Sorry pitching in so late,had the same thing happening with my aristo SD45 ,even after i was 100% sure the track is right then i switched the running gear around front to back and vise versa and never had that problem again !!!Manfred!
Sorry pitching in so late,had the same thing happening with my aristo SD45 ,even after i was 100% sure the track is right then i switched the running gear around front to back and vise versa and never had that problem again !!!Manfred!
sorry,double post !!
Some of club members had problems with their SD45s derailing on our club railways. They no longer bring them out.
Oddly enough my Dash 9 had no problems there.
I wonder if the SD45 trucks are mounted further back from the pilots than the Dash 9s?
Or do they have offset truck pins like the U25-Bs?
Aristo locos are fine, they track well. The 3 axle block is well proven.
TJ,
I really think your problem is that the track is not sitting down on the concrete because the ballast is getting under the ties. As an experiment could you take up the balllast for a few feet in one of the sections that is causing problems so the track is sitting flat on the concrete. See if that stops the derailment. In the end I think you will need to find a way to secure the track to the concrete. As I recall from your visits you are using code 250 track?
OK, let me address the Aristo trucks first, because there is something there, there are 3 pivoting gearboxes in the motor block. MOST of the time, one is nice and loose, and the other have limited movement. This is controlled by little rubber pads inside the motor block between the gearbox “top” and the motor block inside.
Over the years there have had all kinds of debates and “tips” on how to orient the “loosest” gearbox. I have an opinion also, but as long as one is “loose” and the other 2 have some flexibility this won’t be causing derailments.
Also the OP stated that ALL his 6 axle Aristo locos have this issue, so it is pretty darn hard to believe that they are ALL bad.
Also, there are people who have successfully attached track to concrete block, but the concrete needs to be perfect, and it’s pretty darn rare when this is true. Two notable exceptions are Paul, and Dennis Serrine. It can be done, but concrete almost always moves.
Also if the track is not secured to the concrete, ballast WILL work it’s way between the track and the concrete. The effects of gravity on the ballast and the motion caused by temperatures of day and night do this.
So, if all the information by the OP is true, it’s got to be trackwork. No offense but I have seen tons of people who claim good trackwork and it looks like a rollercoaster, and I had the same issues when starting out.
Get down at track level and run the train slowly and watch the wheels, I will bet you a months pay that the front wheels will lose contact with the rail heads… Only the flanges keep you from derailing. Get enough “altitude” and you have a derailment.
Greg
Greg Elmassian said:
…So, if all the information by the OP is true, it’s got to be trackwork. No offense but I have seen tons of people who claim good trackwork and it looks like a rollercoaster, and I had the same issues when starting out…
My trackwork is good
I have an E8 (3 axle truck Aristo) that runs fine on my railroad.
Paul Burch said:
TJ,
As I recall from your visits you are using code 250 track?
That could be a problem. Those of us that run 6-axle diesels on the 250 track of the Northland Railway have encountered countless derailments. Aristo-Craft 6-axle diesels have deep flanges that can catch on all sorts of things.
One long bridge has hand-spiked rails, the flanges clatter across the spike heads. With heavy trains crawling up the grade this often causes the Large Scale Kadee couplers to separate, sending the heavy cars rolling back down the grade.
Derailments in the switches is a constant frustration, especially at the frogs.
My reference to code 250 track was meant to be that it will be more subject to movement than code 332 if not secured to the concrete. I have been using code 250 track glued down to my concrete roadbed for 13 years now. I will put the smoothness of my operation up against any layout. TJ and his father have been here to run trains 2 or 3 times. We both have similar Southern Pacific themed layouts. Only difference in the track is that mine is secured to the concrete roadbed.
Have to differ with Paul N’s opinion. While there was a lot of talk about flange depths, I have not seen any Aristo loco or car have trouble with “spike heads” on any commercial track.
I would be very interested to know how far below the rail head the “problem spikes” are.
Also I would suggest you look to see if your Kadees are either poorly mounted and deflecting up or down under stress, or body mounts and the couplers are overriding at the grade transition.
I had BOTH issues early on and got rid of truck mount couplers to eliminate the first problem, and fixed my track for my second problem.
Again, the 3 axle Aristo motor blocks are well worked out, and many many people have SD45’s as their favorite diesel.
Greg
Paul,
Code 250 track is used inside, everything outside is code 332 on the mainlines. Paul is correct in the similarity of methods, but unfortunately the large temperature swings make it impractical to glue down the track, and previous attempts have failed. Was outdoors testing a few units, and found that the only practical solution for us was to remove the center wheel, removing it and in essence making a long 4 wheel truck resolved all the tracking issues. My father and I are now planning to turn down the center wheel treads to a diameter where they are little more than aesthetic, this will solve our issue in a practical manor.
I appreciate everyone’s input on the subject. I agree that our trackwork is not perfect, but external conditions preclude us from being able to take all the advice given on how to improve it. The six-axles have been an issue for many years, and now they should finally be able to take their proper place pulling tonnage on the Mojave Sub!
TJ Weber
TJ
Before you turn the wheels down take the motor block and set it on a flat surface and see if it rocks back and forth on the mid axle, if so open up and remove any foam and put it back together and check.
Richard
You are referencing the “foam” under the gearboxes? The access to which requires unsolderng both motors?
I’ll be very interested if turning the wheel diameter will work. If you still leave the flange you will still have a longer wheelbase truck. If it does solve the issue, then indeed the problem was with grade transitions.
I’d think removing the wheels from the center axles entirely, or turning the wheel way down and also removing the flange would work.
Please let us know how it worked so for people in a similar situation, they can have a route to success.
Greg
Well IMO if you are going to go to that amount of work why not take the motor blocks off all together and just run them and see if they derail? I kinda agree with Richard and Mr DeVeto(with the heavyweights). Aristo tri axle Trucks seem to like too listen to Twisted Sister music while they roll the main. They wanna rock however I have NO experience with the locomotive blocks.
More about flange removal. There are many examples of Flange less drivers known as Blind Drivers on old steam engines. They were necessary on mountain railroads with tight radius curves. Many narrow gauge Locos had them as well. They could still provide traction while not binding up in tight curves. When I removed the center wheel flanges from my three axle heavyweight trucks I never had another derailment.
Double-edged sword… many people have issues with blind drivers, without the flange, on sharp curves, the blind driver can drop “inside” the rail, and go below the rail head (cross level, springing, etc.) as the curve straightens out, sometimes the blind driver will “climb back up” and sometimes it will stay below and cause a derailment.
Also, your 3 axle h/w trucks are sprung, the aristo motor blocks are not.
Not an experiment I would recommend. This is really crazy, the 3 axle motor blocks have been proven over and over in basic design, as shown by the popularity and lack of running issues on the SD45. One thing you do need in these locos is weight, to make sure the axles will slide sideways to conform to the curve UNDER LOAD.
Anyway, I will be interested to see what solves this particular issue, but I have no issues as long as crosslevel and abrupt grade transitions are respected, this is an unsprung motor block, so you can “high center” the block and have only 2 axles on the rails and the 3rd in the air… this is the derailments I have seen over 90% of the time. The rest of the time is lack of lubrication on the axles so they cannot slide to accomodate the curve.
For all the years I have been in the hobby, and people claiming these things are fine, it’s almost always these problems. Most people don’t want to fix the trackwork because it’s “only this or that loco”… then later it’s another loco, and then another. Trackwork is the root.
Greg
Greg Elmassian said:
Double-edged sword… many people have issues with blind drivers, without the flange, on sharp curves, the blind driver can drop “inside” the rail, and go below the rail head (cross level, springing, etc.) as the curve straightens out, sometimes the blind driver will “climb back up” and sometimes it will stay below and cause a derailment.
Also, your 3 axle h/w trucks are sprung, the aristo motor blocks are not.
Not an experiment I would recommend. This is really crazy, the 3 axle motor blocks have been proven over and over in basic design, as shown by the popularity and lack of running issues on the SD45. One thing you do need in these locos is weight, to make sure the axles will slide sideways to conform to the curve UNDER LOAD.
Anyway, I will be interested to see what solves this particular issue, but I have no issues as long as crosslevel and abrupt grade transitions are respected, this is an unsprung motor block, so you can “high center” the block and have only 2 axles on the rails and the 3rd in the air… this is the derailments I have seen over 90% of the time. The rest of the time is lack of lubrication on the axles so they cannot slide to accomodate the curve.
For all the years I have been in the hobby, and people claiming these things are fine, it’s almost always these problems. Most people don’t want to fix the trackwork because it’s “only this or that loco”… then later it’s another loco, and then another. Trackwork is the root.
Greg
So you are saying that the “Aristo 3 axle motor blocks” are proven to be reliable then ! “OK” sounds good to me! Oh and BTW there is a slight flaw with the the Aristo Heavyweight truck comment …“Yes” you are correct as those trucks are sprung however only on 2 outside axles not on the 3rd center axle which is kinda important ? This is why they need to rock …no argument on my end as you have more experience than me and I was only suggesting and agreeing in hopes to bump my post count and thanks ratio.
Nice to see the Aristo 3 axle motor blocks are tried and true in your opinion though. I don’t own any myself to comment on.
This post has been edited by : Rooster
Deleted due to mental flameout… thank you Richard for pointing this out…
I don’t see were Rooster said any thing about the motor blocks,the way I read it he is talking about the heavyweight.
Richard