Hi trailrider,
Thanks. Haven't tried mixing track codes yet but if I remember correctly, I thought I saw some connectors that line the tracks up correctly.
Last edited by a moderator:
Steam locomotive and cars derailing at crossing
- Thread starter Warpiper
- Start date
Hi trailrider,
Thanks. Haven't tried mixing track codes yet but if I remember correctly, I thought I saw some connectors that line the tracks up correctly.
LOL! Yeah, I tried to use one of my wife's files and it didn't have abrasive on the edges. Also, it was too thick to fit in between the rails.
Well, found some small fills that were able to fit in between the rails that seem to make a little difference with some of the cars. Still some rocking side to side but not as bad. I think bringing the cars up to weight and putting on some new week sets should help. The Flying Scotsman did a little better but not by much. The pilot wheels derail a few times in a few other places besides the cross over. Still a work in progress.
M
MHinLA
Guest
I'd been there, done that !! With respect to all who have given great advice, I wish to say that you'll likely never be happy with the worst piece of track Atlas ever made. Even if you correct the derail problem you're still likely apt to experience stall outs here anyway. The reason is the mass amount of plastic that the frogs are made of. Most diesels will likely make it through due to their wide distance between front and back trucks' picking up current. But if you run short switchers such as 0-6-0s or any steam for that matter they will likely stall here due to the arrangement of their pick up points. Maybe you'll luck out, though. If not, chuck it out and try a Peco crossing. I believe there is allot less size of plastic in their frogs. If you have the gumption you can make your own. But story has it crossings are way harder to make than switches..I believe it ! M
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi MHinLA,
Thanks. I've been wondering who makes a good cross over. I'll have to give Peco a look. Not ready to make my own yet! I've noticed that my diesels make it over without any problems but if I go too slow the Flying Scotsman will stall out.
M
MHinLA
Guest
See ?! What did I tell ya ! The steam stalls but not the diesel ! Although I've heard that the British Flying Scotsman has deep (out of scale) flanges and this could also be the reason it stalls at the crossing (flanges lifting the wheel treads up off whatever powered rails the Atlas has). Yes, try a Peco.I Have no idea if they have the Deg. of crossing your Atlas is.
M
MHinLA
Guest
Did I or someone say 'crossover', not 'crossing'(what this thread is discussing). A crossover is a section of track which allows a train to crossover from say, track 1 to track 2. At least 2 switches, their turnout routes facing and connecting to one another, are required. (I can't believe I'm actually bothering to explain this !)....
Crossover was used in an above reply. Some people have a completely different one than you gave. Yours is correct for US RRs. But some foreign speakers have completely diffifferent ones than we do.
Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk
What we are talking about here
a single crossover between to tracks
A double crossover, which incorporates a crossing at it's center, also known as a Scissor crossover
a single crossover between to tracks
A double crossover, which incorporates a crossing at it's center, also known as a Scissor crossover
The first one is a "crossing" (at grade). The next two are crossovers (between parallel tracks).What we are talking about here
a single crossover between to tracks
A double crossover, which incorporates a crossing at it's center, also known as a Scissor crossover
Andy Jackson
Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk
M
MHinLA
Guest
Not sure who is saying "Yours is correct for US RRs", Andy J, or Cajon Engineer ? Or, are you one and the same person ? Either way, unless one of us, and it ain't me, is across the pond, what does it matter what they say in their part of the world? We're here talking US railroading, aren't we ? Don't we say 'crossover', here ? No ?
Sorry gents but, this is too much spent energy over these ages-old common US RR terms. See ya' in another thread if you don't mind. I'm tuckered out....ZZZZzzzzzzz
Sorry gents but, this is too much spent energy over these ages-old common US RR terms. See ya' in another thread if you don't mind. I'm tuckered out....ZZZZzzzzzzz
Last edited by a moderator:
Selector
Well-Known Member
As is the case of streets and highways, a 'crossing' involves an intersection at defined and unchanging angles where the two or more routes do not deviate from their axes of advancement, and where those routes resume their axis of advancement on the other side of the crossing.
A 'crossover' is where one changes paths or axis, being a transition from one path to another path. When through the crossover, the routes are still on an adjacent and parallel path...such as twinned tracks between two destinations. It is akin to changing lanes on a highway or a street.
On the other hand, an 'overpass' is where one route crosses over another, but at a substantially different height so as to accommodate clearances of the vehicles passing under the overpass.
A 'crossover' is where one changes paths or axis, being a transition from one path to another path. When through the crossover, the routes are still on an adjacent and parallel path...such as twinned tracks between two destinations. It is akin to changing lanes on a highway or a street.
On the other hand, an 'overpass' is where one route crosses over another, but at a substantially different height so as to accommodate clearances of the vehicles passing under the overpass.
Here is a picture of what I've been referring to.
https://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Atlas-HO-571-Code-83-Track-125-Degree-Crossing-p/atl-571.htm
Sorry for the link, I tried to upload a picture but I keep getting an upload failed message.
https://www.modeltrainstuff.com/Atlas-HO-571-Code-83-Track-125-Degree-Crossing-p/atl-571.htm
Sorry for the link, I tried to upload a picture but I keep getting an upload failed message.
M
MHinLA
Guest
Firstly: I've only owned 1 Peco, a switch. It functioned fine. The rails are a tad thinner than Atlas, so you have to crimp the joiners or some other way to snug them firmly against Atlas track. Unless you go all Peco RR you'll likely find this small compatibility diff. BTW, crossings are called 'diamonds' by RRs & MRRers. ...............Now, about your question...: The plastic has to be there because it's insulating conflicting polarities; your engine's wheels have to be prevented from touching the rails which it's crossing past or you have a short, wheel touching both at the same time. The area where you say it jumps out is called the 'flange way'. I believe the Pecos are a bit wider here (won't jump out) and there is allot less mass of the plastic separating the opposing rails, thus longer amount of metal rails in all directions, giving more length/time, picking up current = less chance of stall-outs....Couple things I don't like about Peco: The 2 longer ties on their switches, called the 'head block' & where the 'ground throw' would be anchored to are unrealistically wider than all the other cross ties. I know not why Peco chose to do this. The other is a controversy: Pecos to me don't look American prototype. They look British to me, whereas Atlas look very American railroad. Many will disagree. Also Peco's ties are black and Atlas are brown..That's all for now. I think you'll be happy with the Peco 'diamond' ...M
Hi MHinLA,
Thanks for the information and the explanations. I'm going to swap out that diamond and try a Peco. Not concerned about looks (well, not yet), I just want it to run correctly.
Warpiper,
Perhaps think about where you are going in your future model rr plans. If you are likely to acquire mostly American models, and some of the more recent stuff of the past 8-10 years, then you might want to have those turnouts and crossings with shallow flangeways. And you can maintain Code 83 track.
In that case I would take the leap to grind down the flanges of that British loco. With the loco running, and approaching the wheels from the bottom (so the shavings drop down) , a dremel tool will make reasonable work of it. I think I even did part of the job by running it on sandpaper. If i recall I did several Rivarossi big flange engines like this.
Its not as though you are going to be running them at such a speed that the trueness of the flange material is going to make a difference. It just the roundness of the wheel thread that makes a difference, and you are NOT playing with that at all.
I think those small files can be found at Harbor Freight.
Perhaps think about where you are going in your future model rr plans. If you are likely to acquire mostly American models, and some of the more recent stuff of the past 8-10 years, then you might want to have those turnouts and crossings with shallow flangeways. And you can maintain Code 83 track.
In that case I would take the leap to grind down the flanges of that British loco. With the loco running, and approaching the wheels from the bottom (so the shavings drop down) , a dremel tool will make reasonable work of it. I think I even did part of the job by running it on sandpaper. If i recall I did several Rivarossi big flange engines like this.
Its not as though you are going to be running them at such a speed that the trueness of the flange material is going to make a difference. It just the roundness of the wheel thread that makes a difference, and you are NOT playing with that at all.
I think those small files can be found at Harbor Freight.
