Everything you need to know - in one place?

PhilP

PhilP

G Scale, 7/8th's, Electronics
TRADER
Country flag
Being relatively new to this..
I think it would be a good idea if there was a 'sticky' in this section with all those things it would be good to know when starting out, or adding to your railway..

I am thinking of things like dimensions. - Not just radii of the differing curves, but suggested inter-track spacing (or what it should work-out to with differing radii curves). Clearances, both to the outside of a running line as well as loading gauge / minimum clearance under bridges. Gradients, both plain-track and rack. Thoughts / perceived wisdom on super-elevation on curves. tolerances for out of level (that work!). Possibly back-to-back dimensions for different makes of stock.

Maybe ways of doing things that a beginner would not know, or think of, to make certain jobs that bit easier.

Thinking of a couple of sides of A4 with 'the numbers' on, then a series of sensible posts on the way things can be done which work, and allow trains to run without hitting each other, or the scenery.

The collective knowledge of those on the Forum collected in one place would be a phenomenal resource.

It is all probably 'somewhere' on here anyway.. it is just finding it that is the problem!
 
I agree Ross, but our collective experience has value all the same. If you are proposing to run an Aristo RDC or a Bachmann K27(?) then the loading gauge is a completely different beast to, say, an LGB tram layout. How we reflect that I have no idea, but as I think its a good idea I'm willing to help.

What would be good would be a side of A4 you can print out and pin on the wall, 2 at most.
 
ROSS said:
There's loads of that sort of info on Google..............it just needs the Google search phrasing to be precise.....
There are also a few books with this info knocking around.
Click to expand...
I know 'we' do not need the sort of detail they have, but if you look at (say) the 7 1/4 society, they have a couple of 'pdf' sheets of 'standards' which if their members adhere to, then stuff works..

Have seem a few threads where cuttings have had to be 'eased', or two trains are not able to pass due to clearances bring too tight..
Yes, it is probably all available on the web, but I just though it would be nice to have it collected in one place, as a 'good practice' guide if nothing else.

As an example:
I was told that some curved track I had was R3 (150000 items) which are actually R2. - Duff gen, and inexperience means I could not run certain stock of interest..
 
I total agree with PhilP. I am a newbie at this type of modelling. I have spent hours searching the internet for information and still I am not sure about the best type of trackbed. one needs to know what things top search for first before one can search. I have spent a lot of time looking and reading articles on this site which have helped a lot. i am planning and building raised gardens at the moment for my lay out to go on. most of the gardens are 850mm above the ground so bending down to photograph and work on trains. Track spacing, grades, clearances and removable bridges are things I am researching at moment. Track power battery power or both, electric points or air controlled points cant find any definitive answers on the net.
 
Why not expand the 'Knowledge Base' section of GSC by adding some of this useful background info?

Rik
 
I agree with PhilP that something like this could be very handy, not only to newbies; the GSS tech manual mentioned by Ian is useful but is not a free resource, and though as Ross says there are several good books, each one is usually influenced by the author's own preferred way of doing things. A collection on GSC of ideas and relevant postings on various subjects would take a bit of organising but might well be worth the trouble.
As Rik suggests, maybe the "Knowledge Base" section of the forum is the ideal repository for this?

Jon.
 
The difficulties of trying to search the forum for information is that
a) The titles of threads do not always reflect the content
b) Threads wander off-topic so sometimes useful information on, say track laying, might be found in the Coffee Lounge section
c) There are a heck of a lot of postings which come up in a search and then it becomes a chore trying to sort the wheat from the chaff

I've just tried doing a search for "LGB track dimensions" - and the first three posts shown were enquiring about them. I've not yet found a post which answers those questions in a condensed and accessible way. If the same questions are being asked repeatedly, doesn't that suggest that there is a need which the forum is not yet meeting?

It seems to me that there are at least two types of information which could be included in the knowledge base:
1) There are some things which are incontrovertible such as the dimensions of LGB, Piko, Trainline etc trackwork and the various scales which run on 45mm track.
2) Then there is information over which there are various viewpoints - eg track foundations, ballasting, etc.

Now, if the knowledge-base was organised as a series of wiki articles, to which only members could contribute, then we could have various viewpoints represented within each article. If the wiki was properly organised, then it should be self-managing as any additions and amendments can be tracked back to the contributor.

I suppose it depends on whether we are happy for the forum to be primarily a chat room - or whether we want it to also be a repository for useful information which is easily accessible.

Rik
 
There is quite a lot of useful information on the forum - maybe we need an index? Mind you, it would be quite a task!
 
Hmmm - I don't have permissions to do anything in the knowledge base, besides commenting on non-existing articles. Is this a wiki by another name?

As mentioned by Rik a wiki seems the way to go.

Cheers,
Peter.
 
ROSS said:
Quote Jon.....there are several good books, each one is usually influenced by the author's own preferred way of doing things...................................

Well you could say that info in the Knowledge Base on GSC would be (is) influenced by the contributor's preference of such tip(s) of doing things....
Click to expand...

My reasoning, Ross, is that with the pooled knowledge and ideas of "Those Who Know" here on the forum, people would have access to LOTS of different ideas and ways of doing things - which they could read through (entirely free of charge) and use or not, as they wished - but even if you're going to go and buy every book on Garden Railways that you can get your hands on, that is still only going to give you a much smaller pool of information and experience than could be generated by the combined ideas on here.....

Jon.
 
Guys tell me via pm what categories you want in the knowledge base and I will set it all up for you, then you can start submitting articles and make it the best repository for g scale.
 
Mick's suggestion of an index is a sound way to go, but a mammoth task which pretty well requires 100% dedication to get it set up and then it needs to be kept up to date. With two of my jobs (the first and the last as it happened) I was given the job at one time or another of creating an index from shelves of files, the first was on legal advice received by the firm, the second decisions of a major committee over something like 10 years. In both cases, the historical part was impossible to do except in short bursts, months apart, when my other work permitted. In the second case, after each quarterly meeting of the committee I indexed the decisions made but these gave an incomplete picture because they could not be linked to earlier decisions which had been made but not yet indexed. So, it's not a one member job. Maybe one member indexes the posts on track and track laying, another DCC and so on. But it needs co-ordination beforehand so that the information is presented in a standardised way.

The comments that all the necessary information is out there on the internet is largely true, the difficulty is finding it and sorting the correct from the incorrect, which requires knowledge of the topic concerned. Those politicians and experts who say there is no use for books as you can find what you want on the internet are talking rubbish (and probably have an army of unpaid internees finding information for them in books and journals as well as on the internet). To use the internet, you need to have some knowledge (and this can be pretty extensive knowledge) to sort out the correct from the incorrect. To give an example, a few years ago I gave a talk to some members of the Battlefields Trust on the Scharnhorst and the Gneisenau and the "Channel Dash" which occurred in February 1942, but dates on the internet, some given by merchant navy or Royal Navy members of the time, varied from November, 1941, to April, 1942! Now the date of a documented event is pretty basic, so what are the chances of more complex information being correct in what is a basically factual study?
 
It is not I am adverse to hunting information for myself..
I do not seem to have a lot of luck with the search option on the forum.
You DO need to know what to search for on the Internet in general, AND have the knowledge to know qhat is correct when you find it!

Example:
A few days ago, there was a thread on a new track, and it was commented that a planned extension was probably a little tight for clearance between the tracks. - On a curve, with a point.. 'Someone' mentioned 165mm (or was it 185mm) for a clearance..
Are those figures from a 'technical' source? Rule of thumb? Just what someone has used?
 
PhilP said:
........
A few days ago, there was a thread on a new track, and it was commented that a planned extension was probably a little tight for clearance between the tracks. - On a curve, with a point.. 'Someone' mentioned 165mm (or was it 185mm) for a clearance..
Are those figures from a 'technical' source? Rule of thumb? Just what someone has used?
Click to expand...

I think that is the centre-to-centre track spacing generated by LGB's basic standard track geometry, eg: between R1 and R2 curves, or when using two R1 points as a crossover. Thus it is an accepted minimum standard spacing to allow LGB stock to pass each other. That may be a little bit of a simplistic explanation, but I believe that's the basis of the figure.

Jon.
 
??? Here's a poser..... track radius. Now, if I leave this open, we are going to get an infinate number of opinions. No, not what minimum is best etc etc blah blah, but the fundimental question, how do YOU measure it. I've seen centre line measurement being used, high leg measurement, and even some producers use the outside of the sleeper (rather strange, but, using that, a 4' diameter circle will fit on a 4' board, in theory).

In the real world, track design is done on the centre line. Maintenance is done from the high leg (the difference being half the track gauge, which on a very large radius is insignificant). So, when manufacturer A says 2' radius curve, and maker B says the same, are they talking the same language?

Before we get too far into this exercise, 'we' need to settle this question. I'm all for using the makers 'nominal' notation, but with the 'true (say, centre line)' measurement noted, so a valid comparison could be made.

EDIT. The job's already been done.... just trying to lift the data so I can post. Aristo, LGB, and Piko covered.
 
Good one Gavin..
There is a (was) a sheet with most of them drawn on available form someone on here.. Do not think it had the actual numbers on it though??
Also, when printed on A4, it was a little difficult to read some of the notation.

We need something in bigger print, and with the information clearly laid out. - If only for when you are in the garden with pegs, string, and a tape-measure!
??? ;) :D :D
 
playmofire said:
There is an 8 page pdf download on champex-linden on LGB track geometry.
Click to expand...
So...

The first section to go into the 'Knowledge-base' is on track geometry (dimensions), and a link to said 'pdf' on the Champex site.

I would also suggest there is a 'discussion' area in the KB, so the actual 'knowledge' bits can be kept concise and on-topic.
 
I would suggest that any discussion takes place in the main body of the forum, otherwise there will probably be more discussion than knowledge. Anything useful that comes from the discussion can then be added back into the original article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom