Being new to the world of modelling Railways, 009 in particular, I apologise if my question seems very basic.
I am in the planning stage of a layout but hope to start positioning track over the next few weeks, and one thing I have not been able to determine is an acceptable
Welcome, David - and I would like to say don't apologise for asking questions.
About parallel track: there isn't a real standard as there isn't a thing called 'standard' narrow gauge. It all depends on gauge, loading gauge, type of rolling stock etc. I would lay track with enough intermediate space so you can run big engines, if you want to do so in future. Rolling stock width in 009 varies from about 20mm to 32mm. On curves the best approach is to use your biggest piece of rolling stock with the largest overhang, and draw a line on the baseboard with a pencil held against it:
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.009dutch.nl%2Farchive%2F2011%2Fgallery36%2Fimages%2F2PICT3468.jpg&hash=f93a6b287abaf67a2ea701905dbf462648303965)
If you leave about 10mm between the outer lines drawn this way, between double track on a curve, you cannot mess up.
Couplings with good automatic coupling and uncoupling performance are the Greenwich coupler and the Micro-trains coupler, as far as I know. I myself use the standard N gauge coupler which is OK as long as you only use ready-to-run N gauge wagon chassis, which I don't ;) I myself am not very much in favour of the Roco or Liliput loop type coupler.
Perhaps someone else has better advice on couplings.
Good luck, and don't hesitate to ask if you're stuck with something.
Quote from: DavidLM on February 29, 2012, 17:21
<snipped>...This is a long term project and while starting with the Hunslet 0-4-0
You've touched on a big subject ~ and one of the joys of the diversity of "009". If you're thinking of Beyer-Garrats
Quote from: JulienW on February 29, 2012, 21:44
When it comes to narrow gauge there is hardly any twin-track narrow gauge (que floodgates to open with multiple examples)
Cork Blackrock and Passage is the only double track I can think of offhand... Though there are a few examples of "parallel track" where a branch leaves the mainline but continues to run parallel for a while... Excluding such things as the Japanese railways, that is, and sticking to more conventional NG...
Quote from: Hobby on March 01, 2012, 10:16
Quote from: JulienW on February 29, 2012, 21:44
When it comes to narrow gauge there is hardly any twin-track narrow gauge (que floodgates to open with multiple examples)
Cork Blackrock and Passage is the only double track I can think of offhand... Though there are a few examples of "parallel track" where a branch leaves the mainline but continues to run parallel for a while... Excluding such things as the Japanese railways, that is, and sticking to more conventional NG...
Good to see that someone took the bait! :D
Take any passing loop and you'll have to solve the same problem. I think that is what David meant.
I annoy my wife by working to too tight tolerances at times. I forgot about coach duckouts when building the fiddle yard of County Gate and had to remove them on the coach blind sides!
Long vehicles 'cut corners' and bigger engines with overhangs destroy everything in their path.
Probably the best course of action is to rent Julien W's 'Victoria'. If that clears the other track then everything will.
(https://forum.009society.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.009.cd2.com%2Falbums%2Fvisitinglocomotives%2Fsimplyhumongousjulienwebbsroundhouseconsolidationvickypollardweservedanasboonthisengineduetoitsexcessiveloadinggauge.jpg&hash=fa4d6dc8caa8a536e0414d69d87fea6fee42eeae)
Hi One and All
Firstly my apologies for the spelling gaff
Hi David
As you have probably worked out when it comes to parallel tracks on NG railways it is up to you how far t space them. Unless you are modelling a specific prototype.
A few other pointers that are important when planning a 009 layout:
You will not be able to couple up on a curve. Or at least it will be problematic to do so.
The proportion of the coupling overhang relative to the track gauge is far larger in 009 than in 00 so tight curves should be avoided if you can. I use 12 inch as a minimum but 18 inch would be better.
(The minimum curves on the WHR at 130 foot work out at about 20
Quote from: B.Meldon on March 02, 2012, 13:40
...You should also have a look at the Reverse Curve thread:
http://www.009society.com/forum/index.php?topic=732.0
...
Aaaargghhh! Not reverse curves again.... (sorry Brian, couldn't resist it...)
I know, they're great! Trains look brilliant winding their way through them at nice slow speeds... Who wants to shunt anyway!! ;D
I appreciate the problem of reverse curves now. I was sceptical but photographs in another thread convinced me.
Coupling on plain un-reversed curves can be a problem too, no doubt depending on coupler type as well as overhang and location of the couplers. I saw a rather nice compact US outline "switching" layout where the objectives were rather defeated by attempts to use Kaydee/Microtrains couplers on curved track.
The extent to which reverse curves are a problem is similar to the one of clearances (to get back on topic). It depends on how big the stock (and how much overhang) and how tight the curves are. For a train of slate wagons or skips and tiny locos with little overhang say, then reverse curves could possibly be ignored if you are working to something like N gauge set-track minimum radii. There is so much slop and side-play that the curve is virtually straight over the wheelbase.
I would definitely recommend that raw beginners pick up a few lengths of Peco or other N-gauge Settrack and run their stock over it to get some feel for a datum and not start with a length of flexi-track and blithely start bending into serpentine shapes. They may seem like an extravagance but "tracksettas" are very handy too. It is so easy to think you can get away with squeezing that little bit extra curve with flexible track.
I don't doubt that Blair's reverse curves are actually very carefully laid out, smooth, of appropriate radius and probably incorporate transition curves: he (says he) likes the way trains wind through them at slow speed, so presumably the trains don't lurch left and right like demented insects!
I don't go for little tiddler stock, Graeme, as you well know! I just think its a personal thing, I don't shunt or couple up on curves, in fact most of my operation is fixed formation, so reverse curves don't cause me an issue. I can understand Brian's comments for someone who wants to shunt, but on a layout where "plain" running is envisaged then assuming the track is properly laid (like any model railway) then they shouldn't cause an issue, and to my eyes, a train looks good going through them... For my prototypes (Czech/Hungarian) winding track curving through the countryside is the order of the day, just watch any video of NG lines from those countries (and Saxony in Germany)...
I feel we have to be realistic when discussing this issue, and i do feel that it is in danger of being blown out of all proportion and made into a "no-go area" for many modellers when it shouldn't be...
"I don't go for little tiddler stock"
Good boy!
I'm with you there Blair. We shouldn't put newcomers off by imposing rigid rules, but on the other hand I've seen layouts where certain bits of track are unusable. It may not occur to a beginner that just because one and the same (HOe) RTR manufacturer sells tiny skips and monstrous coaches that a layout designed to run the former will operate successfully with the latter.
It has to be horses for courses. Using "mainline" track for a small quarry is as silly as running large stock on minimum radius curves. It would be a pity if all layouts were the same.
I was looking for dimensions of "Jubilee" track and found this:
http://85a.co.uk/forum/view_topic.php?id=642&forum_id=11
15 foot radius turnout anybody? No doubt it was for the very smallest of stock. Peco are to be congratulated on their new turnouts, but I want to go the other way (smaller radius, not poorer running! :D )
All
I rarely read a Brian Meldon comment that isnt on the button and agree completely with his tracklaying fundamentals whatever the layout purpose or operation. Byand large you can be sure if thes "rules" are followed that any motive power or stock that exhibits running problems the cause will be in the loco or stock and not the track. Unless you are pretty experienced it is so easy to think they dont really matter until the inevitable disappointment comes.
I imagine because we use proprietary chassis and track that track gauges arent used much by 009ers
I am tempted to produce a gauge for my own use to check the gauge of new Peco points because I find even with the new large radius points the gauge through the curve is not guaranteed to be consistent. Does anyone else find this to be the case?
Peter
Quote from: B.Meldon on March 02, 2012, 13:40
(1)...Every point will also need frog polarity switching as the blade to rail contact is unreliable....
(2)....When you make your layout the track work has to be absolutely spot on without any kinks, dips, bumps or steps. This is far more critical in 009 than in 00 and needs to be perfect....
(3)....The track and the loco wheels have to be spotlessly clean I clean the track every day and the wheels of the locos every time I use them. At exhibitions some clean the loco wheels every time a loco comes into the fiddle yard!...
I'm sorry, Brian, but I'm not sure things are as critical as you say - I'm afraid you make 009 layout building seem quite scary but I think it's far from that. I will explain as follows:
(1) I have a fair number of Peco 009 points on the C&DR that have worked quite well without backup switches, for about 20 years. I would only fit backup switches until after you experience problems.
(2) My C&DR is an old layout with lots of imperfections in the track. I would say I'm a fair tracklayer, but not a perfect one. Laying fair track isn't black magic. After it's laid for the first time, taking some precautions like pre-bending the rail and trimming the ends with a file, check it by running trains over it for a period of time. On finding a problem, rectify it.
(3) Cleaning wheels and track every day? No way - I would have given up on 009 long ago if that were needed. I never do so unless operation starts to suffer, and only in trouble spots. You'd only damage scenery. The secret is having heavy locomotives and running trains regularly. I also use a Relco high frequency track cleaning device and a good controller.
The result is a reliable layout, good slow running, few derailments and generally good operation. I'm a layout operator on a regular basis and I would hate bad running, so I don't have it. But I don't have kink-free track. I have reverse curves, bumps and kinks. It's not perfect, but my railway works.
I would suggest there are two ways of achieving this. One is having perfect flat track as Brian says - no reverse curves and all irregularities removed before a train turns a wheel. The other is a trial and error approach which improves as a modeller becomes more experienced.
So to any modeller new to 009: jump in at the deep end and see what happens. Put down some track and learn from your mistakes. As I said: it's no black magic. ;)
I would tend to echo Ted's comments. I've had to replace a couple of points due to mechanical failure but other than that they give very little trouble. I've had to install only three switches due to electrical failure (I have 27 points on the L&TR).
The L&RE get run 2 or 3 times a week these days on average and I tend to find that the wheels and track need cleaning ever 6 to 8 weeks, with the occasional bit of 'spot attention' in between. I use four ECM Compspeed F controllers which are quite old these days but are superb designs.
At the time I laid the L&TR track I was most certainly not proficient at the job and didn't know the nuances but I have relatively few problems. I say the same. Get started, be careful and you'll be ok!
I think that Ted and Brian both make good points (no pun intended) but to some extent it is dependend on your layout.
Exhibition layouts will need to run well so it is probably better to err on the side of caution with reguard to switching the frog polarity - that said, Latham's was out on show yesterday and I had some 'issues' with one or two points and I wonder if after 20+ years the switches need replacing (or cleaning at least) - but at least it is not dificult to fit such switches if you do experience problems as Ted suggests on a home-based layout.
"perfect tracklaying" is something where you need to define 'perfect'. What really causes problems is sudden changes in direction. These are particularly common at base bord joints (not an issue if you layout is a perminant at home job) where care is needed but another problem that arises over time is curves straightening themselves out and insulating rail joiners that are slightly flexible and allow the careful curve running in to a point to look like the edge of a 50p peice (i.e. an angle). I think that the guide here is that if your finger can feel it and the eye see it then you can be fairly sure that 009 wheesets will too.
Certainly having large numbers of the general public looking at layouts when it's a damp day outside is not helpful when it comes to clean track, and don't get me started on having a live steam display (locos fires with old socks) 6 feet away! I cleaned the track before the layout was packed up, again when set up at the show and it probably needed doing again by about 2 p.m. but we managed, probably because the locos had their wheels cleaned 4 or 5 times throughout the day. I'll add that I do not use a Relco unit and have not noticed any decrease in performance without it. At home however (layout is in spare room with centeral heating which I'm the only one to go in on a regular basis) and with less than intense running it never gets cleaned and seems to be OK. Let's face it, cleaning wheels and track will not harm the running (don't forget that rolling stock wheels can get surprisingly filthy too so it's worth checking them from time to time) but cleaning track has the problem that scenery can get damaged - I clean the track on Latham's with the buildings off so I can't catch them which I why I tend not to do it during an exhibition - so its probably more a case of perhaps doing it at the start of a running session and/or if running starts to suffer.
You make some valid points there, Julien - there is a difference between a home layout and an exhibition layout. At an exhibition the dust and damp will get at the track and wheels. I have exhibited in places where I had to clean the track three times a day, but during the recent Tonbridge show for instance I didn't need to do it except before the show opened. And I do clean my rolling stock wheels about once a year when I see too much compressed dirt has built up.
I would add that I use back-up switches at Rae Bridge which goes out on the exhibition circuit.
Fair tracklaying as I mentioned above includes the checks you mention: straight rail joints, feel the joints with your index finger to detect any irregularity, etc. Pre-bending a piece of track and pinning it down soundly where a rail joint is on a curve is a good way to avoid the 50p effect.
However the point I tried to make in my reply to Brian is that there is nothing difficult about laying reliable track. Just try it and see how it turns out.
My thoughts on track laying have changed. I used to be an advocate of the "Iain Rice" floating trackbed idea, but after a brief detour into T-gauge I now think (as do some others here) that gluing track down to a rigid base is the way to do it with smaller gauges. Once the track is ballasted with PVA and chippings it sets like concrete and any sound-deadening properties seem to vanish.
I will probably go overboard with electrical droppers to the track and point polarity switching from now on, but having said that I have a 1200 mm x 600 mm N-gauge DC block control demonstration layout (MERG) that spends most of the year propped up in the corner of the spare bedroom and it brought out occasionally for an exhibition. One of the Peco Settrack points needed a bit of cleaning between the blades to maintain continuity and I may have had to squeeze a rail joiner but that's all in about 5 years of exhibiting. The big proviso though is that the track is not ballasted other than being stuck to a thin black/grey foam (cork underlay equivalent). However, I am fairly sure I'd see a lot more problems if I ballasted and weathered the track.
If there was one procedure that I think will have the most effect it is checking that trains run on your track runs to your satisfaction before ballasting. Being a very slow modeller, I have no problem leaving the layout to "season" before proceeding to the next stage. All my problems have occurred when I've rushed ahead and not checked and tested thoroughly.
Quote from: GraemeD on March 04, 2012, 11:24
...gluing track down to a rigid base is the way to do it with smaller gauges. Once the track is ballasted with PVA and chippings it sets like concrete and any sound-deadening properties seem to vanish.
...If there was one procedure that I think will have the most effect it is checking that trains run on your track runs to your satisfaction before ballasting. Being a very slow modeller, I have no problem leaving the layout to "season" before proceeding to the next stage. All my problems have occurred when I've rushed ahead and not checked and tested thoroughly.
My way of thinking! And you'll be able to change anything in the track layout that won't work.
You mentioned bending the track before you lay it Ted. I'm used to G scale track, where if you don't bend the rail, the only curve you get is straight(ish).
What would you recommend to pre-bend rail in OO9 please, so it stays put?
Thanks
Tony Deighan
I always bend the track by hand, taking care not to disturb the rail 'spikes' on the sleeper mat. For very sharp curves I prefer N gauge setrack. Where necessary to get a smooth alignment, I carefully tweak the rails individually. I first cut through the sleeper mat and slide a section off, then bend the rail between my fingers and slide it back on.
Larger radius curves can be bent against the 'spring' of the track, so the track is pinned down with the spring tension still on. This means you get automatic transition curves at the ends. If you need a rail joint on a curve, staggering the rail joints, as well as soldering the rail joiners to the rail, helps to prevent an angle in the track on the curve.
I spike the sleepers down and add more spikes around a weak area where an angle might result, or if I see one develop during tracklaying. After ballasting the spikes are removed. Mind you pre-drill the sleepers before inserting a track pin.
If I need an insulating gap on a curve I don't use a plastic joiner but I cut it with a Dremel or a Roco saw after the track is down. Sometimes I brace the rails either side of the gap by inserting brass pins into the baseboard and soldering the rail to it before making the cut.
Most of this is using common sense really. Actually I like laying track, there's not a lot of trouble to it. Hope this answers your question.
Quote from: tedp on March 04, 2012, 12:38
I always bend the track by hand, taking care not to disturb the rail 'spikes' on the sleeper mat. For very sharp curves I prefer N gauge setrack. Where necessary to get a smooth alignment, I carefully tweak the rails individually. I first cut through the sleeper mat and slide a section off, then bend the rail between my fingers and slide it back on.
Larger radius curves can be bent against the 'spring' of the track, so the track is pinned down with the spring tension still on. This means you get automatic transition curves at the ends. If you need a rail joint on a curve, staggering the rail joints, as well as soldering the rail joiners to the rail, helps to prevent an angle in the track on the curve.
I spike the sleepers down and add more spikes around a weak area where an angle might result, or if I see one develop during tracklaying. After ballasting the spikes are removed. Mind you pre-drill the sleepers before inserting a track pin.
If I need an insulating gap on a curve I don't use a plastic joiner but I cut it with a Dremel or a Roco saw after the track is down. Sometimes I brace the rails either side of the gap by inserting brass pins into the baseboard and soldering the rail to it before making the cut.
Most of this is using common sense really. Actually I like laying track, there's not a lot of trouble to it. Hope this answers your question.
As Ted said all common sense and exactly what I do as well.
Brian Meldon
Looks like I have opened a can of worms here!
But please remember I only mentioned these things in my previous post as
"Is it not better to point out the ideal way to do things before they get to this stage or become disillusioned with 009 and walk away?"
Of course it is. There are rules to follow in any pastime. Why should 009 be different.
Perhaps the choice of words when talking about reverse curves can give the impression of "rules". A quick search on here and NGRM will show what I mean! ;)
I've been as guilty of anyone of "laying the law down" from time to time, the trouble is when someone has a bee in their bonnet about something their posts tend to reflect their strong feelings, even if they don't intend it to come over that way.
That's true. I have a bee about 'sky corners' and a wasp about inside frames on outside frame prototypes.
Thanks for the advice Ted, as I'm just about to start building baseboards, getting the track laid properly this time round is very important - It's not good to see a grown man cry when only some of your stock will stay on the track.
Best regards
Tony Deighan
Good luck with that, Tony - you will find that laying track is a question of trying out what works best. Getting 009 to work isn't black magic. ;)
I think one point Brian made is very important: don't start ballasting the track before you're happy with it and all your stock runs over it. Once you start ballasting you cannot easily correct what's wrong.
Quote from: B.Meldon on March 05, 2012, 12:28
....Is it not better to point out the ideal way to do things before they get to this stage or become disillusioned with 009 and walk away?...
Yes of course I agree, but everyone is entitled to find out for himself. I am a firm believer in learning from past mistakes, and becoming proficient in 009 modelling step by step. This starts with building flat baseboards and learning elementary tracklaying skills, and getting your rolling stock to run well. Therefore I think encouraging a new 009 modeller should follow the 'little and often' principle - perhaps laying down a multitude of 'rules' will scare him off before he starts.
Flat surfaces? I know of at least two very experienced modellers who still use hardboard as they baseboard surface...
Very wise advice gents, my last disaster in OO9 - hence my self exile in garden rail land for 10 years - was to ballast the track before I had got it working properly. It's so much easier to find best practice now that the internet is around.
Being an OO9 addict I am now determined to get it right this time around and I learnt a lot building the big stuff where I made lots of mistakes too.
At least if you get it wrong in OO9 you don't get eaten alive by the mossies at the bottom of the garden while you put it right!!
Tonights job is to work through my collection of Peco points and to make sure that everything will go through them.
Best regards
Tony
Ps apologies for diverting the conversation away from the original topic!
Quote from: Hobby on March 06, 2012, 12:54
Flat surfaces? I know of at least two very experienced modellers who still use hardboard as they baseboard surface...
Hardboard is pretty g... cough cough. Let me rephrase that.
I find hardboard pretty good if you handle it properly and support it well. I use it as a base on top of a chipboard base unit and all the inclines are made using it with a suitable cross-brace between the running surface and the base piece. It's so strong in fact, that the one unit I made up with slightly too steep an incline for my OO layout will happily take the full weight of me standing on top of it and, as Ted will tell you, I'm no lightweight!
I use hardboard, and even cardboard for some areas of baseboard. The only problem is it won't take pins very well - you have to pre-drill it.
Took me a while to figure out who is behind your pseudonym but I found out!
But I'm afraid we are drifting away from parallel track.
Loading gauge is a problem. Most of my layouts are industrial and have a small loading gauge, and as a result, a large Pugbash loco I have does not fit onto many of them.
Hi, I'm 67 and am currently planning my first layout so I'm afraid I cannot add to the advice already given on this subject.
I'm writing to say that I am in a similar position to DavidLM insofar as tracklaying is concerned, so I am reading all replies and other postings with great interest. What a brilliant 'tool' the Forum is for people like us.
My layout is likely to be a winter project but I am busy collecting track, points etc in preparation. I am particularly concerned (nay, horrified) by the comments in this and other postings about Peco points and their need to be modified (switched) in order for them to perform correctly. I have currently only bought 2 which seem to be of the old type (pre-2010) but as I will need several more I must try to ensure I get the modified ones, although some are even recommending that they should also be switched. Layout size determines that I cannot go to the 18" radius 'mainline' points which seem to be much better.
There are some very interesting replies containing some excellent advice. Many thanks to all those concerned.
It is a good idea of yours, planning ahead and gathering up bits and pieces for the winter. As part of that preparation you could do some dry runs. If you doubt the reliability of your Peco points then connect them to lengths of track temporarily and try them out with the stock and engine(s) you have to hand. Bear in mind that older Peco points are used in exhibition layouts so despite the stories, they can't all be bad.
A test bed need not be fancy. If it is used on a flat table top then it does not need to be particularly rigid, just something to hold the track in place and lay flat on the table without curling. Short lengths of double-sided tape will do for fixing track in place temporarily.
After laying track flat and avoiding "hump backs" then good electrical connection is likely to make the biggest difference to running. Sacrificing a length of track for a test bed will give you a chance to practise your soldering.
The new "mainline" points have received good reports. If you do have running problems and you are not sure of the state of your old points and wish to keep the cost down, perhaps buy one new one for comparison. The you can check that it is the points and not other problems like wheel back-to-back settings and so on.
Apologies for the slight topic drift but if I may add an explanation...
Quote from: kebo66 on July 06, 2012, 22:15
<snipped>
I am particularly concerned (nay, horrified) by the comments in this and other postings about Peco points and their need to be modified (switched) in order for them to perform correctly. I have currently only bought 2 which seem to be of the old type (pre-2010) but as I will need several more I must try to ensure I get the modified ones, although some are even recommending that they should also be switched. Layout size determines that I cannot go to the 18" radius 'mainline' points which seem to be much better.
The problem is that as supplied the Peco point relies on good eletrical contact between the point blade and the side of the fixed rail (correctly termed the stock rail). Whilst it is fairly easy to keep the head of the rails clean it is harder to clean the inside side faces of the rails and even harder to do so in the 2-3 mm gap between the stock rail and point blade - and don't forget you'll need to clean the side of the point blade too to ensure good electrical conductivity. Without doing so the point blade soon looses cotact with the stock rail and does not get any power fed to it - and no power means the loco is stopped in its tracks! New points fresh from the packet should be fine but older ones that have been allowed to build up even a thin layer of grime will not.
This situation is equally applicable to other brands (probably all brands) of model railway points in pretty much any scale, but is a particular issue for 009 where 4 wheel locos (with only 4 pick up points) running any low(ish) speeds (and more suseptable to stalling) are the norm. Therefore it is not just 009 modelres who are adding switches to their points (who ever made them) to bypass the dodgy point blade to stock rail contacts with a
proper electrical switch to improve running, and it is a fairly simple job - no harder than soldring the feed wires from your conroeller to the track.
As Julien said it is not just the 009 points that cause problems. Every single 00 point on my layout has frog polarity switches as well.
It all depends on how reliable you need it to be. For me as it is not easy to obtain good running in 009 anyway I aim for 100% reliability and having the occasional point fail electrically with a poor connection between the blade and the fixed rail is not expectable to me.
Others are quite happy to clean up the side of the rails when this failure happens, and it will happen.
I have two 009/HOe layouts all with the pre 2010 Peco 009 12 inch points. Both layouts run very well indeed, including extensive shunting operations, but every point has been fettled to make this happen.
The later Peco 009 12 inch points made after 2010 and the 18 inch main line 009 points are a lot better and if I were building a layout today that is what I would use, but I would also fit frog polarity switches.
This does not need to be expensive or complicated three wires and a simple slide switch at the end of a control rod is enough. Here is one I recently fitted to an old 1970
I know my entry into this topic has sent the discussion off at a tangent, changing from 'parallel track' to 'Peco points' and for this I apologise.
However, I am indebted to JulienW for explaining so clearly the cause of the problem and the reason for the need for 'fettling'. My ignorance had led me to believe this was only something applicable to Peco 009 points.
Also, my thanks to Brian Waldon for this easy fix method of fettling. I had already decided to use wire-in-tube to switch my points, this method seeming to kill 2 birds with 1 stone so to speak. I had intended starting a new topic to see if members could suggest ways of doing this.
Many thanks.
Like Brian I have used wire in tube to operate the points with the actuating wire fixed to a sliding switch that is wiered to change the frog polarity so can vouch for its efficacy. It is somethign that has been covered elsewere on the forum so it's probably worth having a search through to see how it has been done.