Rack railway?

[Allscales]

Hi All,

I bought a Fleischmann N track cleaning loco, with the two discs underneath to polish the track on HOe layouts. At the same time I saw some rack locos and as Fleischmann also sell rack track, I keep wondering about putting a new body on top of the chassis to produce an 009 rack loco. The chassis is very dismemberable, it can be stripped down to great degree.

I'm wondering if there might be others thinking about doing the same thing?

Cheers,

Friso

[Brandyman]

Although the bodies are the same, The chassis of the Rack (cog) version is completely different.

I have five of the rack versions now and will be replacing the bodies. But the price difference even on the bay reflects the difference between the cleaner and the rack loco. I have even see people trying to pass off a cleaner as a rack loco. 

[B.Meldon]

We had a play with the Fleischmann N gauge rack loco and track a number of years ago now.

All I will say is that it is very difficult to get it to work on anything other than an absolutely constant gradient.

In other words going from level to a gradient or from a gradient to level track is very hard to do. As any slight alteration in the gradient will either cause the cog teeth to jump or the wheels to lose electrical contact with the track. Also as with almost all flexi track the rail does not like to be bent in the vertical and can easily be pulled out of the plastic rail chairs.

The track is supplied with lots holes for track pins and these are needed to hold the track in place on a varying grade. But if the track pins are pushed in tight this has the effect of making the rack dip compared to the rails and once again the loco will jump the rack on steeper sections.

We found double sided tape was better than using pins, but the problem with this is that it does not last for ever and the track will become insecure one day.

I would strongly advise anyone to test what they want to do with the rack loco and track before committing to the project.

We gave it a try and gave up in the end! But this was just our experience, others may have done better.

Brian Meldon

[Hobby]

I had a look at the start of the rack section on a couple of lines I visited a few weeks ago, Brain. The way it was done is that the loco started on the level and then onto a gradual, but continuous gradient, at this point (not on the flat, note) the rack started, the slope then gradually increased until it reached the maximum gradient. The trouble with most models is that they have two "gradients", flat (!) and maximum and no in-between, which is why they look wrong and don't work well. On the Real Thing often the gradient constantly varies, certainly the two we went on, and many rack railways have sections on gradients without rack, they are not all continuous...

[B.Meldon]

Yes I agree it is all about a gradual transition from one gradient to another, or from flat to gradient, and as I said ensuring the rack is at a constant height compared to the rail.

However unfortunately if prototypical practices are followed the transition between level and a grade will probably be between 50 to 60cm long in 4mm scale (if not more) depending on the grade, so for many model railway applications this will just be too long, but if a layout is planned with this in mind from the start with these prototypical transitions the rack would probably work just fine. Provided the rack is kept at a constant height compared to the rails.

For the use we wanted it for there was just not enough space to get the required height, in fact the transition needed was so long that a normal non rack line with a 1 in 20 grade could gain more height in the same space! But obviously over a longer distance the rack would gain more height.

I think the best thing to do is to get a rack loco and some rack track and experiment as we did to see what is required and once this has been established plan the layout accordingly. If it all comes to nought you can always sell them again with little of no financial loss, just as we did.

Brian Meldon

[Brandyman]

I think Brian is correct. Following My tests for my rack railway, the distance to do a simple 3M rise in elevation is about 4M. considering the gradients and as Blair has stated graduation.

As an example I am still after a year in the planning stage,considering (excuse the pun) the clime needed to execute the plan.


This now relates to A 7x3 meter layout.


You cannot do a rack layout in a small space :-X :-X

[Hobby]

Oh people think you can, and you get those totally unrealistic layouts on a 4x2 board where the track is either flat or a 1:1 gradient! That looks very good, B...

[Allscales]

Hi guys,

Thanks for the advice, as this is long term project I'll keep it on hold for now until I have space for it!

[theelliotts]

Some Rack railways start on the rack and so do not have the transition.

[B.Meldon]

Some Rack railways start on the rack and so do not have the transition.

Very true.
However the problem in model form is not starting the rack, because as you say that can be retained on the flat sections as well.

The problem is the curve upwards or downwards needed in going from flat to a grade with the rack in place.

If the entire track is on the same grade then we found it worked just fine. It was only when the grade changes that we had problems.

Brian Meldon