Peco O gauge points and the six foot...

Discussion in 'RTR Trackwork' started by Gary, Sep 19, 2018.

  1. Gary

    Gary Staff Member Administrator Golden Goat 2018

    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    388
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2015
    A quick question for you O gaugers out there...

    When placing two O gauge points together as a crossing, is there adequate room between the running parallel lines, another words the six foot to adequately pass trains ??

    O Gauge 6 foot.jpg
    Cheers, Gary.
     
  2. Kimbo

    Kimbo Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    1,606
    Likes Received:
    128
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2015
    Hi Gary, yes there is on straight / near straight trackwork, how ever the distance between the tracks might have to be widened when running bogied stock or coaches on curved twin track work if using tight curves.
    Kim
     
    York Paul and Gary like this.
  3. Gary

    Gary Staff Member Administrator Golden Goat 2018

    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    388
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2015
    Thanks Kimbo. :thumbs:

    Cheers, Gary.
     
  4. SMR CHRIS

    SMR CHRIS Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    3,035
    Likes Received:
    259
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2015
    It’s very close adding a short section between makes it look a lot better.
    However !! It adds quite a bit of length over the two points that you may not have room for.
    As can be seen on Moonan Flats I felt that the gap between the tracks needed to be this wide to look good for a Country yard, so sacrificed length on the loop 150mm
    You probably don’t need it as wide so a section 50mm between the points may be ok
    F2885D1B-79A6-41C2-869E-1308A4B442FA.jpeg
     
    York Paul likes this.
  5. York Paul

    York Paul Full Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    892
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    Hi Gary as Kimbo says tracks are often spaced wider apart because of the "end throw" and "over throw" habit of long bogie stock traversing tight curves, this happens on the big railway too and such stock is plated as C1 or C3 restriction meaning there are certain curves such coaching stock is banned from going round. But to answer your query about track spacing without becoming too techie... the distance between running lines and sidings are not the same, running lines on straight Standard Gauge track (on the big railway) is set at six feet two and a half inches apart measured from the outer face edge of rails on each running line, this is called the six foot way. Now sidings to running lines are set at ten feet two and a half inches apart and this is called the ten foot way, all this information is contained in the Dept of Transport British Railway (not British Railways or British Rail btw) diagram map of the kinetic envelope for loading gauge restrictions. So what has this to do with our modeling? The answer is absolutely nothing unless you seek to model super finescale like some of us here or you seek to avoid trains side swiping each other and causing running issues. Now the distance between running lines is "opened up" on curves and this six foot way rule also applies to platform edges built on curves, all other structures such as signals, tunnel walls, bridge parapets, gantries, water columns and lineside structures have to be positioned outside the six foot rule and in the case of tunnel walls and viaducts etc will be marked with a Limited Clearance plate if a safe refuge is not available.

    Now I notice your points "crossover" is positioned as a pair of "facing" points which is fine and has become standard practice on modern "real" railways using SSI interlocking and clamp lock operation for points but on the older type railway scene of yesteryear this was bad practice as for rule of thumb the points would be set in the "trailing" direction, I understand though that for us modelers this would make for restrictive running on and for continuous layout operation. Hope this helps.
     
    jakesdad13 likes this.
  6. York Paul

    York Paul Full Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    892
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    Nice layout picture there SMR Chris :thumbup:, you hit the nail on the head because by widening track spacings you increase the lead length between points and on my layout in O Gauge the length between switch ends of my crossover is just over three feet eight inches from siding to running line.

    [​IMG]
     
    jakesdad13 likes this.
  7. Kimbo

    Kimbo Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    1,606
    Likes Received:
    128
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2015
    This might be of some help to you as well Gary....and to others

    http://www.gauge0guild.com/manual/07_d7_1_1.pdf

    I’d agree with Chris and Paul that the siding spacing is different to mainline spacing, but the issue for you is the limited space you are working with. The new tighter “set track” o gauge points peco are now selling would give you the extra spacing between the tracks, plus a fraction more space in the sidings / Passing loop, but would add more to the depth of the plan. The overall appearance of the track plan would also not look as good to my eyes as using the medium points that you have. :scratchchin:
     
  8. Kimbo

    Kimbo Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    1,606
    Likes Received:
    128
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2015
    A picture to ponder......


    Top points, medium marcway and peco (both the same)
    Bottom the new tighter set track points ( note, no coffins to remove anymore, well done peco.)

    So about a 50mm saving on the total length of the junction and roughly double the track spacing , but a lot more depth required.
    Set track points would give you slightly more storage space in the sidings / loop because stock can be parked closer to the junction without fowling the other line. Down side possible buffer lock through the “s” curve of the junction when pushing stock backwards.
    Hope that helps.
    Kim
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2018
    jakesdad13 and York Paul like this.
  9. York Paul

    York Paul Full Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    892
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    A superb visual description there Kimbo... a case of a picture equals a thousand words :tophat::avatar:. Again its that killer "s" word space which is often the bane of our lives.
     
  10. Gary

    Gary Staff Member Administrator Golden Goat 2018

    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    388
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2015
    Thanks for the informative replies, makes my decisions a lot easier now. I will add that I have already purchased the track and I'll go back and have a play on my track design regarding York Paul's advice on facing points.

    Cheers, Gary.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2018
    York Paul likes this.
  11. York Paul

    York Paul Full Member

    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    892
    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    I would add Gary that in model terms there is no reason why facing points should not be used, if fact on single line branch lines that is often the only way especially in termini and run round loops, it just doesn't look correct on an authentic display set up for showing but on home layouts with lots of loops and continuous running options where trains are routed at the modelers wish it is fine to do that. That is the superb advantage of our great hobby it has facets to suit all needs. :tophat:
     

Share This Page