[Les]

I surfed onto a site the other day that dealt with the early flanged track and flangeless drivers, and mentioned in passing that some industrial sites employed this method until quite late.

My indoor RR will be a SL, PP, ca 1875 affair, or at least limited to pre 1900. The main gauge will be G 45mm, with Fn3 & Fn18" thrown in for more fun. The scale in all cases will be 1:20.3. The engines will be short wheel-based 0-4-0T's.

My questions are these: has there been any application of flanged rails in model RRing? Not on mainline, but particularly in industrial sites? I've not yet encountered it, so I have to wonder if there are valid physical reasons for this, or is it a matter of personal interest or fashion?

It is intuitively obvious that what can be made to work in real life is often difficult or impossible (in practical terms) to model, particulary at sizes under a certain limit. (I am unaware of any flying models of B-52's with a six-inch wingspan--whatever 'scale' that may work out to be, for example.) But I think there are flying models of one in a much larger size. The point I am trying to make is, I have to wonder if flanged rail would even be worth trying in Fn18"? I think it certainly would be different.

The first major drawback I can see--for an engine with the same wheelbase--is that flanged curves must be 'broader' due to the chord of the wheel as defined by the height of the flange, compared to a curve for flanged wheels. 'Hunting' might be a problem, lending itself to poor running characteristics, both visual and actual, though speed would be low in both cases.

Anyone care to weigh in?

Les

 

[Jack - Freshwater Models]

I'm not aware of flanged rail , got a link??? Precisely what are you wanting to model. Flanged rail would be an interesting item to make, yikes!

Slate quarries in the UK used dual flanged wheels and some pretty unusual trackage but the speeds were often very slow (walking speed) and operations were pretty simple. I can imagine modeling slate quaries but operation would be tedious at best???

Some things don't scale down well as you said but often this is a case of what is expected by the modeler in operation rather than what works per the prototype. As modelers I think we sometimes expect more than the prototype accomplished.

My guess is that it can be done if you are so inclined. Interesting to think about.

Jack

 

[Les]

Jack,

Well, I don't usually bookmark sites unless they're hard to re-Google or I have a burning need to know more, and no time. But if you look at 'early steam locos' you can find lots of views of flanged track. Insofar as I know, little to none was ever used in the US, while the Brits (those dedicated folk) developed several patterns of flanged rails before giving it up.

What got my mind really turning was, yesterday my wife and I were sorting some RR 'stuff' out that I'd bought last summer at garage sales (my favorite venue) and I found a toy battery engine with metal wheels. I discovered the wheels were for floor use, and almost simultaneously remembered the pixes of the flanged track.

I am attracted by the unusual. And you're right, it is interesting to think about. I wouldn't want a lot of it, but the switches/frogs look pretty challenging to build. And, it'd be something different, as I said.

I don't have a precise model in mind. I want to be free to move within the parameters I specified, but as prototypically as is practical.

Les

 

[ralphbrades]

Les,

Try here:

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track1.htm
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gansg/2-track/02track4.htm

regards

ralph