Nate, Top, top shelf work
very nice. Love the catenary system.
That's some great work. They did some catenary out here in Southern California for the Metro lines and I noticed that the wire was copper, then blackened with (I presume) grease. Are you planning to coat the wires with NeoLube down the road?
AGHRMatt posted:That's some great work. They did some catenary out here in Southern California for the Metro lines and I noticed that the wire was copper, then blackened with (I presume) grease. Are you planning to coat the wires with NeoLube down the road?
Good evening Matt:
Thank you for the comment. I use reasonable amounts of MG Chemicals Silver Conductive Grease on the pantograph shoes and stage joints. MTH pantographs are generally decent conductors, but I prefer to be on the safe side. Some lube helps conductivity, and also prevents any high-current pockets in the stage joints that may develop. Of course it also helps smooth any rough spots there may be on the wire as the pan travels.
Even though I do not lube that often, the underside of the wire is noticeably blackened with the conductive grease, and it tends to collect some at wire joints. When I have to reach for things, make adjustments or perform minor repairs under the wire, the grease gets all over the place, even with gloves. That is OK though; the stuff works great.
Can anyone supply a link to the 0-scale catenary made by Sommerfeldt? My searches are coming up empty. Thanks in advance.
The wire if made of copper will turn green over time, on the NEC it is all copper and green. 
Arthur P. Bloom posted:Can anyone supply a link to the 0-scale catenary made by Sommerfeldt? My searches are coming up empty. Thanks in advance.
Nice work. I thought about trying it but figured I'd electrocute my self or burn the house down.
It's always worth returning here to see what's new under Nate's world of wires. Although he and I model different eras, I could almost believably squeeze in an E44....just not a blue one. All it would take is for one of those MTH's to show up locally in Brunswick green.....not that the P5a is anywhere near retirement on my layout. 
Bruce
brwebster posted:It's always worth returning here to see what's new under Nate's world of wires. Although he and I model different eras, I could almost believably squeeze in an E44....just not a blue one. All it would take is for one of those MTH's to show up locally in Brunswick green.....not that the P5a is anywhere near retirement on my layout.
Bruce
Good evening Bruce:
Good to hear from you, thanks for the virtual visit! You would be pleased to know that I seriously considered a P5a (modified) recently...as well as a BB1 pair. There is a shop in York that is closing soon, and he has one of each. It is not in my era, nor can I afford it... But it would have been cool to run off the overhead here! Also, I think the P5a Mods are 072 minimum, which doesn't quite work.
I saw you have made some progress as well. Have you powered up your overhead? Feel free to post some pics here, or re-direct me to where you may have some. Take care, my friend.
(PS -- Those PRR E44s are around...I expect to see one on your system soon...)
Hi Nate,
You could be correct in being concerned over the P5 not handling anything lesser than 072, although G motors seem even less tolerant and expose my poor track laying skills every time.
My catenary install has been delayed somewhat as I rework said track laying and build/ integrate a train shed much like the design at Harrisburg. This is a change from the initial idea of an open platform style station like at Lancaster. Truth be told, lately, I fire up the ZW's and put in more running than building time. Other house reno's on the go sort of dampen the layout construction ambition too.
Powering the Cat wasn't in the plans but there is always that possibility. Getting the wires even enough for the pantographs to follow them smoothly is first priority here. Because of the layout size and multiple elevations, the Cat serves as an excellent TMCC signal ground plain when hooked up to household ground.....a real noticeable degradation where no overhead wires exist. Fortunately, the Cat already installed has proved resilient enough to withstand my clumsy moves. Just need to get back to the bench and solder up more sections of it to continue.
Off topic a bit... A recent video stunt showed a young man dangerously riding outside on the rear of a Toronto subway. As a comparison, the news ran another video showing some dope surfing the top of a motor, hanging on to the Faively pantograph!
Bruce
Good evening Bruce:
I am not sure if I missed your pictures, or am forgetful or what. What a neat system you have going there. Somehow I failed to notice your multi-level madness, which is even more remarkable considering your apparent tight space. I thought I had a tight space in my loft, you appear even more cramped in the attic! The multi-level design prevents the eye from taking in the entire system, which makes it seem bigger and more pleasant to look at. Do you have a track plan posted up here somewhere? Forgive me for being too lazy to search right now.
In other news, I had to totally re-design the pan shoes on the E44s. I had a slight snag last week, and subsequent tests revealed the shoe is a bit too short. after some minimal wear. A new design is afoot however. 
You should also post some videos at some point. Perhaps you have and I missed them. Forgive me again if so. Take care, and happy building.
(PS -- You coming to York? I live about 20 minutes away from the Fairgrounds).
Hi Nate!
Sorry for the tardy response. The attic is a bit cramped but there's just enough head room at the peak for my 6' frame. I kept the basic layout height lower than usual to take advantage of the maximum room dimensions....roughly 3' off the floor. Attic access via stairs opens into the middle of the room, so considering all the limitations it dictated an around the wall style layout design. Square footage wasn't so much a concern as was making sure things would fit height wise. There never was any great compromises involved in getting the main up and running although some changes where made on the fly.
I sat down tonight and began drawing the current track plan as completed. When I finish I'll be sure to post it. An initial plan that was drawn over 10 years ago has a distinct similarity to what has been completed, although very few,if any, measurements were made before construction. The freestyle form of construction involved assembling a section of bench work frame then completing the roadbed and move on. Running changes to compensate for excessive grades or sharp curves just seemed easier for me using this method. Once around the room and pray that both ends meet. There is still loads of track laying to do, with features such as an engine facility and hidden staging yard yet to come. Finishing the mainline catenary is first and foremost so that the outer reaches are scenicked before the inner features are begun.
Sorry, no videos as of yet......it's another of those new fangled things that confounds me. Never have had the pleasure of attending York...still on the bucket list.
Re the P5a....any tighter than 072 would probably cause issues. The long wheel base on 3 sets of flanged drivers being the main culprit.
Bruce
Tony_V posted:Sometimes the craftsmanship and ingenuity of the members here amazes me. This is one of those times. Very nice indeed.
As far as actual scale, well there are always compromises. My favorite scale to think about is weight. For example the PRR S2 weighed in at nearly 1,000,000 lbs. At 1/48 scale that is still in excess of 20,000 lbs.
Beautiful work!!!
Tony
Just have to correct you - when scaling the weight, you have to do 'cube root', so divide by 48 3 times. So actdually about 9 pounds.
Jim
As promised, here's the attic layout as of today.
Although not strictly to scale, the drawing details the use of easements and curves. If there's a curve in the drawing, even the slightest one, then it's on the actual layout. only the chimney and stairs ( at center ) interferes with the floor space. Although one reverse loop is obvious, a second is incorporated so that trains can switch directions continuously. I currently use the second one ( single track over curved bridge ) as a staging track, holding 3 or 4 trains off the mainline. I tucked an old oak desk under the triple track section that will eventually become Harrisburg. The desk houses my transformers inside a compartment once used for typewriters. The spur coming off the track below the curved bridge will eventually connect to a programing track on top of the desk, roughly at the same level as hidden track A. To the left of the chimney is where my sound system and record storage reside. When the sound of trains become monotonous I crank up the tunes. Track B disappears to a staging yard ( not shown ) that I plan to redesign in the future. For now, it holds the overflow of an out of control spending addiction in engines and rolling stock. the spur behind the chimney will become the lead track into the engine facility, pretty much covering the entire reverse loop beneath. That section of reverse loop that bisects the room will be hinged to drop down when access to the track deeper underneath is needed. That's it in a nutshell.
Bruce
Good afternoon all:
I apologize for the lack of updates since April of 2018, (yikes). Quite a bit has happened since then, both in life and on the railroad. I am not able to do a proper update right now, but I did create a SmugMug album of the power around the system and yard. I hope that will suffice for now. I will post some details as soon as I am able.
@Randy Harrison posted:Nate:
Thanks for the link to your plans. Yours is a most impressive post. Your detail and photos are most helpful. The post must have taken you a huge amount of time.
I have several questions for you.
- Are your solder joint done with high temperature silver solder or regular tin/lead soft solder?
- The brass rods from Lowes, are they brazing rods?
- Did you anneal the rods to facilitate the intricate bends required?
Bravo on a great piece of work and thank you for your generosity in sharing your technique in such great and informative detail.
Hi Randy:
Thank you for your comments. I have done a terrible job at posting updates over the last few years; too much happening outside the railroad. I've made several changes since I last posted on it. The original post did take some time, but it was worth it to me in order to share the system. I find it very satisfying to share with others, albeit online. Sadly, not a single person in my vicinity is into model railroading, or appreciates the work behind something like this as the forum members do.
So, as far as your questions go:
1. Regular Kesters '44' and a 100w Weller. I've only had one joint fail (which was noted in the original post) and that was not primarily attributed to the solder joint, but bad mechanical design that I ended up modifying.
2. Nope, just the regular brass rod found with all the threaded rod and metal shapes. Nothing special about it.
3. No annealing, just carefully applied elbow grease and the jigs that I outlined in the post. No special processes.
See,. that was one of the project parameters for myself: easy to acquire materials, and no 'special' processes to do things. Generally speaking, the system is faithful to KISS methods. While I greatly enjoy this niche if the hobby, it can be tedious and harder to maintain then a conventional 3R system. I didn't want any odd materials or methods to make it more difficult than it was.
NOTE, I'll try to get some new pictures and videos up soon. It's been too long. The system has undergone some good updates and additions, but also has gone long stretches (months even) with no activity or runs. Such is life, I suppose.
Just reading this thread for the first time. Fantastic perseverance, patience, and ingenuity . Well done sir.
Nate:
Thanks for your quick reply. Your work is great. Also, this forum is good place to find fellow hobbyists like yourself who share their layouts with the rest of us and are so generous with detailing their projects with others.
Another question. Is the first photo showing the prototype catenary you are modeling taken at the New London, CT Amtrak Station after the electrification of the balance of the northeast corridor to Boston?
Hi Gerry -- Thank you, I appreciate the compliment.
Hi Randy -- The short answer is yes, my catenary is based on the Euro-style Amtrak catenary above New Haven. I hope you will find a close resemblance between their's and mine. However, that is not the catenary I wanted to build.
My preference is Pennsy catenary, ala the Port Road, A&S and Old Pennsy main. I had a layout years ago with that style of catenary. As it was my first stab at O scale catenary, my build techniques were much rougher then (which should be painfully obvious), and it was an O27 layout, (ugh, I broke so many rules...don't ask). However, the catenary WIRE's Pennsy flavor was obvious, (not the supports). I soldered every single joint, and those are little pieces of copper wire (blipps I called them) between the trolley and messenger wire, which were all soldered by hand. That system was a double-track main, and took over 5 years to build. It then took me just over 5 hours to tear down after I had to move, and it's all history. I was (and still am) quite pleased with the wiring technique. However, the catenary support system is appalling to look at over O27 track, hideously over-engineered, and rather embarrassing to share. I only took a few pictures and video, just enough to show how NOT to do catenary support.
These days I have a challenging home life with a special needs little boy, and my wife has some medical issues of her own. From the drawing board I knew that my new catenary scheme would have to be much more elegant and less time-consuming for me to be able to do. I wanted to run trains, not spend years building catenary; my build time was limited as it was. So, I decided to go the simple Euro-style route.
When I move somewhere bigger, I will try the Pennsy catenary again, as that is what I really want. However, for this layout, in this season of my life, the Euro catenary is a good compromise, and I am very pleased with the results. The trains roll with hardly a hiccup ever.
Attachments
Images (5)
Wow! I'm amazed at your workmanship!
I've just got one question. Why did you choose to use 3-rail track?
Pantenary, if people visit your brand new house and all they notice is the tiny dent on the back end of your washing machine in a small dim lighted laundry room, well then they have a problem. Same here, all I took notice in was the fine craftsmanship in the catenary itself. It is magnificent! I wouldn't even know where to begin! I saw the supports and looked right past them! That's wasn't what I was supposed to be looking at anyway, your system and craftsmanship is really outstanding!
@phrankenstign posted:Wow! I'm amazed at your workmanship!
I've just got one question. Why did you choose to use 3-rail track?
Greetings Phrank:
Thank you for your comment. My apologies; I have no idea how I missed these last two posts, (I do not make a habit of ignoring comments or questions on here, YouTube or elsewhere).
I would have preferred 2R scale. However, that pretty much kills my entire roster of electrics and rolling stock. Life is too short to buy a bunch of 3R and convert it all to 2R; I do not think it is remotely worth the time, IMHO. The Atlas track has a black center rail, so no big deal.
@ConrailFan posted:Pantenary, if people visit your brand new house and all they notice is the tiny dent on the back end of your washing machine in a small dim lighted laundry room, well then they have a problem. Same here, all I took notice in was the fine craftsmanship in the catenary itself. It is magnificent! I wouldn't even know where to begin! I saw the supports and looked right past them! That's wasn't what I was supposed to be looking at anyway, your system and craftsmanship is really outstanding!
Greetings CR Fan:
Thank you for your kind comments. The same goes for you; I have no idea how I missed your post. Sorry about that.
As I mentioned, I did like how the wiring came out. However, those supports are hideous. I should have blown the whole thing away before the wire went up and at least did O42 curves. I learned a lot from that build. The current layout is O63, which is still a little tight for my liking. However, it is the best compromise with the available space, such tat the loops are not all curves. The next layout will employ at least O81 ruling curves, (maybe some O72 in the yard trackage). Anything bigger seems a little excessive unless one has a lot of room; a luxury I currently do not enjoy. Even so, I am completely content with what I have, (maybe adding some more GGD Amfleets at some point).
