Building 3-RS track?

 You do not want the slider to rock. It needs to remain flat as it moves up and down. The 3/8" extra length is on the flat part. It needs a small ramp on each end as well. 

I decided to do a little detailing on this piece. I never painted the ties and haven't gone back to add dirt or grime to the track but this is as far as I'll go with it. It's just a 1x3  board with a piece of flex track on it anyways. 

I found an old Floquil rust paint pen and ran it down the sides of the rails. I glued some light green Woodland Scenics turf along the edges. For such simple methods, I'm quite happy with it. It's hard to believe that from an electrical standpoint that this is still 3 rail. I need to find the brass strip to start working on the sliding shoe for an engine. 

fredswain posted:

Southeast side in Clear Lake. We are right behind Ellington Airport.  The world's biggest indoor pool, Nasa's underwater neutral buoyancy lab where the space station mockup is located, is a quarter of a mile from me. 

When this weather and flood mess is out of here I'll try to set up something in a central location where all the Houston O scalers, 3 rail scale and 2 rail, can maybe get together for a lunch or dinner.

Ron H

I could probably arrange for an operating session at Craig Brantley's O/On3 layout on the north side in Spring. I'm one of his operators. 

I thought I posted - happy to send brass when the water subsides.  I have .020, .025, and .032, and some very thin phosphor bronze.

I hope you and your neighbors can get back to semi-normal quickly.

Also - really nice looking track!

I'm going to use something a little more rigid due to the length. Potentially .093" but we'll see. 

fredswain posted:

I decided to do a little detailing on this piece. I never painted the ties and haven't gone back to add dirt or grime to the track but this is as far as I'll go with it. It's just a 1x3  board with a piece of flex track on it anyways. 

I found an old Floquil rust paint pen and ran it down the sides of the rails. I glued some light green Woodland Scenics turf along the edges. For such simple methods, I'm quite happy with it. It's hard to believe that from an electrical standpoint that this is still 3 rail. I need to find the brass strip to start working on the sliding shoe for an engine. 

Fantastic Fred! I think you are really on to something!

Remember, this is just a technique for the track. The old clip on slider solution that I had years ago won't work now. The design can not be allowed to rock back and forth like that old slider could. It'll tick. The track will be the easy part. The slider modifications necessary to an engine is most likely going to be a deal breaker for most as it'll most likely be a permanent mod. 

fredswain posted:

Remember, this is just a technique for the track. The old clip on slider solution that I had years ago won't work now. The design can not be allowed to rock back and forth like that old slider could. It'll tick. The track will be the easy part. The slider modifications necessary to an engine is most likely going to be a deal breaker for most as it'll most likely be a permanent mod. 

Wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. If I could modify 3R engines to operate on track that looks this good I would never go back. I'm already converting to Kadee couplers so I'm not afraid to modify. Looking forward to experimenting.

I would be interested to see what modifications need to be made on Atlas code 148 turnouts at the frog, wing rails, etc...

There will be no room for error in a pantograph-style mount.  It wouldn't take much in the way of slop to hit a tie.  I am trying to think of some other style mount that would keep the shoe parallel to the studs.

When you get to the switches, will you have to collar the studs to keep them from getting bent?

Fred - I am in awe of how you keep forging ahead and expanding the envelope of what can be done in stud contact for greater realism.  One question: with this spacing between the studs, is there enough contact area between the stud and the slider to support the current draw of some of the heavier locomotives, such as two motor diesels?  Not that this is insurmountable - it appears that even if there were "only" three our four ties between studs, they would still be basically invisible unless you were looking for them.  

You are doing great work - I really admire how you have found such workable solutions to the challenges.

I'm not going to try a pantograph style mount. The slider will have 2 rods soldered vertically that slide inside a small tube, most likely made out of Teflon. The pressure holding them down will hopefully be nothing more than their own weight but we'll see. It shouldn't be much force hitting the studs so they shouldn't bend. Again, we'll see. Running at Lionel full speed would certainly subject them to more force than realistic speeds. It's all trial and error at this point and I'm not willing to be negative about anything until things are tried. I'm also not going to over think things. The laser cut stud rails were a clear example of that. 

PGentieu posted:

Fred - I am in awe of how you keep forging ahead and expanding the envelope of what can be done in stud contact for greater realism.  One question: with this spacing between the studs, is there enough contact area between the stud and the slider to support the current draw of some of the heavier locomotives, such as two motor diesels?  Not that this is insurmountable - it appears that even if there were "only" three our four ties between studs, they would still be basically invisible unless you were looking for them.  

You are doing great work - I really admire how you have found such workable solutions to the challenges.

I hope it can handle the current draw of modern engines. It apparently handled the current draw of engines from the 30's and 40's. More contact area would certainly ease my mind but then again how large is the wire going directly to each motor? We only need to equal or beat it. 

In two rail we have serious problems with two-wheel pickup.  I know that 3-rail seems ok with only a pair of rollers, and sliders always make better contact than wheels.  I will be interested in your operational report.

If it works, fantastic. If not, tweaks will be made. That's the nature of engineering. 

Not much to update right now. I've picked up some .064" x 1/2" brass strips to use as sliders. It's rigid enough for the length needed. I'll devise a plan after I get them shaped the way I need them. 

I'd love to say that I've made progress on this but the wife has me doing some remodeling work in the house right now. I doubt I'll ever have free time ever again!

Don't feel bad.  Last week I applied two steam pipes to a Mountain.  I used to build an entire locomotive in two weeks.

I find that I enjoy it more if I do not feel pressured to "get it done".  My current other hobbies - airplanes and law - are holding my interest.

I am looking forward to your operational report, but I have a lot of time (I hope), and whenever you get to it is soon enough.

I remember seeing this post which has Gargraves 2 rail and stud strips. If I can figure out how to make slider shoes I am really tempted to do this.

https://ogrforum.com/...ail-stud-rail-11x9ft

I'm ready to start playing around with this concept. Can anyone share photos of the loco sliding shoes that they have created? 

My attempts several years ago used laser cut strips that put studs between every tie. I had short sliders that just clipped over 3 rail pickup rollers. It took a lot of work to keep them from clicking. There was always a small amount of sound but the noise from wheels and track masked it pretty well. I had a couple of sliders that I built exactly the same as each other. One always clicked and the other never clicked. I have no idea why. The fewer studs there are, the less clicking can occur. Having a slider that rocks increases the likelihood of clicking. A shorter slider increases the chances of clicking. Once I read the old book talking about this latest method, it addressed all of the these issues and why this latest technique is better. The upside is that the track technique is easier. The downside is that the slider is far more difficult. I am convinced that regardless of the number of studs necessary, the slider must always remain flat with no possibility of rocking.