Non Existent Reasonable Catenary

I'd like to see someone make the Archbold-Brady catenary bridges in O Scale. The best way to do it would be to make the A-frames and truss out of stamped sheet metal. I have scale drawings if someone's interested in doing this. Here's an original A-B catalog, look on pages 24 and 25 for pictures and a description.

http://archive.org/details/Ste...esAndCatenaryBridges

My personal view is that manufacturers have decided not to produce until ALL people connected with the hobby pronounce the word correctly:

CAT-EN-ARY

Perhaps the won't because so many CAN'T en ary...

Jon

Marty....you will be the guy that gets that Acela back when the time comes.  It is just on a journey across country right now.... 

Thanks so much for making it available and giving me the inspiration to do catenary!

Alan

The word catenary of course comes from the old sport of throwing cats in the air. It was originally CAT IN THE AIRY. Later it was shortened to catinary. Just a little known fact for you.  Don

Jon is correct.

The best, easiest, and cheapest catenary I've ever used was LGB's earliest version: plastic posts that clipped to the track (but could also be screwed down), a bow-shaped hanger with 3 notches for varying wire position, and a single heavy wire with a loop on both ends that slid/clipped together around the hanger. Not prototypical or scale, but it works well with my wife's LGB Trams. Some enterprising company that does business in Europe should check on licensing the design (now who could that be?).

well, i will be looking forward to reading don's article, after which i will slink away feeling inferior.

Actually it hasn't hit the shelves yet.  Whereas the price sheet from a year ago said delivery in 4Q 2012, the new price list just says 'in 2013'.  Further, the new sheet has no pricing for the items, just 'to be determined'.

Also, "point of order":  It's not quite correct to say that these items are 're-released', as most major items such as the masts and wire itself differ significantly from the earlier 0 scale versions.  The new wire sections have a thinner cross section and the ends differ;  the old masts were the DRB 'prewar design' and the new ones are postwar DB style.  I think the one tower mast so far offered may be the same, though.

Best rgds, SZ

Forrest, no you won't. You will stand proud after building your first section. It's an easy step by step way to build your own for very little money. Of course my wife left me. The cat ran away and my dog bit me as I was building the system.   Don

Don...just love your explanation of where "catenary" came from....so....I took the cat outside and tried it.  UHMMM...don't do this if your cat has claws and an upset stomach!.

Just thought of something.  Wonder if one could use the Bachmann signal bridge as a start for pieces to construct poles.  Of course there is Plastruct beams that could be used.  I think I am going to enjoy Don's article....!

Alan

The catenary systems shown here are way too big and clunky looking. The photos of actual catenarys  I have seen show more slender poles and supports.  

There was an O-gauge catenary system in the 60's by Pittman, the Erect-a-Wire Trolley pole. This consisted of slender poles threaded at the base with a bolt to affix to the table and a cross arm at the upper end for a copper wire clip.

The Pittman system's copper wire needed to remain straight, a problem. But I added an end piece to the cross arm that would engage the Marklin catenary pieces that resemble  the MTH catenaries wires but shorter.

On eBay I found lots of Pittman Poles and Marklin catenary wires, so the end piece was the only thing I need to make.

I think I posted this before I'll see if I can locate the photos.

Alan, you have a great arm. I just him fly over Lahaina. Don

That's what I would like to see. Something that clips to say Fastrak, was inexpensive, and easy to set up. I'm not a diehard realist, but seeing the GiGis run around with their pantos up in the air just doesn't look right...

SZ, I'm going off the Australian distributor's price list. He published prices a year ago, and they were outrageous.

Don,!!! He just landed on my roof!

OMG, he spun in a different direction just like your toilets. What a ride! Don

i assume a legacy engine running from the catenary would not have any legacy signal issues and that the middle rail could still be powered for passenger cars (my bi-polar has a switch for power source selection).

Alan, here in the Northeast the catenary supports are huge I beams.  MTH has captured the I beam very well.  I know out west sometimes wood poles were used. 

Hey Dave...I used to compete in Frisbee throwing so I guess I put too much of a spin on him...thank Don for giving me the idea!!

AlanRail....somehow I figured that you would do it better than anyone here so how about some pictures so that we all can learn from your expertise....

I have the Pittman poles, lots of them....and am using them in another part of the layout as one can see if you look carefully at my pictures.  As hard as I have tried, the wire can not be pulled tight enough without what Marty described as the "wave from a football game" which occurs while the pan is in contact with the wire.  The poles are not sturdy enough to weight the wire without distorting the pole.  Also, the poles in that system are very short and is best used in street scenes or areas where taller equipment is not used.  Very little ability to adjust the height....

Marty....the MTH I beam is done nicely even though it is a bit large in its cross section.  The MTH system certainly has its detractors but for those of us that have limited time and skills to hand build a system, it works and it works quite well.  There are a lot of things that you can do to make it look better....just have to use your ability and imagination.

Alan

Marty, most of the poles on the Milwaukee were wood except on the long trestles. Those were metal. Don

Alan of Leaving Tracks fame, your snide comments aside:

DON'T use the copper wire, that's what I said, you are right keeping the copper flexed IS a problem;

INSTEAD attach the Marklin fixed catenary to the Pittman cross bar with a connector that engages the cross bar at one end and has two pins to connect to the Marklin catenary at the other.  

The Marklin is like the MTH catenary but shorter. the Marklins are easier to find on Ebay then the MTH ones.

I am trying to find some photos as I removed my PITT-MARK catenary for other work.

AlanRail, the above photo of my old layout is Marklin wire. It comes in three lengths and is very easy to use and strong. Don

Good evening everyone, I've been following this topic from the beginning.  Is there any concensus yet as to what we can do to build one of these systems without breaking the bank?  Scale Rail, yours looks really great. do you have pics and tips of the assembly process you used that you could share with us?  Great topic everyone.  Best Regards, Lion Vic

AlanRail.... setting aside your usual response....as I said, using the Pittman system  will make the height very low and is best used in applications where more modern equipment is not being used.  While I wasn't commenting on your solution to the wire problem, my response WAS aimed at your "clunky" comment.  You make it so easy to fish...if you know what I mean.

Don and Marty....I like your catenary systems.  Both accomplish what you want in a model and I certainly don't think they are "clunky".  Some folks just don't know how to comment about other's work when they don't think it meets their criteria.  In my case, I think I have already mentioned that the MTH system is not perfect nor is my skill level.

AlanRail...I will comment on your pictures when they are posted...

Alan

John....beautiful catenary.  This is what can be achieved with someone like John that is a master at what he does!! 

Alan

I love to view a beautiful scale system.  As I stated many times before I am a toy train guy that runs scale trains.  I operate every day and know what would happen to copper wire with the amount of operation I do.  It would wear thin or break after time.  I chose the Marklin wire as it is very hard and a grinder is needed to do any work on it.  My system  was made  to look like something Lionel (i am a toy train guy) could have made in 1956.  The Marklin catenary will outlast my lifetime and the poles use the Lionel block signal top caps.  This system was not an easy task to do on a finished layout.  If anyone thinks it is fun to do or a cake walk, guess again.  The end results are priceless.  I have a large amount of electric locomotives and not one pickup roller for the third rail exists.  I am very happy with my system and it operates one hundred percent.

I have non-existant catenary on my layout.  It was very easy to set up and inexpensive too!  Downside is no one appreciates the lack of effort that went into it.

Marty,  do you wear out the shoes on the pantographs?

Lack of a decent catenary system was why I shied away from modeling the New Haven, which relied heaviy on electric operations on the Shore Line from New Haven to Grand Central (yes, I know they recently electrified the line to Boston).  The New Haven had some really nice looking electric locos, several of which have been done by MTH.  As noted, several O gauge modeler have built their own, but catenary systems do tend to be finicky and require a lot of patience, skill, and planning to get them to work properly.  I do think the O gauge world does need a decent looking reasonably priced catenary system.

I always wanted cantenary whether functional or just for aesthetics.  Then I wondered about how hard it is to work around it. (are there replacement pantographs ?) We all want realism for sure and the bottom line is kind of funny, we want to be realistic but our tracks have three rails.  That being said I would be interested in a reasonably priced cantenary.  I do not believe I will able to afford it with the layout pushing 850' of track........maybe I have a rich relative somewhere.   

This forum is a real community of craftsman and knowledgeable folks in the O world and as a result, this thread has been a really interesting learning experience for me that I have been absorbing like a sponge. I am looking forward to Don's article. Until then or at some future date, I am running the electrics with the pans down as my engines, otherwise they look like they have sprouted misbegotten and bizarre radio antennas on their roofs. I have the sense that before I can run wire from a commercial source that's reasonable in cost and design compromises, I will be so old as to not be aware, or care about what planet I'm on. All the more reason to look forward to what Don presents. Thanks Don.

Jim...very good point concerning our desire to be realistic in our catenary yet we have 3 rails on our track.....

Alan

David, not at all.  Most pan contacts are plated and I have never had a problem with this.  very good question as I am sure others have wondered that.  To make catenary work on a model railroad, many things have to be considered. 

So, based on buying the catenary system from either Model Memories or MTH what do you think the cost would be to install in on a rather small layout on a single track. My layout is 5 1/2 deep by 14 long the main line where the system would be installed has one Ross 054 turnout in the curved position and all the curves are the same 054. I don't need it to be powered I just want it for looks.

Does Model Memories have an estimating program or chart?

Any ideas.

Trainman9......as far as the MTH system, you can figure somewhere near ten dollars per foot complete and working....

Alan

I can appreciate that a good imagination is the easiest way to enhance and modify any model railroad! 

I would like to note that the Lionel center rail track had a prototype.  The New Heaven installed third rain electrification on some of there branch lines out of New Heaven using a center third rail.  The problem with it was that there was no way of covering the third rail built in the center of the track and they toasted a few people.  Their claim that the only people getting electrocuted were trespassers apparently did not fly.  I do not think the overhead catenary and center third rail existed at the same time, but it might have been close.  The center rail was installed around 1899, about the same time JLC was working out his track.

4000 HOD insulators, brass and plastistrut poles, 3600 ft of 24 gage phosphor bronze wire. 

I think I am already all in at this time.

Wish me luck.

Always a detour on way to PRR, no straight and narrow path.

mikeg

Bill:  Following up on an earlier reply by Don McQuaig (Scale Rail) his article did appear in OGR Run #264, the June/July 2013 issue.  Don uses 1/4" wooden dowels to represent the line poles that the Milwaukee Road used, along with 1/16" brass rods for cross supports, bracket arms and supports, along with Marklin HO stamped catenary.  I had purchased a bunch of this catenary some time earlier, when it became available, and I have actually started putting up catenary using his methods. 

Only have about ten feet of it up so far, but, aside from working while on my knees, it is really easy and very realistic to put up.  Don actually used his for current collection, but I only intend to have it for appearance.  Since I use either TMCC or DCS for all my train operations, I didn't think that the added bother of powering up the catenary was much of a benefit.

Now that the Holidays are behind us and the cold weather has set in, I will again be downstairs and up on the layout, "hanging the wire" overhead.

Paul Fischer

At one time as a measure of desperation, I bought some ( about 11) of the old Pittman \ Bowser O scale poles that come with a bracket arm installed. They are already threaded at the bottom for under table mounting. They came with clips to attach the wire but looked so bad that even I would not use them so I considered other methods of attachment..the problem ( was ) is I could never find enough of them on the used market.