Alternative to print

[NW Modeling List]

Hi Bob; 

Check out: http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/ 

Nigel 

----- Original Message -----

From: "List, NW" <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> 
To: "List, NW" <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> 
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 7:48:34 AM 
Subject: Re: Another track centers question 

Thanks Grant. I appreciate the information. 

Also thanks to everyone posting the RMC updates. For years I have been getting most of my information from printed publications. It still isn't clear to me how those will be replaced with on-line publications or what those on-line sites are; if they are out there already. I have seen a lot of stuff on youtube and some sites, but to me they don't quite come up to the level of the edited articles that are in the magazines. 

I find that it takes a lot more time to surf the net and filter the good from the bad on line. Though I also suppose a lot of questionable information has been passed through the hobby publications over the years. 

I am one that appreciates what editors have to do. But I have also recently noticed that printed publications are starting to suffer in editing. It used to be a point of pride in newspapers to get grammar and spelling correctly, but it seems like I am seeing an ever increasing number of mistakes. 

I guess it comes from being old. 

Bob Huston 


---- NW Modeling List <nw-modeling-list at nwhs.org> wrote: 
> In inches, for 1.5" (1:8) scale, K = 1000 
> 
> For Z scale, K is the same as in N scale, as any difference gets lost in 
> rounding error. 
> 
> K only varies with scale, so any (narrow) gauge of the same scale would 
> have the same value of K. The reverse is true for G; it has several 
> scales for one gauge. For some context, this formula was derived from 
> the prototype for determining main line track centers on curves, 
> allowing for smokebox overhang. Other factors affecting centers may 
> apply in G gauge and narrow gauge, and for tracks other than main line 
> in any scale. For example, yard track centers might vary to allow more 
> room for carmen. Ladder tracks, particularly parallel ladders, need 
> wider spacing, but this too is driven by smokebox overhang on curves (in 
> turnouts). 
> 
> Grant Carpenter 

snip 



> >> For track centers on curves: 
> >> 
> >> TCc = TCt + (K / R) 
> >> 
> >> should work for different scales and units of measure by scaling the term "K". 
> >> 
> >> For all terms in millimeters: 
> >> 
> >> TT3 (1:101.6) scale, K = 4300 [corrected from previous post] 
> >> 
> >> TT (1:120) scale, K = 3000 
> >> 
> >> For all terms in inches: 
> >> 
> >> N (1:160) scale, K = 3 
> >> 
> >> TT (1:120) scale, K = 5 
> >> 
> >> HO (1:87) scale, K = 9 
> >> 
> >> S (1:64) scale, K = 17 
> >> 
> >> O (1:48) scale, K = 30 
> >> 
> >> A disclaimer. . . 
> >> I have only tested this empirically in HO scale. Your results may vary with scale and tolerances of wheel gauge, track gauge, track centers, and overhang. 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Grant Carpenter 
> >> --- 
> >> Main track centers on tangent (TCt) were 13' apart, later 14' (post-war) and wider in curves. For track centers on curves (TCc) in British TT (3mm) scale, try TCc = TCt + (5000 / R), where R is the inside track radius (all terms in millimeters). 
> >> 



________________________________________ 
NW-Modeling-List at nwhs.org 
To change your subscription go to 
http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-modeling-list 
Browse the NW-Modeling-List archives at 
http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-modeling-list/attachments/20140825/ba1ca37f/attachment-0001.html>