Minium turning Radius the narrow gauge Porter?

S

Shortline2

Joined: 28th Oct. 2002
Hi guys,

My collection of books is not available at the moment, and Google and my brain was not on the same page... So after a few pages of modeling stuff I gave up at possible a 40-foot turning radius.

I have various Trainz models of a small narrow gauge Porter 0-4-0 locomotive, and I been trying tonight to figure out what is the sharpest curve radius that loco can turn around when talking prototype?

I know there is a difference if it is with or without any cars attached, both curve info's would been great to find out, but of course, that also varies with the gauge, I know.
I have in mind for now the 24-inch version, but also the 30-inch and the 36-inch would been cool to figure out.

Anyone out there have any of these info's in their knowledge? :)

Thanks

Linda
 
Interesting question. Without leading or trailing wheels, I would imagine the wheel base would determine the theoretical track radius where the wheel flanges would start to bind against the rails. The working minimum radius would probably be something larger to account for variations in the relevant dimensions.

If pulling a wagon or two is to be considered, their minimum radius must also be taken into account as well as the maximum horizontal coupler swing.

Since they typically didn't run very fast, I don't suppose that horizontal tipping forces really come into play.
 
From the 1889 Porter catalog:

"Our smaller special service locomotives on narrow gauge haul mine cars around irregular curves of only 28 feet radius, and they have done daily service around curves of 20 and even 17 feet radius on wide gauge."

There's a mention of an 0-6-0 in there with blind center drivers being able to negotiate a 30 foot radius curve.

Book is at Google books; http://books.google.com/books?id=q5...mpany, Pittsburgh"&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false.

It's also at archive.org - http://www.archive.org/details/lightlocomotives00portrich

Hope that helps?
Curtis
 
Thanks Narrowgauge, but I have those already. I want to build one cause building is more fun :) I want to build the 2-6-0 and an 0-4-2 like Bachmann makes.

Rock On!
Dusten
 
Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies, Curtis, of course, I should have thought about the Internet Archive page - Thanks!!
Google Books I'm not that big user of as so many of the books there are blocked for me as I am not in the US... :(

Martin, thank you, yes, it was an interesting question, and thanks to Curtis comments I feel I can possible get away with a very sharp curve, around 32 feet or so, need to tweak it a little so it may end down on 30 feet radius...
Image for those who are curious can be seen here. :) Ooops...

That image shows a very, very, very tight curve, I forgot the 5m grid in TS2010 and counted them as 10m... That curve is a killing 25 ft radius, nearly at least, need to make a template to make it correct...
That is a real tight one, and yes, I shall try a even tighter for that spot, going on 20ft if I can get away with it.. :wave:
This to avoid the creek...

That was only a quick play around, need to tweak it some more, get the creek out of the way and so on... :hehe:


Thanks

Linda
 
Last edited:
Pencil42 said:
Very nice, Linda! It really illustrates how tight a 30-ft curve is.
Click to expand...

Hi Curtis, others,

Thanks, but I do have a confession, I messed up as seen above, I miscalculated, it's not a 30 ft radius, it is more like 25 ft...
I think I saw the Porter book from 1908 mention a curve down to 16 feet as possible but not advised at all.
Being a real cramped space up on this mountain, I might try the 20 ft radius, and larger on the mainline, playing with it and need a large bridge built...

Anyway, thanks all for a interesting discussion about sizes and radius for turning and so on. :D

Linda
 
Hi guys,

Not sure how interesting this is, but here is a small picture series to demonstrate the sharp curves I found in the Porter book that the engines could handle. :)

First out, a 30ft curve (click images for larger views):

We are entering downhill into the sharpest part, which is a 30ft nearly half circle curve... Slow speed!!


Nearly through half of the curve, at the sharpest part there is, relax, it will be better...


The curves and train as seen from the hill across the river - here you can better see the sharpness and the way they built the rails hanging on the side of the ground instead of going through the land...
cheaply built you know... LOL


Train so slow it was very easy to capture a second look of it passing this great curve of death! :p

But hang on, if you felt this is insane, look at what they built at the terminus/starting point of this true cliff railroad. The engineer insisted to have his engine turned, so, he got his will, wonder if he has a change of heart now... LOL


Here you see the small porter is turning after a hard day of working, you really, really have to go slow here, no room for errors...


This curve is really insane, it turned out the preview show in my thread linked way above was not going to work even as a 20ft curve, it would have to be like 17 or 18ft - so, this was the solution instead, hanging on the side of the hill, this is a true 20ft or 6,096 meter radius curve!!
Insane, but, fun to watch the engineer...

Now, there you have some Trainz examples of crazy railroad building, next for someone, find the real life images and post them here. :hehe:

Take care all, I'm finally over my Trainz fever for this time, three days of hard railroad building took its toll and I had finally today a Trainz free day, except the Forum that is, that is nearly impossible to stay away from. LOL

Linda
30ft_curve_entering_750p.jpg
 
Last edited:
Wow! That's a fun looking route Linda. Don't quit now!
Ahhh, come on. 3 days is nothing for a young Trainz'er like yourself. Remember the 'ol days? You couldn't put it down ;)
 
Thanks guys,

Sorry Rick, while I have trouble sleeping as I see this map inside my head more then I like, I just need to stay away, to many other stuff needing my attention. :(

Curtis, thanks!! That is an old MRT type of track except the trestle, that is a new TS2009 onward track. I need to admit that making tracks are not as fun anymore, while loving the new type of making tracks it also turned into so much work to make it look great I lost interest in doing it... :(

So I tend to use my old test MRT type made for a project that never needed those as they where able to produce much better and greater tracks then I came up with...
One day I bounce back.

Thanks for the ego boost, needed that today!

Linda
 
I think I remember that project too Linda.

I still use the old mrt track I made for my EBT route but I converted it all to the new stitched track format. It only takes some config edits to change it. You end up with just 2 lod levels but it's low poly track to start with and they say the new format is more efficient. I don't need to make track with all the extra polys for my own use.

There is at least one advantage, the new track allows you to set the distance that the lod switch takes place. With the mrt it's hard coded.

Bob Pearson
 
Last edited:
Shortline2 said:
...

But hang on, if you felt this is insane, look at what they built at the terminus/starting point of this true cliff railroad. The engineer insisted to have his engine turned, so, he got his will, wonder if he has a change of heart now... LOL

...
30ft_curve_entering_750p.jpg
Click to expand...
If the object was to turn the engine around, wouldn't be easier to just build a small turntable. It would only have to be long enough for the short wheelbase of the Porter and have enough clearance so the ends don't scrape the cliff as it is swung around.
huntsville-turntable.jpg
 
Hi Martin,

Yes, your right, a short turntable like that would work great. I had one in that spot too, a little longer ones (long enough for the Gilpin Shay), but as I never seemed to be able to finish it, and it was to large and kinda not fitting the idea I took it out and replaced it by the loop as a start point. :)

That image with that very tiny turntable looks like an even better idea, maybe I shall ask the machine man to design me one and have it installed. :p

Lovey image, thanks for posting it!!

Hi Bob,

It is the config parts that kills me on the new track, whenever I try to get my head around it I tend to spend so much time with the trial & error that by the time it is done like I want, I am so tired it takes months till next track piece, and it all starts again and then it takes years till next time...
The trestle is the proper new way, the fill/wall track is the old MRT kind..
But, great idea, maybe next time I get around to Trainz stuff, I spend some time doing it.

That or try a short turntable for the Porter locomotive, unless a kind sould out there wants to make one with a walkway around on trestle as this is hanging on a steep mountainside so the men turning the locomotive can walk safely around the turntable. :wave:

Still, that loop is fun to watch... :hehe:
But yes, a turntable is a better deal.

Thanks guys for the feedbacks

Linda
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Tightness of turns vs train speed: my standard.
Replies
7
Views
555
JonMyrlennBailey
J
J
I'm trying a new punch recipe.
Replies
0
Views
152
JonMyrlennBailey
J
M
What exactly are the two Trainz track superelevation parameters P1 & P2?
Replies
4
Views
853
mapsgame
M
J
Some proposed Narrow Gauge equipment I'd like to see in Trainz
Replies
0
Views
467
jordon412
J
C
Looking to either join or create a trainz narrow gauge website.
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
tdstead
T
Back
Top