Tight turn

[Thai1On]

I'm rebuilding an early part of my route but running into a problem. I'm generally following a river as per most railroads but I have to make a 90 degree in a small space. I'm not looking for hardcore prototype setup but something that is somewhat realistic. In theory could most large American steam locomotives make a 100 meter turn at slow speed? If not I can and will use the "HOG" and reroute the river to make for a larger turn :hehe:.

Cascade was right, these DEM maps can take over your life and sanity .

Dave

 

[cascaderailroad]

I will help you all I can.

Post some screenshots in the Screenshots Thread

Or send me a PM.

Sometimes the track lines in HOG DEM's are way off by +/-20m in all xyz positions ... showing track in river channels, or way up on a mountainside.

I lay a stretch of water in the river channel, and move it up and down to see where the actual riverbed is, and see where the track would best be located ... most river channels are very shallow.

http://i525.photobucket.com/albums/cc339/cascaderailroad/Screen_004-4.jpg

On my PRR route, the Great Flood of 1936 hurricane washed out the entire portion on the line between Tyrone and Spruce Creek ... the river channel was so severly eroded away, and the once 4 track line was never fully rebuilt ... and only 3 tracks were relaid in that eroded section. Now it is 2 tracked.

Being that we both have TS10 I could help you greatly ... what is the DEM route that you are working on ?

 

[Thai1On]

These are DEM's of my early childhood home and no major railroad ever ran there and I'm looking to correct this error . Doing research on the area I found there was a short-line logging railroad that operated around the 1880's and thanks to Google Earth and some old maps of Kentucky I found the old grade. I have used some of the old grade but the southern 90 degree turn is giving me trouble. Again I can reroute the river if necessary as no one will know :hehe:. I just would like it to look good and somewhat realistic.

Dave

Below you will see the the first attempt and the second attempt of the mainline.

The next 2 are different angles of the bend.

Last is the mini map view. Worst come to worst I can simply make a tunnel to cut the bend out completely.

 

[cascaderailroad]

I use FT Track assembled circles as a tracklaying template, for laying spline points ... sliding single track overtop of the FT Track spline points ... then I simply slde the FT Track circle out of the way for later use as a tracklaying template at another location.

Note: Some FT Track refuse to join like magnets (IDK why).
FT Track is best joined on a flat surface, and while zoomed in, and appropriately rotated for best joining angle.

I used FT 300m R for the Horseshoe Curve as it roughly replicates the 609' R (the math doesn't figure).

But it looks like you need a 100m, 150m, or 200m FT Radius Track to use as a template.

I myself find that trees and textures get in the way, and make tracklaying more difficult.

A curve should have a straight track on lead in and lead out ... and also straights in between where oposing curves are joined to curves.

I have used as tight as 50m R, and 75m R FT Track on my Wopsononock backwoods RR

 

[Dermmy]

American 'Plate C' stock, which is stuff permitted for unlimited interchange with no restrictions, copes with a minimum radius (iirc) of 350 feet, which is not all that far from 100m. A short-line logging route would be more than happy on curves that tight.

The Kentucky Hollers forced railway engineers into some amazing twists and turns. My East Kentucky routes have plenty of tight turns. I used 100m as a preferred minimum, but it does get below that quite a few places.

That overhead view of yours though could have that curve tweaked out to an easier radius even if the river banks are steep. Using the 'straighten' tool on the approaches will make them true tangents, even that would help...

Andy

 

[ShadyCadence]

I'd cross the river and take the far bank around, then come back across.

 

[JCitron]

The other alternative to try, Dave is to take your track and move it a bit more inland away from the river closer to the base of the hill. By moving the track away from the river's edge, the curve doesn't have to be as tight. You could then create an oxbow lake where the track used to be. This would make the river a bit wider, but with the little island along where the original riverbank is, and a new bank near the track.

Another thought would be to move the track to the new location, but keep an abandoned ROW where the old track is. The old track being your original line as you've laid it now. In our fictional world, this could be where the company had used the original ROW when they first built the line, but as time went on, and their equipment became bigger, they required a little bit of new track work done. This scenario is not unusual if you think about it. CN has done that in numerous places in the Rockies. The Boston and Albany did that later on in Western Mass when they wanted to run faster express trains, and so did the Union Pacific as it reworked their route in the great Southwest to avoid steep grades and tight curves as well.

John

 

[Euphod]

I second John's suggestion. The first thought I had when I saw the screens was to move the curve inland from the river.

 

[Thai1On]

Tight turn rebuild

I like the abandon track idea, thanks everyone. I'm going to try jumping the river and see what it looks like. Now off the surveyor.

Dave

It's amazing what the L&A engineers can do with a few steam shovels and a couple of box cars full of dynamite :hehe: