Chicago L style elevated train structure

[velotrain]

Sorry I misinterpreted Jeff. Reading your message again, I should have realized.

 

I do think this is generally true for commercial buildings, but not residential, "most all buildings have a lot of lights on during the day"

[cteno4]

Depends if folks are at home or not!

 

Windows do interesting things in the day when viewed from different distances and lighting conditions. They tend to go mirror then very dark in appearance as you increase viewing distance and most layout scenes are viewed at >100m at n scale. Scale windows don't do the same thing visually though (again lighting effects don't scale well).

 

When I was playing a lot with T scale this popped out as you are viewing scenes from like 300m+ usually and what you could do for t scale windows (they get tiny) was hard. Even printing on acetate sheets made like a 1' thick window. Lighting t scale structures is really a challenge as they are tiny! Eishindo Did a cleaver thing in their small structure modules of providing an insert into the structure with a floor section for each floor (completed with molded and painted details of furniture!) and a frosted clear plastic light pipe that ran up the center if the structure so you could put an led under the structure and light the building. The walls and roof are all a one piece cast from clear plastic and the outside had a thick coat of paint but with window area left clear. Did make for like 2' thick windows, but you could get a gentle lighting from the light pipe. I even tried painting out one floor of the light pipe to darken a floor and that did work. Wasn't great, but at this scale everything starts to go wonky and why it was a challenge to model and very different from previous experiences at other, larger scales.

 

Jeff

[EF57]

getting back on topic: do the experts agree that the kato "rahmen" (which just means "framework" in german) catenary poles are OK for supporting a high line? And: the first guy's third rail looks good to me. Where is that used in japan?

[kvp]

The framwork poles are usable for constructing an old style elevated line, but assembling them the right way is important, with some kind of support everywhere under the tracks.

 

3rd rail is only used on some of the older legacy metro systems, for example the standard gauge, 3rd rail powered Tokyo Metro Ginza and Maronuchi lines and the Osaka subway Chuo line.

[EF57]

thank you, how much work you have saved me!

[Rmsinsd]

Bill, thanks for posting that blog info! It's perfect inspiration for an elevated portion of a Unitram mini layout I'm developing. Viaduct pillars just weren't the right answer, but I'd not found another solution until now. Off to place an order for catenary pieces!

[velotrain]

Could anyone provide a link (or kanji search phrase) to photos of early Showa elevated subways supported on steel truss structures, or has concrete always been the norm?

[bill937ca]

Scroll down for bigger images.

 

http://funini.com/train/tokyo/metro/ginza/index.html.en

 

http://funini.com/train/tokyo/metro/marunouchi/index.html.en

 

http://funini.com/train/tokyo/metro/metro_ueno/index.html.en

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by bill937ca

[velotrain]

Thanks Bill, but I was generally wondering if there was ever anything at all similar to what's seen in the project in your initial post, or the Quinntopia video?

 

I was considering a project to build something using the Kato "rahmen" supports (perhaps the HO versions), but with a more credible track support structure. 

 

I see that Micro Engineering produces some N-scale bridge track that looks appropriate, as it comes with long ties, guard rails, and outer guard timbers.  Neither the ties nor the guard timbers are as hefty - square profile, as found on the proto, but they'll do.

 

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YfAv0xhLFQA/UNMUYMXTyAI/AAAAAAAADkU/vD0xzviHA-I/s1600/flex+track+compare+4.JPG

 

Question:  will Kato and Tomix trains generally run on code 55?  It seems more widely available than the code 70 - this would be isolated track (no need to interface with anything).

[kvp]

Yes they run on code 55, but only on the Peco type with the missing inner rail clamp heads and not the american type witch is more accurate. The standard japanese (and european) track type is code 80. The differences are mainly in the rail thickness, as Tomix Finetrack rail profile is narrower than Kato Unitrack. I would suggest either using code 80 or Peco code 55. The latter is better if you want to have turnouts on the elevated section as Tomix only supports elevated turnouts on the ballasted conrete viaducts.

[velotrain]

I definitely want to use the ME bridge track - for the reasons given, so will try to "track" down some code 70.

 

I don't know if it matters or not, but ME has notoriously thin "spikes", such that they can very easily break off when bending the track, so the Japanese stock just might work on the code 55.  Maybe I'll ask on a US-based N-scale forum to see what their experience is.

 

My current thought is just a double track straight run with no turnouts, although I might have a kink or two to test out semi-proto methods of achieving curves - and with more frequent support, than is seen on the video.

 

I saw Elwood's Elevated products at the show, which he sells basswood kits for. 

 

http://www.trolleyville.com/tv/times/july2009/images/291-Elwood%27s-Elevated.gif

 

However, I'm thinking about building my own similar girders using styrene - sheet and angle stock.  The station is more puzzling.  Overhead crossing components would be a good source for bashing, but that's just the access stairs.  My memories of NYC are that the token booth is on its own level, nestled underneath the tracks, with "inside" stairs to each platform.

 

This site shows an interesting photo I found yesterday.

 

https://www.chicago-l.org/stations/images/SouthElevated/indiana04.jpg

 

It’s a CTA station from the steam era where the fare is paid at ground level, and then there are stairs to the platforms from that building.  I notice that the lower stairs are totally enclosed to discourage free rides.  This allows a lower track level than the arrangement I recall from NYC, and I might try something similar for "Japan".  I'm still hoping to see some images of the Ginza line as originally built, but since it came decades after the NYC and Chicago networks, there may be few to nil structural similarities.  It seems likely that they would use the Chicago style, with all stairs internal to the station.  However, that doesn't work if the line/tracks straddle a street ;-)

[bill937ca]

Something like Tokyu Osaki Hirokoji Station opened in 1928 by Ikegami Electric Railway?

 

http://funini.com/train/tokyo/tokyu/osaki_hirokoji/index.html.en

[velotrain]

Thanks, Bill, but I suspect what I really want is a Japanese interpretation of an early 20th century NYC/Chicago style station.

 

I do like the ITLA products, but somehow want to create my own thing rather than just construct their system.  Also, they don't provide for any sort of token booth, so I guess their elevated line is free to everyone ;-)  Since bashing is my favorite construction method, that's probably what I'll end up going with - if I do this at all . . . .

[bill937ca]

I don't think I've ever seen a pure elevated line in Japan.

[velotrain]

Then I guess I'll have to build an impure model . . . .

 

Probably not so different from the one you started the thread with, except the flex track will have something supporting it ;-)

 

And I won't get anywhere close to his detail and signage.

[kvp]

So far most japanese high level stations i've seen had two classic structures: either a brick viaduct with the station in the viaduct arches and iron bridges across roads (german/british proto., ex. Yamanote and Chuo lines) or the more modern elevated on concrete or steel viaduct with the station in a more modern box building underneath the platforms.

 

Wood decks on steel viaducts are usually avoided in Japan due to the fire hazard. This doesn't rule them out, but they weren't common.

 

One way to avoid a ticket level it to have one gate at the top of each stair at platform level. This allows side stairs with low elevated height and minimal street footprint.

[velotrain]

Yes they run on code 55, but only on the Peco type with the missing inner rail clamp heads and not the american type witch is more accurate. The standard japanese (and european) track type is code 80. The differences are mainly in the rail thickness, as Tomix Finetrack rail profile is narrower than Kato Unitrack. I would suggest either using code 80 or Peco code 55. The latter is better if you want to have turnouts on the elevated section as Tomix only supports elevated turnouts on the ballasted conrete viaducts.

 

From a US source - I suspect the "greater clearance" is related to the low ME spike heads that I mentioned:

 

"My new-ish Kato, Tomix and Bandai seem fine with code 55 and since ME

code 55 is even greater clearance then Atlas I do not think it would be

a problem."

[kvp]

Actually Atlas code 55 track is too shallow for some older sets and i had problems with Arnold locomotives. Code 40 is too shallow even for modern japanese trains. (also tried, they ride up on the spikes) Peco code 55 is using a trick to allow larger flanges, so it's actually code 60 for the flanges and code 80 for the rail joins. I would suggest Peco code 55 if you want to be sure that most trains could run on it. You could test Atlast code 55, but i'm pretty sure it's shallower than Peco code 55 that comes with the inner spikes missing. (it's held down by using code 80 rail embedded into the tall sleepers that gets covered by ballast)

[velotrain]

I think you're misunderstanding the quote from a US forum that I copied above. 

 

I have no intent to use Atlas, and he is saying that the ME code 55  - which I do plan to use, has greater clearance than the Atlas.

 

I also heard from a forum member that his Kato US prototype equipment has no problems with ME code 55.

 

Again, I'm going with ME as they produce bridge track - which is ideally suited for elevated lines, so Peco has no interest for me.

 

I've long been familiar with how they engineered their code 80/55.

 

I gather you have no actual experience with ME - of any code

[kvp]

Yes, i just tested the Atlas tracks. They look great but not really usable with off the shelf stock. The question is if the ME code 55 has the same or larger clearence than Peco code 55, because if that is true, then it will be ok as i've tested Peco code 55 with all kinds of japanese trains, even some ancient ones from the 80ies.

[velotrain]

I'm certain that the ME clearance is less than that of Peco, since as you stated it's effectively code 60 on the inside of the rails.  However, it's greater than on Atlas, and I have first hand confirmation that current Japanese rolling stock will work on it.  I had actually ordered four sections of code 70 from Model Train Stuff last night, but when I saw the messages from (non-JNS) forum members this morning, I called MTS and they made the switch on the order.

[cteno4]

Charles,

 

One of our club members has a big me code 55 Japanese layout and only issue, and that's a code 55 issue in general, is that bits of ballast or smutz can get next to the rails and contact the flanges and cause jumps. But that housekeeping to clear that. All his Japanese stock runs fine and the few derailment issues were all bits of ballast issues or point and flangeway issues all usually remediated with dental picks and fiddling.

 

But worth getting a section and testing well for yourself in your situation and equipment. Some older gear does have larger pizza cutter flanges but that's usually pretty old stuff.

 

Jeff

[velotrain]

Jeff - Since this will be an elevated line using bridge track, no ballast worries ;-)

[velotrain]

I decided to see if there were any updates to the blog that Bill linked to at the start of this thread.  I translated and read the most recent (#25), and discovered that the layout section with the modern downtown and retro elevated line has been detached from the layout, but I didn't yet look to see what has become of the rest of the earlier layout. 

 

Actually, I liked the "original" layout, so I'll have to go back at some point (somewhere around #15) to see just why he decided to tear it apart.

 

http://layout.client.jp/

 

 

I've also decided that the Tomytec Osaka City Subway Series 50 cars look more appropriate for an older (imaginary) elevated line than the currently available Tokyo subway cars equipped for third rail power, of either the Ginza or Marunouchi line.  I must say that these (Osaka) cars somehow look older than the 1969-91 period given for them (see earlier thread below).  Maybe it's the livery that makes me think that, as I would take it for pre-1950 if it was on an American streetcar, and our subways were traditionally nondescript colors - perhaps related to their initially being hauled (and patinated) by steam engines.

 

http://www.jnsforum.com/community/topic/9949-looking-for-non-specific-prototype-photos/?hl=%2Bosaka+%2Bsubway

Edited May 28, 2017 by velotrain

[kvp]

The newer posts have a proper support structure under the rails, so that explains why the old one was removed (to upgrade it).

 

For the subway cars, you might want to look at the old Tokoyo standard gauge metro sets as the orange and red colors look great and some of those cars look almost like old american cars (not exactly like redbirds but they look cool). For a slightly more modnern look, the stainless Tokyu cars with flat fronts and gangways could be used as modern american stock. Imho if you can find orginal 1000 series cars and paint them in a dark color, you can make them look like old nyc irt cars.