I'm getting stumped on how to do something...

[Rod.H]

I big mouthed in a jp youtuber comment that I could do the endless oval they did in a smaller area with the use of 2 Tomix CA-S and 4 C541-15s. Now while one of my CA-S sets is set up like a CC set (I added on the additional bridge beams), things were on hold till I picked up the Tomix packs 3245 and 3235, 8 p10 pillars and 4 long beams, with them a quick test resumed the hold as I'm now waiting on more items 140mm lengths of plain viaducts and packs of C541-15 - my version of a 10mm socket, they walk. 

I did a quick anyrail mockup and hit another obstacle my planned grades end up crossing over the lower track at a height where I suspect the suspended track will interfere with any rollingstock at ground level. I'm thinking I either need to change design from the squashed Tomix oval to a true oval, or there's a combination of straights that will make this idea work.  

[inobu]

Not knowing what the plan looks like but understanding rolling stock clearance and grade issues you can split your elevation scheme.

I always use 2" foam for my layouts. This allows me to go below ground level if needed. 

 

If I have a cross point with clearance issues I will drop the grade in one direction and lift it in the other. I am able to achieve 50mm clearance by 

manipulating only 25mm in elevation up and down.

 

Inobu   

[Rod.H]

Right, someone unfamilar with the Tomix CA-S set https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10150039/50/1 which consists of  2x S140-WP, 4x S280-WP,  2x C280-45-WP, 2x C317-45-WP, 2x CR280-22.5-WP, 2x CL280-22.5-WP, 2x CR317-22.5-WP and 2x CL317-22.5-WP, as these are the canted wide track, the 22.5s are actually the start and end points of the cant and are therefore directional, one either side of a 45 creates a 90 deg bend. 

 

On one side, at ground level I'm replacing a S280 with two C541-15 set in an s-curve to shift the oval up by 37mm, on the elevated section crossing over the same space I'm repeating the  C541-15 s-curve in the opposite direction closing the loop but when I do that the raised track crosses over the lower track 3 times, 2 more then needed. 

 

This is roughly where I'm at now:

I'm trying to work within some self set rules, I can only use the track that 2 CA-S sets holds plus the needed C541-15 and the elements needed to create raised track. I suspect the last time I mess around with raised track I either combined a CA-S set with the CC set or translated the CA-S+CC design to use the second CA-S to replace the CC set's curves.

[inobu]

Got me now.......I can't even see where you are saying that the raised track crosses over the lower track 3 times, 2 more than needed....

2 more than needed means 1.

 

There is no way you can have 2 loops crossover at a single intersecting point.

Inobu

Edited October 20, 2021 by inobu
add image

[cteno4]

The x is not a crossover it’s an over and under point the the one track crosses over top of the other one and the third spot one track is over the other track. It works.

 

jeff

[inobu]

2 hours ago, cteno4 said:

The x is not a crossover it’s an over and under point the the one track crosses over top of the other one and the third spot one track is over the other track. It works.

 

jeff

Jeff,

 

You got to help me on this one................Where does this statement fit

 

I'm repeating the  C541-15 s-curve in the opposite direction closing the loop but when I do that the raised track crosses over the lower track 3 times, 2 more then needed. 

 

What does the raised track crosses over the lower track 3 times, 2 more than needed? means

 

 

Inobu

Edited October 20, 2021 by inobu

[Rod.H]

I'm probably also doing it wrong by trying to force the shape, as here's Shigemon's production of the initial trigger following Kato's plan for Unitrack:

 

And now the video using Tomix track where I shot myself in the foot:

This one uses a both a CA set, a CC set and C541-15s.
 

Yeah, I'm probably causing more troubles for myself by trying to use the non-standard oval shape

 

 

[cteno4]

I just meant the layout plan workes and has 3 over under crossovers. Rest is semantics.

 

Jeff

[Rod.H]

13 minutes ago, cteno4 said:

I just meant the layout plan workes and has 3 over under crossovers. Rest is semantics.

 

Jeff

It may work but I'm intending to start the climb from 0 and rise to P10 (~55mm) the additional crossings over the track gave me the appearance in anyrail of being in the realms of 30mm or so. That's the concern.

[inobu]

33 minutes ago, Rod.H said:

I'm probably also doing it wrong by trying to force the shape, as here's Shigemon's production of the initial trigger following Kato's plan for Unitrack:

 

And now the video using Tomix track where I shot myself in the foot:

This one uses a both a CA set, a CC set and C541-15s.
 

Yeah, I'm probably causing more troubles for myself by trying to use the non-standard oval shape

 

 

Yeah, like I said it is impossible to have 2 loops intersect and crossover to each other with a single pass over. The track setup in the video have a single overpass because it is a figure 8 that is rolled back into itself. The second line is an extension of the Figure 8 adding its own overpass.

 

Your plan is basically a chain link which will over lap twice

 

 

 

Inobu

Edited October 20, 2021 by inobu

[Rod.H]

More thought is needed then. At least I've got some more C541-15s and a Tomix 3262 pack on the way from Nariichi-san, as waiting till November for the viaduct C541-15 would drag this out more and the 3099 beam set is unobtainium thanks to it covering wide track C541-15, S70, S72.5 and buffers.

 

[Rod.H]

I'm starting to think I might've come up with an answer or two
2xCA-S turned into an oval minus any S140

2xCA-S with the S140s removed from the inner loop and added to the outer

Now, I just need these darn C541-15s and/or bare viaduct to arrive so I can verify if the computer is right. I'm thinking I'm now going to be tripped up by either the s-curves or the grade, for as previously stated I need to be at the height of the P10(55mm) column for the C541-15 slew. I think I've enough space for the needed grades. 

I'm also thinking only one design is in a smaller footprint then my two inspirations.

 

Either way I think what I've come up with is in a smaller footprint than this: 

Which is using a Tomix Starter Set A + a CC set and probably some additional random track pieces for part of their second idea.

 

--Rod.H

 

 

[Rod.H]

Parts arrived

As I didn't want to attack my CC set, along with that bit of viaduct, along with the C541-15s I also ordered another set of up/down piers. The sharp-eyed amongst you will note no S140s in the unused track pile, just S280s. I wanted to see if it would work in a 1220mm length, as the gradient was my concern

Well, it certainly appears to light engine.

I think I've also achieved the minimum footprint without changing the scale. 

 

edit: I wasn't happy with the front grade, thinking the beamed S140 was too sudden a rise, so I swapped it for the beamed S280 and grabbed an S140 from the storage tub. Along with the fences and Taki1Ks from the crate.

 

--Rod.H

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Rod.H

[Rod.H]

Though so, it looks a little better with S140s either side of the crossover and the curves would look better with a CXXX-45 replacing the super-elevation start & end pieces as my 180 deg curves are actually made up from two 90 deg corners.

Means I'm now following the self imposed rule : no additional track besides the C541-15 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Rod.H

[Rod.H]

The originator

Eventually got the right tweet. I know I'm in the space of a tatami mat, just shorter

Edited November 2, 2021 by Rod.H

[Rod.H]

Right, decided to put up a very basic video on YouTube  of possibly the last stage before the PC rail with viaduct HC541-15-PC I've ordered turn up and probably have discovered the train length limit for this version. Or this loco hates grades

 

[Rod.H]

Interesting, someone mentioned somewhere - think it was YouTube comment - that a Kato Store came up with a more advanced version of this folded over figure 8 and I found it listed at the Tokyo branch https://www.katomodels.com/hobbycenter/product/original/001235.php 

 

So of cause how does that translate into Tomix

A slightly larger oval that still fits in a Tatami mat and I think might be able to have a Shinkansen run on it as the minimum radii is 280.

• 1012 (S280-PC), N Tomix Fine Track, Straight (concrete) (1093) 28cm.    x5
• 1021 (S140), N Tomix Fine Track, Straight (1801) 14cm.    x3
• 1072 (HS280), N Tomix Fine Track, Straight 28cm. (viaduct)    x3
• 1121 (C280-45), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (1851) radius 28cm, angle 45º    x4
• 1122 (C317-45), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (1852) radius 31.7cm, angle 45º    x4
• 1123 (C541-15), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (1853) radius 54.1cm, angle 15º    x3
• 1194 (C280-15-PC), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (concrete) radius 28cm, angle 15º    x2
• 1196 (C354-45-PC), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (concrete) radius 35.4cm, angle 45º    x4
• 1243 (PR280-30), N Tomix Fine Track, Right turnout 14cm. (remote)    
• 1281 (N-PR541-15-SY), N Tomix Fine Track, Right turnout (brown) 14cm.    
• 1740 (C541-15-WP), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (1770) radius 54.1cm, angle 15º    2
• 1872 (HC317-45-PC), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (concrete) radius 31.7cm, angle 45º (viaduct)    4
• 1874 (HC354-45-PC), N Tomix Fine Track, Curve (concrete) radius 35.4cm, angle 45º (viaduct)    4
• 3030, N Tomix Fine Track, Straight 28cm. (bridge) (blue)  

The only thing that's stopping me from putting this together is the Facts that I don't have a PR280-30 or another set of C354-45 curves on hand, I've got everything else. Heck, it's pretty much just a CA-S & CC with add-ons, it certainly would look good with HC541-15-PC. And why the use of the PR280-30? It was the only way I could see how to link the 74mm gap.

 

[Rod.H]

I'd a thought, why do I even need a PR280-30 for? A point that sharp in that location might cause problems, so...
It's a return to the originator at a larger radii and with a inner bypass, outer loops is C354, inner C317 and the bypass C280. And all I need to assemble it is another set of C354 curves. I suspect that as the gradient of this design is spread over the curve more, my Kato powered rolling stock shouldn't have any issues with it then.

[Rod.H]

As mentioned in the "What did....thread" I have track! for a time saver I picked up some viaduct track and C354 curves in both viaduct and wide track. Then assembled everything flipped 

So far I've found that only my Kato 4-car E217 refuses to climb one gradient, yet it has no issue with the other. I need to set this up on a more level surface to see if that's a factor. The track arrangement under the multi-viaduct section makes setting up the beams a pain. The C541-15 in viaduct form I suspect would make that easier as I think only one beam will be needed.

[Rod.H]

It looks like the C541-15 viaducts and a beam from the 3073 pack is the answer for the expanded loop and that means a beam from the 3071 pack would work on the plain loop. Though I needed the 360deg connector of which there's four of in the 3245 pack to get the angle needed. I'm beginning to think the reason for the oddity on the KHC  "Space-saving long run set" (HCSP9000) is due to Kato not doing viaduct cross beams.

 

And my C541-15-WP reappeared, well two of them. Swear that I've another two somewhere as I could only buy them in 2-packs.

 

[brill27mcb]

The beams make it more interesting scenically. You could also double-deck one track directly under another track using the Tomix beams.

 

Rich K.

[Rod.H]

Hrmm, double-deck over...don't have enough piers or beams to do it justice. Now I've another idea to add into my layout concept scrapbook. I can just imagine asking a professional layout designer: "Hi I'd like to build a semi-show grade portable layout using Tomix track, it must have the following: a deck truss bridge with  two deck girder bridge spans connecting it to embankments, a passing loop station, a section of double-decked track, a container handling facility, a locomotive or EMU servicing yard. And it all needs to be Japanese themed! Oh and here's the inventory of what track I currently have at hand. No spaghetti!" I doubt that I'd get a decent reply from many of them.

 

 

Either way I need to find a location where I can set this up in order to get better angles for photos or filming, as I'm either going to try and submit a magazine article on this -undecided which model train magazine it'd be appropriate for- or try for a longer youtube video. May end up doing both.

[Rod.H]

Well I hired a room

Set up my version of the deluxe Kato set in Tomix and ran some trains. Yes the 30 year old Bullet Train ran okay, it's just under-powered when compared with the Commuter and Express EMUs, I have especially in 8-car form. I think I need to either re-motor it or source another motor chassis, probably both. I'd issues with the RH switch to the point where I raided the my starter set for the S140 rerailer, which helped a little bit then I discovered why I was getting inadvertent multi-track drifting, I'd some motor chassis bogies with a slight limitation in pivoting or were catching on underframe parts. My Tomix 209-1000 that I'd fitted the body mount TN couplers to, was doing it nearly every loop while also being slower than the unmodified Tomix E235-1000, rotating both of the motor car bogies 180deg resolved that.

 

Then I went a bit crazy, broke out the near full yard set and started adjusting the distance of the switches from the curve on a not completely flat surface...

[disturbman]

55 minutes ago, Rod.H said:

My Tomix 209-1000 that I'd fitted the body mount TN couplers to, was doing it nearly every loop while also being slower than the unmodified Tomix E235-1000, rotating both of the motor car bogies 180deg resolved that.

You probably didn’t cut enough of the tab holding the TN couplers. Re-rotate the coupler and use your finger to see what catches the body-mount. I can’t imagine a 209 not to have enough clearance between the bogies to install body-mounted TNs.

[Rod.H]

I'll probably make a thread in Train Doctor on it, but the motor car bogies were catching on the TN coupler spring mount, when I rotated them I discovered a curved edge built into the power bogie that cleared it.