Bullet Inclines

[Guest Closed Account 1]

Designing a modular layout for bullets.

 

Which percentage inclines do I want to incorporate?

 

I will be using the newer (double) canted turn unitrack.

 

Modules will be simple 4x4 sheets on 1x2. One table will overlap the other due to space constraints. Sort of roller coaster sounding using unitrack pier viaducts and double wide tressels.

 

It will take 10 feet to go up 2 inches with a 1.5% incline. Argh.

[KenS]

Kato trains are typically rated for a 4% grade (you can often see references to "4%" in the otherwise Japanese instruction sheets), although I don't know if that would apply to a full 16-car train. However, that may look too steep to be realistic.

 

I limited myself to 2% grades on my layout, but I didn't need to climb very far since I wasn't doing a crossover.

[angusmclean]

I used the Kato incline set as a guide, which I think is 4%, and it looks steep, but it is a compromise I can live with to achieve cross-overs.  This incline is fine for most sets, bullets up to the seven-coach sets I have simply rocket up, but shows up some shortcomings in the pulling power of some of the smaller steam locos, which would seem to need a little more weight on the drivers.  Some train sets also are happier with the powered coach near the front end rather than the rear.

[Samurai_Chris]

Personally from my experience, living and looking at Shinkansen linese here.. The terrain will change, but the track stays the same hight... It all depends on how high, or how low your track sits on the existing terrain...

 

Sometimes it can be street level. Sometimes it can be 20m + above the earth..

[The_Ghan]

If you want to be prototypical you'll keep your shinkansen tracks as level as possible and alter the terrain around them.  If you are looking to make an interesting layout and don't care too much for what a REAL shinkansen track is like then you can get away with 4% on straights, but I'd be worried about 12-16 cars going around a bend at that grade and would suggest 2% on curves.

 

Cheers

 

The_Ghan

[clem24]

If you want to be prototypical you'll keep your shinkansen tracks as level as possible and alter the terrain around them.  If you are looking to make an interesting layout and don't care too much for what a REAL shinkansen track is like then you can get away with 4% on straights, but I'd be worried about 12-16 cars going around a bend at that grade and would suggest 2% on curves.

 

Cheers

 

The_Ghan

 

Meh I've got the temporary Kato double track using their graduated piers and going up straight + 2 pieces of the 45 degree curves and the only train that struggles is an overloaded Tomix C57 (we're talking 12 cars attached to it hahahaha). All my singular-powered Kato Shinkansen 16 car sets make it up with no real drama. Kato's trucks are just so low friction that they almost never have any issues. Bachmann on the other hand..... My Acela can barely get started on a level surface and cannot go around the Kato curves (R414) even when level. But it is pretty... In a Euro-inspired American kind of way.

[Guest Closed Account 1]

Personally from my experience, living and looking at Shinkansen linese here.. The terrain will change, but the track stays the same hight...

The tracks must experience a grade change at some point. Can you inquire at the railyard for me or direct me elsewhere for more info? Do you have a magnetic angle finder? :)

 

Thanks for everyones input. 2% was my guesstimate.

[David]

I was wondering about this.

 

In theory at least high speed trains like the Shinkansen should not be as sensitive to grades - in Europe the high speed only sections of the rail network can have grades up to 4%! High speed trains typically combine the power of a freight train, but at a fraction of the weight. The MU nature of many of them also helps increase adhesion, and the high momentum allows them to run up inclines without drawing much more power then on level track. The real enemy of high speed rail are curves, so it makes much more sense to go over something then curve around it.

 

However I don't know what actual prototypical practice in Japan is. The Japanese clearly have no trouble in spending the money to tunnel through or build over anything in the trains path. Maybe they are willing to invest in higher construction costs for even a small energy savings, or maybe there are other issues or concerns specific to Japan that limit grades. For example some of the European high speed tracks still have grade crossings, while this has never been tolerated on the Shinkansen - obviously views on tolerable safety are different. Earthquakes could be another reason - is a train traveling up/down a grade more at risk of derailment in an earthquake?

[The_Ghan]

Hi David,

 

Actually, freight trains are bigger on torque.  Shinkansen motors have more power and less torque than a freight train.  But I get your point.  The grades of REAL shinkansen are set as a matter of effeciency of operation.  You need to remember that in 2008 on average shinkansen ran just 6 seconds behind schedule ... and the track runs through climaticly diverse terrain.  Around Tokyo in summer the temperature can be over 30C, there are a lot of wet days, and in winter it usually snows.  Keeping track grades at a minimum does make a difference and you know what the Japanese are like with detail.

 

You pretty much answered your own construction questions.  I can only say that I don't know of any instance where a cost cutting measure has been taken in designing the track network for shinkansen.

 

Cheers,

 

The_Ghan

[KenS]

High Speed in Japan by Peter Semmens (ISBN 1-872524-88-5) says of the Tokaido Shinkansen that: "Gradients as steep as 1 in 50 (2%) were adopted in places, but in the main they were limited to 1 in 67 (1.5%)." (pg. 9)  For the Joetsu line, pg 33 mentions a gradient of "1 in 83" (which would be 1.2%), but it's not clear if that's a maximum grade or not.

 

However, pg 62 notes that on the Yamagata mini-Shinkansen line there are "gradients are as steep as 3.4% for considerable stretches...1 in 29 1/2".

 

And of the Hokuriku Shinkansen line he says (pg 68) "to reduce construction costs, the new line is steeply graded, with more than 30 km..inclined at 3% (1 in 33)".

 

There's also a comment in the section on maglev trains that gradients of "1 in 25" (4%) are possible because the cars are light and don't rely on physical adhesion, which implies that the ordinary trains don't have grades that steep.

 

So, 2% is clearly prototypical, and even 3% is (although uncommon), but that's about the limit.

[The_Ghan]

 

And of the Hokuriku Shinkansen line he says (pg 68) "to reduce construction costs, the new line is steeply graded, with more than 30 km..inclined at 3% (1 in 33)".

 

 

Well, now I DO know of a shinkansen cost cutting measure !!!!

 

Cheers

 

The_Ghan

[Bernard]

When I designed my layout I took in account the length of the Shinkansen's cars and the speed. You need long radius on the curves, nothing tight, it will made for smooth running. (plus even with tight curves the cars will look odd going around them.) So all of my inclines are of a 2% grade and long.

[to2leo]

A little related.  My head-in terminal station is 0.5 to 1% grade so that gravity can assist in helping my trains to back out.  

[inobu]

Webskipper,

 

My suggestion would be to look at this from a different perspective. Modeling is a depiction of a image, objective or scene. In our case we are depicting an area or region of the world that has its scene and terrain uniqueness. It might be easier to pick the scene and recreate it. That way you have a working plan that can keep you on point. You are not trying to create a scene but model it. The biggest problem is the disconnect between what we envision and what we can/should depict.  

 

Being that you are going to have 4x4 modules in reality you have 1/8 of a mile or 660 feet of N Scale scenery to work with. The question now is what will it take to depict the scenery from the prototype scene or image.

 

The best thing about the modules is you can move or adjust them to your liking.

 

Try looking at photos and find the area or scene you would like to depict you can use it as a guideline.  

 

Inobu

[The_Ghan]

Good point Inobu. 

 

Also, who amongst us will know if he models at 2, 3, or 4%?  Do we care?  I wouldn't. 

 

When I model a region or scene, such as Hakone Torzan railway, I'm not looking to recreate the exact radii, grades, number of girders on a bridge, etc.  I'm looking to recreate the feel of the place.  I'll model features that people who have visited the region will remember.  I might get a particular local shop right, an unusual building, cliffs, fields, etc.  But tunnels, bridges, platforms etc. are often shorter than the actual.

 

Just a few thoughts !!!

 

Cheers

 

The_Ghan

[Mudkip Orange]

Also, who amongst us will know if he models at 2, 3, or 4%?

 

Well, I know what pieces of prefab Woodland Scenics styrofoam I picked up at the LHS. So I can say decidedly that my layout runs at 3%.

 

Of course I could be really anal and specify 3.125%. However given the general dodginess of my benchwork I don't really feel justified expressing things to the third or even first decimal point.

[Bernard]

The biggest test with grades is will all of your roster be able to climb it. I did some tests and all my Tomix & Kato trains with their 5 pole motors had no problems at 4%, but when I tested my older Minitrix trains with their 3 pole motors, it was a problem. I knew at 2% all my trains would make that grade.

[KenS]

While I agree with what The_Ghan and Inobu have said about the goal of a model railroad being to give the impression of the prototype, rather than trying to strictly re-create it (although there's nothing wrong with trying to exactly re-create some specific scene), I'm going to disagree slightly.

 

To create an illusion, you have to understand the original, and in particular understand what makes it special or distinct. Looking at a prototype scene alone isn't sufficient, because if you don't understand what you're seeing, you can't decide which aspects are important and which aren't. This is certainly easier to do if you have repeated personal exposure to the original and can compare a scene to others you've seen. But even those with experience can be misled into generalizing something that's prototypical in one place to apply it somewhere it doesn't fit, which can break the illusion for someone who is familiar with what the desired scene is based on.

 

If, like me, you've never seen the prototype, it's a lot harder to get it right. Building up a mental image of the prototype by looking at Flickr photos and Youtube videos is certainly helpful, and I've spent more hours than I can count on Google Earth tracing rail lines and looking at how they fit into the environment. But I also think it's important to understand what the protoype does (or doesn't) do, and why, particularly for those of us starting off without the advantage of substantial exposure to the prototype.

 

Once you understand something, then you can make deliberate choices about what you do.  Knowing that a typical Shinkansen line is probably under a 2% grade wouldn't stop me from using a steeper one if I needed to, but I might take steps with the scenery to make the grade less obvious to the viewer. And that's part of creating the illusion as well.

[Samurai_Chris]

For me, and my current layout design.. I have decided to hide my Shinkansens from making turns, and will only allow them to be seen running on the strait... The reason for this is not because I think Shinkansens look bad on corners, but with the angles I have used to run mine on it would look unbelievable.... So that is why that I will only show them on the straits and hide the turns with mountain tunnels.. Same goes with gradients.. I have never seen a Shinkansen run a gradient.. Where I live it is flat, fast, and level!

[Martijn Meerts]

It depends on what you need an incline for. In a lot of cases an incline is to get 1 track over another track. In that case, instead of just raising 1 track with a 4% incline, you could raise that track with 2% and lower the other track with 2%. This is even fairly prototypical (although maybe not for shinkansen), I've seen it at various stations.

 

Of course, if the incline is purely to get the tracks to different levels, you could use the hiding method. Most of the Japanese trains are powerful enough to pull a train up a 4% incline, even in a curve. I've tested it with a Tomix incline track set, which I believe is even more than 4%. No trains had problems with it, including 16-car, single-motor shinkansen. The M250 had no problem with it either, both in push and pull, and my Tomix DD51 was even able to push the entire M250 up the incline while the M250 was turned off =)

[The_Ghan]

KenS

 

I don't believe you were disagreeing with us ... rather, you were adding to our arguement.  I agree that to model something effectively (a better word than "realisticlaly") you need to understand it.  A classic example would be a steam era fiddle or siding or yard.  If you don't understand how freight was handled, helper services, doubling a train, etc. then you're not going to get it right.  One can never do too much homework in this regard.

 

Excellent point Ken.

 

Cheers

 

The_Ghan

[Guest Closed Account 1]

The question now is what will it take to depict the scenery from the prototype scene or image.

 

This is great conversation.

 

The scene is the Arizona Desert, a high speed railway system north of Tucson. Wait, what? Japanese Bullets in the South West?

 

What a better place to run wide open than the desert? Its not purely flat but, the right tracks snaking through the sand will surely provide a smooth ride.

 

So my scene is a blank canvas.

 

Oh, it's 21:11 you can hear the freight train now, ripping through the viaducts westward from i19 till its on flat sand running with i10 on the north west side. Then the standard grey track ballast is surrounded by the pink caliche and desert vegetation as far as the eye can see.

 

Starting with the Kato high speed double canted perimeter track and working in with a station and maybe a Picacho Peak somewhere or at least a canyon side to add some elevation. Using the technique of tracking running off the table to an imaginary destination is a great way for me to add my module to the next project or leave as dummy tracks.

[Bernard]

There is nothing wrong with a "Fantasy Layout" as a matter of fact it will test your imagination. It sounds like it's going to be a lot of fun.  :icon_thumright:

[Mudkip Orange]

It's not really all that far-fetched to imagine that if AZ put in an HSR on the Flagstaff-Phoenix run, the Japanese might end up supplying it. I for one hope you build it.