Templot Club Archive - Search Results
To search again, click the Back button in your browser.
Search results for: unequal
10 results found.
... regards, Martin. posted: 19 May 2010 10:15 from: Jim Guthrie Martin Wynne wrote: Perhaps I should revert to "irregular" and just resign myself to explaining over and over again that there is nothing wrong with it? Martin, I've never considered the word "irregular" to mean an error of any sort- more to mean some sort of inconformity- like French irregular verbs I just checked up on what British Railway Track uses to describe such crossings and it seems to be the phrase "crossings of unequal angle"- a bit of a mouthful. Jim. posted: 19 May 2010 10:24 from: Nigel Brown Martin My guess would be that by the time users get to try ladder tracks they will have accumulated some Templot experience and won't be unduly worried by "irregular". Things like "control template" are things which users meet first time around, and are thus more critical. cheers Nigel posted: 19 May 2010 10:41 from: kenbec Hello again Martin, Perhaps I should revert to " ...
... topic: 3730 Y I can't I get a Y point! posted: 4 Aug 2020 00:23 from: Eve Wallis Hi, I can get all sorts of turnout templates as a Templot novice, but not an equal (or unequal) Y point. I have searched the forum and although I have found 3 different postings from Martin, I still can't get a Y point! Can someone please explain, each baby step by baby step, how I can get half a diamond crossing matched up to half a turnout...please? Baffled and frustrated! Cheers, Eve Last edited on 4 Aug 2020 00:24 by Eve Wallis posted: 4 Aug 2020 00:33 from: Andrew Barrowman Not sure if it's the best method but you can CURVE a turnout (mouse action) to make it a Y. Last edited on 4 Aug 2020 00:33 by Andrew Barrowman posted: 4 Aug 2020 00:53 from: Rob Manchester Hello Eve, Too late at night to do much thinking but take a look at ...
... and y axis. Most of my requirement is for scanning historic photos and I felt x and y axis should be scanned to the same resolution. I choose an HP Scanjet 8270, which last time I checked was still a current offering and what I am continuing to use, currently with Windows 10. It has survived a Windows upgrade and gives excellent service. Any questions on this scanner please feel free to email me. Regards Peter Chappell Thanks for the reply Peter. Out of interest, what is the effect of the unequal scanning resolution? A distorted image? I had a look for the HP8270, it isn't listed as a current product on the HP sites (however there were support pages of download of manual, help in fault finding etc). However I did find it available via Amazon (France) at 1200.00 Euros, rather more than I can justify spending, I couldn't find it listed on any other of the usual French suppliers. As I live in France I want to buy from a French supplier, it makes resolving any ...
... the layout can fit onto two equal length boards. It also entails dividing the "Ash Road Turnout", which is a loose heel type. The problem there is that the loose heels would be on the very edge of the board, and I'm not sure whether that could work. I'm as yet uncertain in any case how to make this type. Two equal sized boards could easily fit front to front for transport, but I'm thinking just now that it won't be such an effort to adapt that idea to work for unequal lengths. I just wonder whether the difference of three inches- 4 ft 3 rather than 4 ft- is worth worrying about. Certainly no problem while we have a Skoda Octavia, but when that dies we may need to go smaller. Attachment: attach_3135_3685_19_August_Baseboa rd_options_fine_adjusted.bgs3 61 Last edited on 19 Aug 2020 13:12 by Julian Roberts posted: 19 Aug 2020 12:51 from: Julian Roberts Here is the track file of the plan for unequal board lengths. Attachment: attach_3136_3685_19_August_Final_L ayout_assymetrical_board_lengths_u naltered_from_17_July.box 30 Last edited on 19 Aug ...
... copyright© Kevin MacLeod. Likewise on this next one. If you are not too concerned about symmetry of the transitions, the procedure is more straightforward and doesn't require any mental arithmetic. Here's another video showing that -- notice that the two transition zone lengths are very different. I did that to make things clear, you can get much closer with a bit of trial and error. The important step to note is swapping the peg to the template end which you want to be used in creating the second transition: unequal_curly.png unequal curly corner video regards, Martin. posted: 10 Nov 2008 23:41 from: Paul Boyd Here's the raw video (it's in Flash format). Sorry it's so scruffy, but you get the idea. Click the play button to start it: Well, I understood that having watched it a couple of times, but never in a million years would I have come up with it myself Still, a new technique has lodged itself into my Templot mental folder Parts of Templot Club may not function unless you enable ...
... turnout on B'ham New Street with a 1:20+ angle and I've got pics of ultrascale wheels in 00-SF with an acute angle crossing of 1:16 from memory and the wheel does not drop in a hole at all. It is supported all the way across. If it is not supported the track geometry is at fault. Going back to my own design. I'm happy to use switched crossings in a slip if it will make them easier to build. The bit I'm struggling with is the equal or unequal angles. Surely by definition an irregular crossing will have different angles. I thought that is why they are 'irregular'. Clearly I was wrong. Not the end of the world though, as nothing has been laid as yet. I'm just going to have to look at the plan again to correct some issues. Shame really, as looking at the crossings on print by eye, they looked great. I happen to like large radius pointwork so always use C10's or larger in most applications. Will coming down to 1 ...
... when changing gauge/scale. Fixed. customize V-crossing> wing and check rails... settings: Help notes updated and references to obsolete turnout-side modifiers removed. Two new option tickboxes have been added to the check rail dialog and to the shove timber dialog: 2_060946_390000000.png These settings are now template-specific and saved in the .box file. This makes it easier to use the check rail adjustments and shoved timbers as prototype customizing in generic templates. For example to re-use GWR V-crossings with unequal timber spacings and check rail lengths differing from the REA sizes. If retain on new mint is ticked in each case, any adjusted check rail settings and/or shoved timbers will propagate into a new mint control template. If retain on tools:make is ticked in each case, any adjusted check rail settings and/or shoved timbers will propagate into the newly created control template when using the tools> make --- functions. These tickboxes duplicate the existing tools> make tools: options> retain --- ...
... . Very informative. In making model locomotives I've found weight distribution is critical. I've managed to improve this in a number of instances by using compensation beams. For example, I built a Metro 2-4 -0T, where I incorporated a flexible chassis by having the leading drivers (which had the drive) fixed, the rear driving axle pivoted at the centre, the leading axle treated as a pony truck, and weighted so the CoG was behind the leading drivers. So the drivers carried all the weight, but unequally. It worked but I wasn't really happy. I built a second chassis with twin compensation beams between the drivers, and the leading axle pivoted so that the loco was fully compensed, and weighted to have the same amount an all wheels. Much better. Ran more smoothly and pulled a lot more without slipping. In 4-coupled engines I now use twin beams as a matter of course. It turns 4-4 -0 and 0-4 -4 engines from being a pain to get right to being ...
... topic: 3084 Check this out. posted: 25 Sep 2017 17:52 from: Tony W Recently came across this strange diamond with unequal length checkrails in a video. Answers on a postcard to... 2151_251240_190000000.png Tony W. posted: 25 Sep 2017 18:49 from: Martin Wynne Hi Tony, Here's my postcard. There was at one time a slip road on the right. Hence the extended timbers on the right, and the shortened check rail on the left. Looking closely at the image, I think I can see the far end of the short check rail has a machined flare rather than bent. The near end is too fuzzy to be sure. Admittedly there is no evidence of any former rodding or redundant chairing, and no obvious reason for the very long check rail (8 timbers each way), so it's a stab in the dark. Notice also that the check rail hidden by the windscreen wiper is shorter at the front than its opposite check rail, again for no obvious reason. This diamond may ...
... date but quite likely circa 1890) so you may want to consult later plans if you intend modelling the station in LMS or BR days. 4011f6671d6b633b028536d1d0260903.p ng This image I found, shows a Bedford TJ series? in the background. So Circa 1958-1975, goods yard still there. Last edited on 10 Oct 2017 18:33 by Damien Morris posted: 10 Oct 2017 18:36 from: Martin Wynne Hi Damien, Welcome to Templot Club. What you have there is an irregular diamond-crossing (crossing angles unequal). It's possible to add slip roads to an irregular diamond-crossing, but it would always be a special by the design office, where space constraints leave no choice. For example a cramped station throat, or a complex junction. It's very unlikely to find one in a goods yard. Further, it is on a curve, requiring that the crossing angle with fixed K-crossings is not flatter than 1:7.5 -- that's a very common size for a slip. Flatter angles* than that require ...
Search took 0.095 seconds
Back to Templot Club