There is a lot more to this track layout than greets the eye.
A track plan that long will require multiple power supply points just to move one loco smoothly, now add in the electrical load of nine locos, and then add the drag of all those hopper cars, and the distribution of the locos within the hopper cars. Dont forget the friction caused by the spiral curvature, the gradients up and down for the flyover, not to mention the work required to develop a 15" radius out to 36".
Suddenly you begin to realise that this "insane track idea" has some serious issues requiring engineered solutions.
Not to mention that all that track and those hopper cars would have cost some serious coin.
Mark
Lookie here, I can't get four feet of track with one curve to run five minutes without some sort of derailment. I can't keep ten cars on the track all at once without fiddling around for a half-hour, so I really got to hand it to this guy for getting it to run like it does. He's got this set up in his living room with the return loop on cardboard boxes, so you know this wasn't meant to be anything but a whim to go on YouTube...
rrinker Wrote:Life is too serious anyway, can't be completely 100% serious at all times in hobby pursuits as well.
Try telling that to the guys on the Atlas forum!
TrainNut Wrote:rrinker Wrote:Life is too serious anyway, can't be completely 100% serious at all times in hobby pursuits as well.
Try telling that to the guys on the Atlas forum!
Isn't that gone?
Though the same could be said about the guys on the MRR forum. Had one guy there blast me for planning a door layout in N, all but demanding I change to an around-the-walls sytle of layout instead of a door, insinuating that everything I want in my railroad is wrong. I really haven't been back much since. One of the MRR
editors suggesting I put in crossovers between two adjacent parts of a mainline (hello short circuit that I can't really wire around easily!) that ran in opposite directions made me question a lot over there.
rrinker Wrote:Life is too serious anyway, can't be completely 100% serious at all times in hobby pursuits as well.
TrainNut Wrote:Try telling that to the guys on the Atlas forum!
ScrewySqrl Wrote:Isn't that gone?
Very well could be. I've been out of the model railroading loop for quite some time. The last forum I knew of that went belly up was the 2guyz one.
The Atlas forum is gone but,not to worry the Atlas Rescue Forum replaced it..All is well in the pursuit of serious modeling which is a very good thing for some of us that choose that path.
However,while I am serious about some things like correct cars for the era I model and prototypical track planning (no time saver type ISL),no switch back for industries,no cutesy pie names for industries,don't run my Athearn and Roundhouse wide body freights cars with scale with cars etc I still model close enough is good enough and will never accept derailments as part of operation..
One of the MRR editors suggesting I put in crossovers between two adjacent parts of a mainline (hello short circuit that I can't really wire around easily!) that ran in opposite directions made me question a lot over there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There shouldn't be any wiring issues with crossovers..I used 'em on just about every ISL I built to date.
I'm amazed that the nine Bachmann engines are still running
teejay Wrote:...boring after about 1 minute for me 
....to each his own I guess . 
T
That makes two of us...
Plus it made me dizzy....
The Jurassic Park Rule comes to mind: "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should..."