Visting Maine 2 footers to the WW&F!

[James Patten]

The 20, 30, and 33# rail helps give visitors the feel of the original line, which is the whole purpose.  We have talked about moving the transition joint south from the curve onto the straight, it just hasn't happened yet.  I think we'll continue to use the small sized rail in the yard.

Someday we ought to have a demonstration track that's laid in the gravel like the original line, to really give the feel for the original railroad. 

[Ira Schreiber]

Just to put this into a little perspective, when I was involved in an 85 mile short line railroad, it had all 60# rail.
We had 122 ton Baldwin switchers (VO-1000's) for motive power and in very cold weather(-0*F) broken rails were common. The line was weight restricted to 209,000# cars or 70 ton capacity.
I would not worry about #7 or #11 on 30# rail. It is the axle load that determines the capacity of the rail, not the total weight of the vehicle.

[Stewart "Start" Rhine]

James' post is good info on the museums rail.   Yes, Jason wanted to extend the 56 lb rail south out of Davis curve.  The plan was to re-lay with heavier rail to get the comp joints into the tangent.  That was in 1997 and we have been running with the comp joints in their "temporary" location since then with no problem.  Ira's post is on the money.  During the time I worked on two shortlines I saw 120 ton locomotives on 60 and 70 lb rail.  The key was having good ties and a firm sub base.  Our crossings were mostly 70 lb with guard two rails.  (There are 6 rails in each crossing).  The inside guard rails protect the flange ways while the outside guard rails protect the running rail from snowplow damage.   The last upgrade was 110 lb rail in a concrete crossing.  That crossing did not have the outside guard rail.

[Matthew Gustafson]

What rails are the MNGM are useing to suport #7 so we know how to operate #7 at WW&F?   

[Ed Lecuyer]

What the issue is (if you carefully read the previous posts) is that it is the size of the switches, not the rail that is the issue.

Now, I don't know enough about switches to explain the hows and whys. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can help.

[Vincent "Lightning" LeRow]

What rails are the MNGM are useing to suport #7 so we know how to operate #7 at WW&F?

Matt, the MNG uses 85# rail, not for design specs but purely for availability,  the only variation is the 70# we use in our miniscule yard. 

The 85# is verry cheap rail, because there is a lot on the ground, and a lot in scrappers yards.  The MNG actually had a mile or so of 85# donated a year or two ago.   

all of that aside, the heavier rail has actually saved our hides at MNG in recent years because of our rotting ties with no replacements.  the heavier rail is actually good (to us) because it only needs one good tie in every 5-6 to adequetly hold the gauge with the preportionaly light weight of what's using it.

[Eric Bolton]

I think what they mean by a #8 switch is the radius of the diverting rail. Basically the switches are to tight of a turn for the 7 or 8. Right???

[Greg-Pockets-Boden]

The number of a switch (turnout) is the frog angle, expressed as a ratio. A #8 frog angle results in 1 unit of divergence in 8 units of run, measured on the frog centerline.

Greg B.

[Tom Casper]

One other thing to remember about Forney's, is their long rigid wheel base.  That requires a switch with a lower number to make it eaiser to pass thru the switch without binding or derailing.

Tom C.

[Wayne Laepple]

Actually, the frog number must be higher to accommodate longer wheelbase locomotives.

[James Patten]

The number of a switch (turnout) is the frog angle, expressed as a ratio. A #8 frog angle results in 1 unit of divergence in 8 units of run, measured on the frog centerline.

A good way to conceptualize this is to use your foot.  Where your toe touches the gauge side of the diverging track, and your heel the gauge side of the main track will be 8 foot lengths from the point of the frog, for a #8 frog.  4 foot lengths for a #4, 10 foot lengths for a #10, etc.

Make sure there's no train coming when you do this.

[Tom Casper]

Actually, the frog number must be higher to accommodate longer wheelbase locomotives.

Wayne,  that is what I thought I was typing.  Another senior moment!  sigh!!

Tom C.

[Gordon Cook]

James' post is good info on the museums rail.   Yes, Jason wanted to extend the 56 lb rail south out of Davis curve.  The plan was to re-lay with heavier rail to get the comp joints into the tangent.  That was in 1997 and we have been running with the comp joints in their "temporary" location since then with no problem.  -snip-

I would a comment that those comp joints just south of Davis are a good reminder of why the later, faster Forneys got pilot wheels. When we hit those joints southbound at anything above about 5-6 mph,  #10 lets us know as she suddenly lurches towards the west. I suspect that is the reason why Jason wanted to move them further south, but it's just not very high on our 'to-do' list.

[Ira Schreiber]

It would be easier to move the comp joints south than to re-rail #10..