Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: software attn Bill Hoshiko

Expand Messages
  • Ole Rosted
    On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:08:23 -0800, you wrote: Bill: I think your answer to Alex W is very interesting reading. ... They are - but I plan to use the wood ties
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 2 5:40 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      On Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:08:23 -0800, you wrote:

      Bill:

      I think your answer to Alex W is very interesting reading.

      >In order to construct hand laid switches I need PC ties and switch
      >ties. RLW makes ties for NN3 scale so I am assuming that they would be
      >a little large for Z.

      They are - but I plan to use the wood ties "on edge" (narrow edge
      facing the base). The wood tie - being 1,05 x 1,45 mm - will seen
      from above on a ballasted track - mimic danish 1:1 ties. The PC tie
      meassures 0,85 x 1,45 mm. This cannot be put on edge since the
      copper/broad side has to face the rail. In any case there will be a
      vertical distance from the bottom of the PC tie to the bottom of the
      wood tie. Worst case is with the wood tie on edge, but I don't think,
      this will present a real problem (I haven't tried yet) (note 1)

      [about code 40 points]

      I planned to limit the throwbar/point-tie's travel to a degree
      allowing god contact yet avoiding deformation.
      I do not know if this is possible?

      >I am not a metal worker so I could never solve this problem with the
      >smaller rail. I could never keep a code 40 switch functioning correctly
      >for any length of time. They required constant adjusting. Even Code 55
      >would be a challenge. You would need a very strong solder and an wide
      >throw bar, or rail made from a much harder metal. When you file the
      >rail down to make a switch point you just do not have much material to
      >work with.

      Doesn't look too god!

      > The laws of physics to not scale down.

      :-)

      >There are some things that we must compromise on.

      I agree!!

      >I do not mean to
      >discourage you from trying your ideas but, just want to point out some
      >things that you may have to consider. I think that the fellows from RLW
      >were trying to point this out for you.

      Yes, but I decided to try anyway :-)

      >Sorry to be so long winded but this is a subject that I have been
      >working on for a long time.

      I enjoyed every word of it. Even if it was meant for Alex and not for
      me, your letter was a bull's-eye-hit with me.

      (note 1) if someone with better eyes/equipment might want to correct
      me - please do!

      regards Ole Rosted, Denmark
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.