Thanks for the info Mats. (I had requested the “rail height” for Trumpeter plastic track.) I’ll reference this below, and discuss it more extensively in Part 2.

I decided to create each of the parts as a separate topic, so hopefully any related discussion will be specific to the part-topic where that step in the process was first introduced. I think there will be more than enough information in each part to justify this.

I was going to ask if you would need a short curved section after the switch to bring the spur-siding parallel to the main line, and it sounds like you will. All model railroad track manufacturers make curve sections in various radii, but they always at least make them to match the curves of their own turnouts.

You would use the same process as the switch, but it would be a lot easier - less complex. You would need a short section of straight track so the siding – spur is not too close to the main line. One reason I would recommend using real track / rail for all the spur trackage is that sidings have a less-raised roadbed, with not so much gravel (ballast). In fact, sometimes there will even be grass growing between the rails, although this is less likely in Fascist Germany where everything must be proper and perfect.

Often a smaller profile (“weight”) rail will be used for long spur tracks, but your spur will be short enough not to consider this. Notice I am using siding (U.S. lingo) and spur (U.K.-Euro lingo – perhaps with exceptions) interchangeably – essentially meaning a dead-end track, usually serving an industry or a railway facility. "Passing" sidings are a different category.

Obvious logic – the mainline has heavy trains with powerful engines moving at high speed, putting a lot of stress (wear) on the rails, and on the ties and ballast to keep the rail precisely in place. A small engine slowly “spotting” or retrieving one or two cars from a siding creates much less stress, so you can use lighter (cheaper – less steel) rail and less ballast, which often means (with other reasons) that the siding is at a slightly lower level then the main. Sometimes it is sufficiently lower that an embankment or wall is needed to separate the two (some distance away from the switch) – this could happen if the spur was perhaps brought down to street (loading dock) level from an elevated main line, to facilitate transfer to truck. This works to the modeler’s advantage, as the offset in height makes for a more interesting scene. Proto photos, even from the war years, should verify this – although it is now standard practice for other reasons.

Also - I noticed that in Part 1 I misidentified the sharper of the Marklin turnouts as left, when it is clearly right. I was originally going to compare left switches, but then noticed that the site I was using had the two left sixes photographed from opposite directions. I decided to use the “right” ones as they provided a better “side by side” comparison, but then forgot to edit the text.


I am researching some options, so it will be a few days before I post Part 2. One of the options is other possibilites for “donor” model railroad switches - especially if you want a more realistic length-look. BTW: Mats – I don’t know if you have decided the length of your dio, but it could easily be 150 Cm (or even more) to be close to realistic, although it could also be narrow – maybe 30-40 Cm, depending on how much of the shed you wish to model-show. Or, if you are not married to symmetry, it could be narrow on one end and wider on the other. This might be a perfect “bookshelf” diorama. Some model railroaders have bookshelf layouts.
I have found a very interesting turnout option, but it is even more expensive than Marklin. Peco in England manufacture 1:32 turnouts that are designed for use with a 10' radius curve (almost always outdoors, especially as few - if any - British houses have basements). This means it is 24" or 600mm long, but I think is markedly better looking than the Marklin turnouts - for multiple reasons. You'll notice that both the frog and guard rails are metal, unlike the Marklin. I mostly think it just has a “more elegant” look to it. There are a lot more ties on it than the Marklin medium, but the count is still low when compared to the prototype switches. Check U.K. eBay – possibly the Continent also; I believe some German garden railroaders use Peco track. Make sure you’re sitting down first.

Peco Gauge 1 medium turnout – 24” 500mm long Right is SL-E895, Left is SL-E896



One thing I can't comment on is the shape of the rail, as different countries often had slightly different profiles. One that the U.K. used was known as "Bullhead", but I believe that was mostly on the earlier railoads, and I suspect the Peco product uses a more standard modern profile that will be similar to the Marklin and Trumpeter. Amazon UK has these for 90 pounds (each), but I’m guessing (certain ?) you can find a used one for (far ?) less on eBay – perhaps removed from someone’s garden railway. Again, a little damage “may” not be an issue for you, as you don’t need it to be operational, and that could mean a much lower price.

OK – time for a new topic. US railroads measure the type/weight of rail in terms of pounds per yard – no doubt this is kilo per meter in Europe. I don’t know how the translation is made (does anyone know if there is a formula ?), but for model railroad usage we express this as a “code” – which corresponds to the height of the rail in thousandths of an inch. I don’t know how this is handled in Europe – if anyone knows, do tell. There are also different rail “profiles” as mentioned above, but I plan to ignore this aspect for our project. One important note – the “code” is absolute, related only to the actual rail and not any scale of modeling. Although most rail produced is intended for a particular scale, there is some crossover - especially when narrow gauges are involved. Also, a lot of commercial track uses a larger code than is “proto”, mostly because many model trains (especially engines) have an extra-long (deep) flange to prevent derailments. This has changed somewhat over the years, but there are still modelers who have older “over-flanged” equipment that will not operate on more appropriate scale rail sizes. Most gauges have small specialist groups who work with precise prototype standards.

I had asked Mats to measure the height of Trumpeter rail, and he gave me 5 MM, which translates to code .197 Peco uses code 200 rail, so hopefully you can appreciate the closeness of these – certainly closer than the unaided human eye can distinguish. I have variably seen .197 and .250 given for Marklin rail, and am trying to verify this – I will have the answer in Part 2.

Charles

As an interesting reference, this page gives dimensions of prototype rail and tables of the equivalent weights in scale; at the bottom is 1 Gauge. 5mm rail is a bit larger than 110-pound rail, Code 200 is a bit smaller than 120-pound rail.

It's somewhat annoying, though, that poking into the mylargescale.com forums turns up the fact that a company called 'Train-Li' sells PVC 'display' rail that is Code 332; the picture below is from the mylargescale forum showing the Train-Li plastic rail beside a section of aluminum Code 250 rail:



Code 250 is already past 150-pound rail, and Code 332 would be noticeably out of scale (8.5mm vice 5mm -- more than half again as tall) -- which is a profound pity, since having a convenient source for plastic rail would allow making switches or other complex track features using techniques and tools that plastic modelers are already familiar with.

The head of Train-Li, Axel Tillman, has a number of posts in this thread in the mylargescale forums; in one response he said that it was possible that they'd produce Code 250 rail. Because it's extruded, not molded, the startup cost for an extrusion die is going to be less than for an injection mold, and you can produce rails of any length. If he could be convinced there was enough of a market for Code 200 rail, he might be willing to have a die made, but I don't know how much of a market the 1/35 modeling community would be.

Sean -

You might be able to survey the interest-market, and convince Alex Tillman to do this, through a fairly easy initial process - but it would require a major time commitment on your part if all parties agree to proceed.

Also, I've tried to lay out all the considerations that I can think of on an initial pass. You might be able to make a go/no-go decision earlier - such as if you only hear from a half-dozen guys.

1. Ask Mr. Tillman just how much it would cost to create the extrusion set-up (die + ?) for code 200 rail, and the minimum amount that he would need to produce in an initial run, and the cost of that. One important thing to investigate is the lengths it could be produced / shipped in.

2. Based on that, determine what a reasonable amount that each modeler might need - say to create a number ??? switch in 1:35 and a siding-spur for one car, plus the main line, allowing for a learning curve. You would need to decide an estimated-average dio length, maybe in the 5-6' range.

I realize that sounds huge to a lot of guys, but if you want a realistic RR switch, and a realistic siding (military and/or industrial) that it is used for, then you need to be aware that it requires some serious real estate. Note that it can be as narrow as the main line width + siding width + depth of "reason for the siding". You could build a loading dock and then just a "flat" of a structure. Personally, I think true flats look silly, and adding a couple of inches to create more surface depth-detail is well worth it. You also have some "free space" on the far end from the siding, behind the mainline and switch. This could be part of a large industrial complex, perhaps with a loading dock for trucks.

3. Divide the minimum amount of track footage from the initial run by the above calculated length of "track order", which will give you the number of modelers you need to participate to make this work.

4. Divide the total costs (set-up and first run) from Axel by the number of modelers, providing the (adjusted) cost to each. You would need to consider-discuss with Alex the cost of his shipping to you - I doubt he would want to ship to eachmodeler, but then I don't know how he runs his business.

5. What it would cost you to do the distribution (assuming he won't), which will likely include a mailing tube, due to the fragility of the product. I would investigate this before negotiating the cut-length with Alex (what country is he in?), including tube cost at maybe 2' and 3' lengths, mailing charges - there is usually a fee charged for "extra-long" (perhaps 2' is at the regular charge, while 3' has a sur-charge?), delivery to modelers in foreign countries will cost more - one option here is shipping all European orders (assuming U.S. production) to one address, to be broken up and shipped to modelers from there. In other words, you or someone has to do a whole lot of research and calculating. I'd suggest designating a basic charge to include the tooling investment, the allocation of track, and shipping to the country of production. Additional shipping charges based on location are assigned to each modeler based on their country.

6. I'd suggest that you or someone other than Alex coordinate all of this, perhaps with free track or even a pre-fixed payment, based on the total work required. Since Alex is in business, the goal should be to expect him to do as little as possible, basically:

- Provide the initial cost of set-up
- Agreement on total initial run size size, section length (he has to do this), rail profile, delivery date, etc. on the first production run
- Sending a test sample to you and or a small group (no more that 3, and 1 is likely best) of approvers for the full first run. We'll hope it's satisfactory, as modifications could get sticky. You might want to separately approve the die first, before any plastic is pushed through it.
- Shipment of the initial run to you or a designated party.

7. Other considerations.

- My feeling is that the modeler group will need to pay the full cost of set-up and whatever Alex decides is a reasonable first run. Otherwise, he has no guarantee that he will ever get compensated for this and no reason to do it.

- Since a set group of modelers is financing the first run, you need some sort of provision for re-compensation for this group (if you care) if there are future runs that Alex retails directly, or through distributors. Lots of possibilities here.

- You (or whoever) needs to decide the scope of the entire effort and what compensation you need, and how much of it will be for the "good of the cause". Remember, many will get the track, but you and a TBD group will be doing all the work.

- If you would consider this, post a message and ask for individuals to contact you with how many feet/meters they would want and how much they're willing to pay, say by the measurement unit and the "estimated" package size, including cost of packing materials and shipping.

- After you have some idea of the current, total interest, decide if it's a go or no-go.

- If a go, set up a structure for discussion and implementation. i.e. you don't want to be dealing directly with X individual modelers on every aspect of this. Perhaps one representative per X modelers, or by continent, whatever.

- As part of the GO decision, all modelers would need to send their share of the money, so it can be combined and sent to Alex - maybe half up front, 25% on delivery of the test draw, and 25% on final delivery. You need to discuss to what extent this is being done on a trust basis vs. whatever "formal" structure may be required.

- I believe there is at least one net-based company that organizes this sort of thing for "start-ups", where those contributing funding get shares or something. I do not think this is at that level, but there might be some way to broker this if you don't want to handle it, but it would increase the cost - even if possible.

- You need to really think about this and decide if you're willing to take it on, as it will be a whole lot of time and work.

OK - I've tossed this out and will now withdraw, as I have no interest in plastic track and/or rails.

Charles