Holding Cars in a Siding on a Grade

[Maletrain]

I did a little test when this first came up, but didn't post the results because they were not easy to repeat with accuracy.  However, I will tell you that a regular Bachmann under-the-track permanent uncoupling magnet will actually pull a typical MicroTrains car about 1/2" along level track to center an uncouling pin over the end of the magnet.  And it stays there until I tilt the track by about 4%.  That is with plastic wheels and axels, but probably a steel weight that is up above the under frame casting.  On this car, it is clearly the trip pins that are the attraction points.  Cars with metal axles act similarly with attraction to the axles, and cars with steel screws for king pins are also attracted.

So, if you want to hold cars with magnets, getting the steel low and maybe using a magnet low could give a pretty strong hold.  But, it could be quite variable to use just a magnet in the tracks and whatever is on the cars, especially if you don't keep the trip pins in your couplers.

My own perspective is that I kind of like the pin with a blue flag in a prepared hole idea for sidings - it is more hands-on brakeman like activity for an operator, and doesn't require much fiddling to make it reliable.

[peteski]

Bachmann uncoupling magnet?  They sell those? 
None of the MTL cars use steel weights - the entire underframe is cast from non-magnetic metal.  So either a magnet, or piece of steel would have to be added to those cars.

[Doug W]

I’m not trying to be a killjoy or wisea$$, but doesn’t it make more sense to have all sidings level with no grade?  Isn’t that prototypical?

Not on my prototype, the Elkhorn City-Dante section of the Clinchfield RR. The main, passing sidings, storage tracks, and most industry (coal loader) tracks were on a grade, which was countinous (if variable) southbound for most of the distance. Even the Elkhorn City yard was on a >1% grade!

Cheers
Doug

[bbussey]

I get that there are real-life exceptions to every standard. But aside from strictly following a prototypical setting such as the Clinchfield section, I don’t see how it would be difficult to construct all N scale sidings/yards that regularly will hold standing rolling stock to be at level grade, regardless of the surrounding terrain and/or the grade of the connected right-of-way.  Unless the purpose is to add additional wrinkles during operation sessions, why add unnecessary aggravation?

[nkalanaga]

You might be surprised what a small switcher can move on a 4% grade.  According to the one chart I saw of it, that's the grade on BN's (ex-NP) hump in Pasco, and switchers didn't have any trouble hauling cuts up the down side of it.

The secret is weight on drivers.  Horsepower gives speed, but weight gives traction.  If you don't need more than 4 or 5 mph, 600-1200 Hp can pull a lot of train, even on a grade.

[tehachapifan]

I get that there are real-life exceptions to every standard. But aside from strictly following a prototypical setting such as the Clinchfield section, I don’t see how it would be difficult to construct all N scale sidings/yards that regularly will hold standing rolling stock to be at level grade, regardless of the surrounding terrain and/or the grade of the connected right-of-way.  Unless the purpose is to add additional wrinkles during operation sessions, why add unnecessary aggravation?

In my case, and I would guess for many others, the grade can't be interrupted due to space constraints. Like with many things in model railroading, real estate is at a premium and having the line level out for a siding would eat up a lot of often necessary climbing in order to pass over other tracks, etc. Just the transitions from grade to level and vice versa would also eat up a fair amount of space. This may be more of a factor with table-top-style layouts that have grade changes, like mine, than perhaps an around-the-room style layout, where you may be able to have longer runs before the line needs to clear other tracks, etc. Additionally, my layout has changed and evolved several times over the years and this siding was added way after the layout's original grades were designed. In my case, the siding, located off a branchline that used to be the mainline alignment before I expanded the layout, will hold tank cars for a refinery that I'm now planning nearby. The refinery itself will be level but the siding, located a short distance from the refinery, will still be on an existing grade.

[Steveruger45]

Found this on MRH.
https://forum.mrhmag.com/post/handbrakes-with-super-magnets-12191791

[Maletrain]

I get that there are real-life exceptions to every standard. But aside from strictly following a prototypical setting such as the Clinchfield section, I don’t see how it would be difficult to construct all N scale sidings/yards that regularly will hold standing rolling stock to be at level grade, regardless of the surrounding terrain and/or the grade of the connected right-of-way.  Unless the purpose is to add additional wrinkles during operation sessions, why add unnecessary aggravation?

I am in the process of trying to figure out grades for a new layout, which will be "arround-the-room".  And it is not turning out to be so easy to get some hidden tracks under the layout surface and back to staging without getting some significant grades in places I don't want them.  I am trying to keep sidings flat, but the tight spot is where a fictional short line interchanges with the B&O, climbs up to a yard, and then crosses over the mainline on its way across a river that the mainline follows.  The need for about 2" of railhead to railhead elevation difference at that bridge is making it hard to keep the grades down on the short line, and I will need to make switches on a grade then transition to level sidings/spurs, which eats room to a surprising extent on those sidings.  A twist involving both a change in grade and a change in direction is a challenge for not at least stalling locos due to poor contact with the rails, if not actually derailing cars when shoving or pulling.

[bbussey]

I don't follow how the need to moderate the grade on the short line is in anyway relevant to having any siding branching from that short line be level after it branches from the short line.  The turnout has to be at whatever grade the short line is, and the siding branches and then levels off that.  Same as with entering or exiting a helix, which most people don't utilize extensive real estate to transition into and out of.  I don't see the problem.  Dealing with a workable series of grades for the short line is the puzzle in this case, not how to level the sidings.

[lock4244]

I’m not trying to be a killjoy or wisea$$, but doesn’t it make more sense to have all sidings level with no grade?  Isn’t that prototypical?

In high school we'd climb on a tank car that was spotted on the tail track for a large industry in beautiful Scarborough and release the hand brake. The tail track was on a slight down grade towards the west with a sag before the bumper, so we'd roll a few hundred feet then the car would stop on it's own. We'd then push it back to where we found it, tie on the hand brake, and continue on down the CN RofW to the beach. CN was hard up against the Lake Ontario shore, and a large empty field separated this spot from view of the plant and civilization in general, so our fun was not easy to witness.

Oh, but the track was definitely on a grade and they'd spot this particular two domed tank there once in a while for no obvious reason but our enjoyment.

[Maletrain]

deleted accidental dupe

[Maletrain]

Brian, we basically agree.  The problem is that making flat segments in the short line for some switchs leads to some unwanted grades between flat segments.  So, I will be putting switchs on a grade, which results in some somewhat longish transitions on the spurs'sidings after the switches to get the tracks to become level.  I am having trouble fitting the transitions plus the needed spur lengths into the plan where I want them, due to lack of room.  A transition from a straight into a helix is not really the same thing. For a spur of a down grade, there needs to be a twist in the roadbed going into the diverging route because just turning the track to run across the slope would make the down-slope rail lower than the up-slope rail, and the track needs to be level across the rails - a lot more important than being level along the rails.

It all fits fine when I draw it flat, but when I get to setting track heights, I am seeing grades in the short line main where I need switches, or, steeper grades than I want to make flat segments for those switches.  So, that gets pushed into the spur tracks, where length becomes a challenge.  Am I being clear? 

I am not saying it can't be done, but just that it is not so easy.  My biggest issue righ now is that a large wye for turning short passenger trains is getting steep on the connecting track between the 2 tracks spreading and going up-grade from an interchange area to opposite ends of a yard.  Since the intended purpose of that wye will necessarily involve a backing move with a (short) train, I am worrying about it, trying to minimize the combination of grade and curvature.  And, no, I won't be able to always do the backing down-grade.

 I've never done this before, but I have seen others screw it up with sectional track switches, making abrupt transtions that cause derailments.

[Dwight in Toronto]

@lock4244 - I too grew up in beautiful Scarborough (Brimley, midway between Lawrence and Eglinton).  The adventures to be found along Lake Ontario and the Bluffs were only a modest bike hike away, and even as a kid, that busy Canadian National lakeshore mainline was like a magnet for me.  Great memories. 

[lock4244]

@lock4244 - I too grew up in beautiful Scarborough (Brimley, midway between Lawrence and Eglinton).  The adventures to be found along Lake Ontario and the Bluffs were only a modest bike hike away, and even as a kid, that busy Canadian National lakeshore mainline was like a magnet for me.  Great memories.

Port Union for me from age of eight, the plant was Johns Manville. But I did live on Amberjack, off Brimley between Lawrence and Ellesmere from age three to eight... close to Agincourt yard but too young to appreciate it.

[Dwight in Toronto]

I remember that Johns Manville facility.  We kids once found something akin to a “tailings pond”, like one might find at an old mine site.  Except this pond had this magnificent light grey clay that you could shape and manipulate like Play Doh.  It didn’t dawn on me until many years later that it was muddy asbestos we were playing with!  To think that a bunch of kids could cycle right in there, and poke and sniff around doing who knows what for hours on end, in an asbestos-based industrial area. Pretty unfathomable.