NittenDormer Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Been testing my rolling stock on set track curves today, was pleasantly surprised to see that the envelopes did not overlap. A Mark 3 coach is pretty long, but I don't know about the stockI don't have. To future-proof my layout, are there other things that will stick out even more? Modern image and OO gauge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) On the inside of curves mk3s are about as bad as it gets. For the outside it is things like Peaks, or going to real extremes, the APT-E that has a "huge conk" "gargantuan schnoz" (I remembered it wrong) according to the user guide.Andi Edited September 21, 2017 by Dagworth 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Neil Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2017 A friend's Rapido/NRM APT-E has a greater overhang than anything so far. His railway had curves and clearances set for MK3s but these have had to be altered so that the APT-E can be run. It's the longer than usual front overhang which causes problems on the outside of curves. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 An APT-E, possibly a Hornby 80x model. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCB Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Some old 4-4-0s are bad for front overhang, Triang L1 and M7 (going backwards) are my test chassis for front overhang . I don't know anything worse than a Mk3 for center throw but I use a Mk1 coach for center throw on a 1957 layout and a 156 Sprinter on the 1987 outside line. Getting the curve absolutely constant radius is vital, it is the kinks which cause the collisions. I use set track below 2ft radius cutting webs between sleepers and easing them out to larger radius to close the track spacing towards Streamline spacing, and to far less on straight sidings etc. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 47137 Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2017 A friend's Rapido/NRM APT-E has a greater overhang than anything so far. His railway had curves and clearances set for MK3s but these have had to be altered so that the APT-E can be run. It's the longer than usual front overhang which causes problems on the outside of curves. I had to cut a chunk out of a baseboard support too. Here are a couple of photos. The Hornby Mk3 coach has a greater inside overhang, but the APT is surely the worst thing on the outside. - Richard. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NittenDormer Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 Thankfully, as you would have known had you read my mind properly, I have no intention of running an APT. Nor much steam. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 (edited) The front end of a Pendolino (I had a visiting friend's example run on my layout once ... it caused a couple of problems). Class 166 DMU - these are wider than a mark 3 coach with a slightly wider outer envelope on curves. Cargowaggon vans (i.e. Heljan) - these have a long overhang between the bogies, inside the curves, plus the centre step boards can cause overwidth problems with lineside objects like platforms. When I am setting up my clearances, I use the unpowered driving ends of the class 166 unit and the Heljan Cargowaggon vans to double-check things. Edited September 24, 2017 by SRman Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted September 21, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 21, 2017 Been testing my rolling stock on set track curves today, was pleasantly surprised to see that the envelopes did not overlap. A Mark 3 coach is pretty long, but I don't know about the stockI don't have. To future-proof my layout, are there other things that will stick out even more? Modern image and OO gauge. The real Mk3 coach is 23 meterers long, a Mk1 being a mere 20 meters while the forthcoming Hitachi IET trains will use a 26 meter body shell. I'm not sure what the lengths of the New Caledonian sleeper stock is being built to, nor the Mk5 coaches being built for TPE. In terms of overhangs, I believe the bogie positioning on the IET has been done to minimise the remedial work necessary to curved platforms - but I'm not sure if this equates to a grater end throw compared to the shorter Mk3 coach of if the extra length means grater clearance is necessary on the inside of curves to accommodate the body. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
royaloak Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 The real Mk3 coach is 23 meterers long, a Mk1 being a mere 20 meters while the forthcoming Hitachi IET trains will use a 26 meter body shell. I'm not sure what the lengths of the New Caledonian sleeper stock is being built to, nor the Mk5 coaches being built for TPE. In terms of overhangs, I believe the bogie positioning on the IET has been done to minimise the remedial work necessary to curved platforms - but I'm not sure if this equates to a grater end throw compared to the shorter Mk3 coach of if the extra length means grater clearance is necessary on the inside of curves to accommodate the body. The IET is the same between the bogie centres as a Mark 3, all the extra length is at the (tapered) ends of the IET coaches. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Legend Posted September 22, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 22, 2017 Yes I was going to say if future proofing you really need to consider the forthcoming Hornby IET. 26m coaches Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trains4U Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 I had to cut a chunk out of a baseboard support too. Here are a couple of photos. The Hornby Mk3 coach has a greater inside overhang, but the APT is surely the worst thing on the outside. DSCF3957.jpg DSCF3958.jpg - Richard. Does the driver have to look out of the door window to see where he is going? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium njee20 Posted September 22, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 22, 2017 I doubt the prototype encountered such tight curves, that is insane overhang though! I imagine buildings were demolished when some people ran them! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 47137 Posted September 23, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 23, 2017 Does the driver have to look out of the door window to see where he is going? I doubt the prototype encountered such tight curves, that is insane overhang though! I imagine buildings were demolished when some people ran them! I think the model driver looks 180 scale feet in front of him, sees the track takes in a 90 degree turn and shuts his eyes. My own feeling is, if you are building a layout and it is going to be with you for many years, it is sensible to build it physically able to accept any train you can imagine, however unrealistic in operation, so you can test the model or indeed enjoy seeing it running from time to time. My caveat is to do this without spoiling the appearance of the layout. In my case, the equivalent curve is in a tunnel, it will let me have a 24-foot layout (eventually!) instead of an 11-foot one. I draw the line at not trying to accommodate 0-16.5, but everything 00 and H0 ought to fit. - Richard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 The real Mk3 coach is 23 meterers long, a Mk1 being a mere 20 meters while the forthcoming Hitachi IET trains will use a 26 meter body shell. I'm not sure what the lengths of the New Caledonian sleeper stock is being built to, nor the Mk5 coaches being built for TPE. In terms of overhangs, I believe the bogie positioning on the IET has been done to minimise the remedial work necessary to curved platforms - but I'm not sure if this equates to a grater end throw compared to the shorter Mk3 coach of if the extra length means grater clearance is necessary on the inside of curves to accommodate the body. According to Modern Railways the new sleepers are slightly shorter than a mk3, so that the current mix of Mk3 and Mk2 can be replaced by the same number of new coaches and still fit in the longest platforms at Euston. The 80x units, assuming modelled to scale, are likely to overhang more than a Mk3 on the outside of unprototypically tight model curves despite the taper, and may even overhang more on the outside of some really tight actual curves. But with the same width and bogie spacing they shouldn't overhang any further on the inside. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted September 23, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 23, 2017 I don't know the measurement, but the sturgeon wagon has quite a throw, that might be in Mk3 land? Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 The Hornby Pendolino schnoz has a bit of a throw too.... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cravensdmufan Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 On my 00 layout: I have found that Bachmann 158s have the most overhang (more than Mk3's or Mk4's). Dapol "silver bullets" have wide steps Both these items fouled my already installed platforms that I had carefully tested with long coaches. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now