Rerailers in Nolix (modified helix)

[rsn48]

Do rerailers come in Peco Code 55; I recall seeing Atlas rerailers but not Peco 55 ones.  I checked out the link below for an image of a Peco rerailer but came up with nothing.  I'm thinking of setting out a few rerailers in my Nolix (modified helix), I'm not even sure I'll need them.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=peco+code+55+rerailers&hl=en&newwindow=1&tbo=u&rlz=1C1VASI_enCA509CA509&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=3h0AUZ72MuXZigKMyYDwAw&ved=0CDkQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=709

[pnolan48]

I don't recall them. Besides, I always built my own guardrails, with C40 rail inside the Atlas C55, wherever I expected trouble. I also built rerailers out of .030 and .040 styrene.

[rsn48]

Thanks Pete, I didn't think I'd seen any Peco 55 rerailers, maybe I'll do the same as you and install some guard rails.

[wm3798]

Since the Peco 55 is really modified c80 rail buried in the ties, you can use the bottom flange and mate old school Atlas rerailers right in there.  The fat chunky out-of-scale ties will also blend right in, although you might have to shim the bottom of the ties a bit at the transitions.  It's been so long since I've used that stuff I can't remember.

Lee

[rsn48]

Where I intend to put the rerailers will be out of sight, so I don't care about the visuals.  Yes I could think about the Atlas code 80 jobbies.

 

[wm3798]

This is all Atlas c80 in my old East Staging Yard.  Decidedly subterranean and out of view.


So I'm familiar with the concept.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by no-lix, though.  Usually that's a reference used to describe a long, scenicked route that carries a train from a lower to upper level without the use of a helix. (No He Lix)

So, if it's not part of the scenery, and it's not a helix, what exactly is the track plan?  Got any pictures?
Lee

[rsn48]

Here's a pic of my nolix, realize helix's look pretty much the same where as nolix's can vary widely since they are basically helix's without the standardization; so elevation gain with hopefully some open scenery.  On my nolix, the second and third only levels will be seen from the front.  If you look closely you'll see the second level is directly above the first, which will be hidden with a mountain siding, and the fourth level, again if you look closely is on the other sides of the mountain ribbing which I have up, so it will be hidden as well.

On the third level only, the visible area will be double tracked, for a siding, which is secretly staging holding one train (there are various other points on the layout that hold one train as staging).  I went out of my way to have no hidden staging.

I will probably put rerailers on the rail roughly just after the turnouts for the third level double track to help correct any errors through the turnout.

Just last night I finished with the attachment of the final road run, where the clamps are currently to the second level, so.........I'm done the woodworking of the nolix area, with the exception of adding some additional supports and possibly a mountain rib or two.

[wm3798]

Oh dear God, what a mess!    This is not a no-lix.  It's a badly engineered roller coaster!

The apparent steepness of the climb and the undulation of the alignment will be nightmarish for all but the shortest trains.  You're going to have buffeting forces all over the place and in all directions.  There will be a lot of unnecessary friction going up the hill, and all kinds of slinkies and picked flanges going down.  Not to mention the sketchy support you've provided for the sub-roadbed.  I see potential warping and kinks a-plenty in your future.

I would seriously re-think this plan.  There's good reason that a typical helix has uniform geometry all the way up.  There's not enough re-railers in the world to make this work any better.

What's the overall change in elevation from top deck to bottom?
Lee

[rsn48]

Well Lee, thanks for the vote of confidence.  First some history.  Back in roughly 2000 I had read the article of an Armstrong plan Jim Money's Athabaska RR in the 1998 edition of MODEL RAILROAD PLANNING.  In it Money recruited Armstrong to create a layout plan and was adamant he didn't want a helix, he was so adamant that Armstrong drew up an initial plan with three helix's.  Jim asked John to draw up another plan doing away with helix's which Armstrong did.  Armstrong in a moment of humour decided to call the "place" (not the thing) a nolix for no helix. 

Also in roughly 2000 I became the moderator of the layout design forum at Trainboard which I was part of for roughly five years.  Since the forum was my suggestion and the other moderator added to that forum quite after three months, I was basically on my own.  The independence gave me a public forum for ideas which influenced others.  The idea I flogged the most, particularly for N scaler's was the idea of a nolix. 

When I read the Planning article of Money's Athabaska RR, I decided the word "nolix" was useful to the hobby; we had a word to describe a "standardized" circular incline to move trains from level to level, but we didn't have a word for non-standardized construction to move trains from level to level.  What also became apparent to me when looking at Armstrong's plan was the trains were visible, much more than in any helix with a window or what have you, and the visible area was incorporated into the scenery.  So I decided - "a nolix was a non-standardized helix with the purpose of moving trains from one level to another creating as much visibility of trains as possible, incorporating these visible areas into the scenery."

I then preached this concept near and far, from Model Railroader mag to the Atlas forum, to obviously the Trainboard layout design forum, the layout design sig, etc.  The problem for me was that helix's tend to be a large blob with not much sceniking options, pretty much a big circular mountain.  In N scale because of our lesser requirements for "broad" curves, you could have a peninsula only 40 inches wide and you could have a nolix, or a corner area such as I have used and have a nolix.  The peninsula that Armstrong created for Money was very large as you can imagine it would have to be in HO.

I became inactive in the hobby with severe hobby burnout, all my activities on the net (being moderator and an active participant, particularly on the Atlas forum) died out, and with medical problems I kind of drifted away from the scene.  Currently I am seriously playing with the idea of writing an article on "Nolix's" for one of the RR mags.

Where I have changed over the years is that I have decided the word nolix by itself isn't that useful; the reason being is that if I say helix, because of its standardization, we can visualize one.  But, if I say nolix, because it is not standardized, visualizing one is difficult.  Or in your case Lee, what you have visualized is different than what I produced thus helping back up my assumption that the word nolix needs to be expanded.

So my conclusion is that other words need to be paired with nolix for us to get a better idea of its usage.  So if I say Lee has a "peninsula nolix" we can draw some rough conclusions about it in our head, if I say Rick has an L shaped nolix we can have a better understanding of nolix, or again I can say Bill has an around the walls nolix, and we understand the concept.

So do I have a nolix, I say yes, this from the guy who made the word popular.

Secondly does it dip and dive, not really as I worked with a friend who has built his own helix and we used some "helix" technology to maintain grade "consistency."  The grade is roughly 2.2 % though in one two areas slightly less, and in a straight run, a bit more.  Realize that a 2.2 % grade in my nolix will have less "stress" on the wheel/rail contact than in a helix as the train isn't consistently going "round and round."

Here is a link to me talking about the concept of a nolix at Trainboard back in 2002 when I was a moderator there:

http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?68709-Another-Nolix-(track-plan)

Here is me talking and Andy Sperandeo responding in a thread in the Model RR forum, back in 2002:

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/3517.aspx

The road run is firmer than it looks, there are still some areas that will get bracing, and the plywood has been aged. 

There is 19 3/4 inches of separation from the my layouts first deck to the second deck.

And here is another pic, in the background you'll see a level with the one end boosted, used to maintain a consistent grade through the nolix, harder than with a helix:

[haasmarc]

Lee,

Who makes that Reading boxcar in this photo?

[wm3798]

That's an old MDC car.  Horribly inaccurate according to Reading and freight car nerds, but I liked it enough to weather it up and drag it around my layout.

I'll take back my hasty analysis.  The other more overhead shot makes the ROW a lot more clear, and I can see now what you're aiming for...

I recall Armstrong's use of the term "no lix" but I always remember it being used to describe the around the walls type assault on a radical change of levels.  I stand corrected.

Maybe it's my reaction as a plausible scenery kind of guy...  I'm having a hard time visualizing how you're going to build scenery around that track plan without it looking extremely "model railroady" as Ed would say.
(I confess that I've used a lot of this type of acrobatics when unavoidable, but I try to strive for something that will at least photograph well...)

So apart from modeling the Canadian spiral tunnels or some obscure narrow gauge route in Nepal, how do you plan to pull off the scenic treatment here?
Lee

[rsn48]

I'm glad you asked about scenery and prototypical inspiration, you give me a chance to brag, reminisce about times with my son in the Fraser and Thompson River areas, and hope you come up here.

So lets start with some propoganada, here's a video from the Rocky Mountaineer company, encouraging you to come up and take their train, the video is well done and gives you a feel for the area that inspired me along the Thompson River, get yourself some popcorn and pop and enjoy, and say hello to Reba for me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXxgRlIoEgg

Now what you need to know is that CP was the first through the Fraser Thompson canyon area following a trail originally built by the British Royal Military Engineers.  Latter CN joined in the fun and put a line through on the other sides of the rivers, so that you had CN going up and down its track, east and west bringing the goodies to market and the Super Continental to Montreal.  And you had CP doing pretty much the same thing.  So tracks on either side of the Fraser and Thompson Rivers.  What I'm having a hard time doing in finding a video to show you this, but I have one and if you stop it at the the 4:31 minute mark and look up above the road, you'll see the second elusive track which never seems to show up in all the videos I can find.  Also a number of years ago, CN and CP had a brief rational moment and decided to set aside rivalries and institute directional running, so East bound takes the CP track and West bound takes the CN track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqEP292Ffc8


Here is my favourite video of my favourite area in both rivers, its called the White Canyon in the Thompson River valley area.  Now realize there is track on the other side you can't see.  Now my second level is the track you can't see in this video.  The cardboard strips will run up from the table top to the second level, thus blocking view of the first level.

On the other side is my third level and the mountain ribs I have created are to roughly look like the large streep mountain in this video.  So cardboard strip running up and checkered across to create my hydrocal mountain, this will block viewing of the fourth level which is on the other side of the ribs.  I will be making the mountain reasonably high to block out most of the mountains you can see as backdrop, for if you look closely those mountains are the same scene repeated three times, I need to block most out so the viewer doesn't realize that.  And now to my favourite video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrSJwoD3dls

Will it look toy like, maybe where there will be four tunnels on the left side where the first level starts, then you will see the second and third  levels, then the fourth level.  I'm hoping to extend the mountains so all the tunnels are above each other.  But then again, there are many tunnels in this geographical region.  Also, between the second and third level will be a recessed river.

I wanted to edit this in, here is a Youtube video of the Cisco bridge areas, probably one of the best railfan areas in Canada for obvious reasons when you watch the show.  What you see is the trains swapping sides, so the first bridge crosses to the other side of the river, and the same with the second bridge.  I would loved to have modelled this scene but I just don't have the room:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texHXI5qIRg

[rsn48]

Nolix history Part Two

I thought I'd add this below my long post above.  Lee you said your understanding was that Armstrong used the concept nolix to describe around the room elevation gain.  Back to the original use of the word by him, he never used the word elsewhere except in his track plan as described above in an earlier reply of mine.  Armstrong never talked about the nolix as a "thing" but a location, he named the peninsula area of the track plan the nolix.

Enter Peter Nolan,

Pete joined Trainboard I think a little after me but came upon my preaching of nolix's and he began using the word to also include around the room elevation gain as a nolix, much like you Lee imagine it.  Many caught onto this concept and used the word that way.  This is why I think the best use of the word is when the description is added on to it - so a peninsula nolix, a V nolix (don't think one exists), an L nolix, and around the room nolix, a W nolix (again it doesn't exist but I'm using it to make a point); all these descriptions help the reader understand what type of nolix exactly is used, since a nolix isn't standardized like a helix.  So the around the wall concept of the nolix is Peter Nolan's doing, he's known here as "pnolan48."