Interestign frog . . .

[peteski]

I was browsing new photos on the Fallen Flags website when I found this one:



It was a turnout on Boston & Maine RR. Is that a movable frog? Moved manually? The diverging route doesn't seem to be used often. Also note the way the ties are interleaved as the tracks are diverging. Not something that is modeled often.

[Chris333]

Sprung frog.
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/p/247276/2759455.aspx

[C855B]

^^^^ What he said.

I recall SP using them a lot on low-traffic spurs in our area. The tie thing is different... looked like a fun project. Maybe to save the expense of long ties in a non-critical location?

[Point353]

http://gnarchive.com/incidents/spring_frog.html

[Doug G.]

See, Tru-Scale was right.

I still believe closed frogs are superior for model railroading.

Doug

[peteski]

Interesting. Thanks for the info. So, for obvious reason, this is a one-way turnout which can only be used to exit from the diverging route.  Which is similar to the turnouts which have sprung points.  I wonder if this turnout also had sprung points (highly likely)?

Chris, the thread you linked to has some scans from what appears to be an old railroad book (rather than a hobbyist type book) I see that they use term "turnout" to describe the track arrangement in question.  That should put to bed the argument modelers often have as to whether to call these devices turnouts or switches.  Looks like "turnout" is a correct term (where "switch" refers to the movable points area). That is how I see it.

[wcfn100]

That should put to bed the argument modelers often have as to whether to call these devices turnouts or switches.

It hasn't so far.

Jason

[peteski]

It hasn't so far.

Jason

Well, it has at least for me (but I was already there to begin with, so I'm just seeing another publication confirming what I already believe in).

[Missaberoad]

Well, it has at least for me (but I was already there to begin with, so I'm just seeing another publication confirming what I already believe in).

When I copy out an ocs clearance (our version of a track warrant) I am cleared to a switch, not a turnout...

And as far as I know the switch you have in the OP can be used in either direction. At least thats how the identical ones we use work...

We also have some mainline switches at work now with solid rail across the normal position and movements that use the diverging route must climb over the rail... Its a little unnearving I'll post some photos when I get home...

[wcfn100]

When I copy out an ocs clearance (our version of a track warrant) I am cleared to a switch, not a turnout...

Sure, you're dealing with a location not the engineering or construction of the track.

Jason

[SandyEggoJake]

Now *this* is an interesting frog.

(Not high speed)

Edit: no matter which way I edit this photo on my phone, it still comes out upside down. Odd.

[Chris333]

"On your phone" is the problem.

[peteski]

Jake, that looks like the seldom used "leap-frog" turnout!   

[Doug G.]

Now *this* is an interesting frog.

(Not high speed)

Edit: no matter which way I edit this photo on my phone, it still comes out upside down. Odd.

Turn your phone over.



Doug

[nkalanaga]

They had frogs like that in Pasco years ago, near the passenger station, and serving industrial spurs. 

As for turnout vs frog, the way I heard it, at least on the 1960s NP/1970s BN, was that operation crews called them "switches" because all they cared about was which way they were going.  Track gangs were pickier:  A "switch" is the moveable parts, points, throwbar, tie rods, etc.  A "turnout" is the entire piece of track, including the "switch", the frog, and the various rails with them. 

The key is that, whatever you call the piece of track, you ALWAYS throw the switch.  At least on the prototype, throwing the turnout would be very difficult.  Thus, the device that moves the points is a switch stand/machine, not a turnout stand/machine!