Hornby suspenison bridge R8008

[Davenport]

Hi all,

Just looking for advise,

Has anyone fitted one of these to a 8' x 4' board , just wondering about the incline/decline , i dont want to use the hornby incline/decline system 

Thanks

[Mol_PMB]

I think that in the available space you would struggle to fit a reasonable gradient (assuming that you want tracks both over and under the bridge, connected together). It's a long bridge too, so the approaches would need some fairly sharp curves that would add to the challenge faced by a train climbing the gradient. Even if you could physically fit it in, I suspect it would be unreliable and frustrating.

Of course there's nothing stopping you having separate high and low level circuits, and that may be the best approach if you want to feature the impressive bridge. Or put a road over it (much more prototypical for a suspension bridge).

 

[Davenport]

Ya thanks was only looking to do a single track line on  the outer (biggest) track 

I believe hornby had this done in a track plans book many years ago.

 

[Broithe]

You'll struggle with it on a board that size, as it comes. You could shorten the base of the towers, of course, to reduce the lift required. Having the approaches including curves will also add to the struggle to get the lift required.

I had one here, with the full height towers and straight approaches. I think I used hardboard for the ramps and they are eight feet long - full lengths from a sheet. It was usable, but not really ideal.

 

 

You could also drop a 'well' under the bridge, below the level of the sheet, to get the height without the whole climb.

[Davenport]

Thats a fantastic layout and thanks for the advise, I was thinking of bout using these for the incline /decline but again have no idea would they work.

Maybe as you say shorten the base of the towers to keep that incline height to reduce the lift it might. Also maybe if a few inches could be cut from the  lenght of both sides.

 

Edited Wednesday at 22:16 by Davenport

[Broithe]

Curving the inclines adds to the effort required to pull things up. If you're running decent locos, rather than older ones, and short trains, you can have steeper and tighter runs - but you would be advised to experiment and find what works reliably.

Also, smaller bogie diesels will pull better on curved inclines than bigger (long) steam locos will.

It's hard to give a hard and fast prediction, there are many variables at play.

On the straight 8' ramps above, we could pull long trains with Murphy 181s, but some older, more highly geared things struggled with the weight. Shorter trains will be easier to raise, obviously.

In general, modern, all-wheel drive diesels will be better than bigger steam locos. The lower the gradient, the better things will be - and the greater the radius of any turns on the inclines - you could, if necessary, even reduce the gradient on the curved sections, increasing it slightly on the straights to get the height back.

Whatever happens, in the space you have, you will have to compromise. I would be inclined (hah!) to drop the ground under the bridge, if you can, to have the bridge going over a hole, rather than raising the track to the whole height of the deck. You could still have a bit of an incline, to keep the effect, but have the 'height' under the bridge. Or have the track raised above the board all the way road, but dropped a bit away from the bridge. You could do all of these approaches at the same time, with the lower parts of the towers reduced also...

Also, if the bridge is 'at the back' - i.e., four feet away from where you can stand, make sure you can reach it for any issues that might happen, and to clean the track occasionally.

Edited Wednesday at 22:43 by Broithe

[leslie10646]

Someone else who likes to have a layout where his engines can get a run!

How long is that set-up of yours, Broithe? Have you taken over an entire floor - much easier that working in among loft struts!

Great stuff. Very jealous of your uninterrupted space!

[Broithe]

9 hours ago, leslie10646 said:

Someone else who likes to have a layout where his engines can get a run!

How long is that set-up of yours, Broithe? Have you taken over an entire floor - much easier that working in among loft struts!

Great stuff. Very jealous of your uninterrupted space!

It wasn't really mine, though I was contracted for permanent way construction and maintenance, and I had rights as an operating company.

The big figure of eight all round the outside must have been over 100'. The original part was in a garage, then it expanded out through the door under a long closed-in car port, for the mine and the power station. The power station is up the road here now, renamed as Ferbane.

We once got a 181 to pull a few carriages round as slowly as possible, just creeping up the slope to the bridge, and it took over eleven minutes. It could have been longer, if we hadn't had to allow for the possibility of stalling on the slope...

It was notable that the Metcalfe and Superquick buildings, when exposed to vast amounts of sunlight through the polycarbonate roof of the car port, did look better, less new and pristine.

I have a lot of the infrastructure packed away and it may resurface in some form - eventually.