# curve banking or superelevation



## caferacer (Jul 22, 2010)

My question is do I need banking or super elevation on my track powered railroad I am running wide 15 plus foot curves and if so how much elevation or angle do I need to add,some of my wide 18 foot curves are up hill 1.5 up to 2 degree incline per 150 feet of distance as I am new at this its me trying to get my head around the question so to speak caferacer


----------



## kormsen (Oct 27, 2009)

i don't think so. 
save if you either plan a racetrack or are planning to run very heavy and very long trains. 
.


----------



## Dan Pierce (Jan 2, 2008)

Model trains like level track, especaiilly the switches/turnouts. 

The 3 axle dual truck diesels will derail on uneven track!!


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

No need for it unless you want to run bullet trains. Later RJD


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I like it and use it. I'm modeling G24 and have older shorter locos; 2-8-0 and a 4-4-0, they track fine. 

There was a recent discussion about it tho' and most don't. 

Like any grade change or transition it should be smooth and long rather than short and abrupt. Longer wheel bases might object. 

John


----------



## caferacer (Jul 22, 2010)

Thanks guys being new so many questions i read about these things and need to ask if I need it on my railroad running long wide curves and slow inclines and slow declines so many questions do not like a pain but keen to learn the correct way to do things.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Transition or Easement curves will add more to your realism than most others. 
It's the spiral curve from straight to a set diameter/radius. The distance you'd travel on a bike from straight to curve as you move your handlebars around. At a constant speed. 
Easy to add with flex track, harder to do with sectional. (would require reshaping a straight section and trimming the longer inner rail to fit.) 

John


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It looks neat, but if you study the "suspension" (or lack of!) in many of the available diesels, you will see that they do not handle superelevation well. There's just no real suspension in our diesel models. Some of the better steam locos have a functioning suspension, but often the spring rates are wrong and they are so stiff, nothing flexes. 

I would basically stay away from it if you are not running short wheelbase locos, and then of course, smaller locos were not often running on high speed lines that needed superelevation. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Well said, Greg. 

I'll certainly second your comments. Model trains will run best on and have been designed for zero degree banking. 

I tried some superevelation on my first layout and had nothing but problems. When I flattened the track on everything, those problems were solved.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

To amplify on my comments, recently Ted Doskaris and I embarked on a quest for better looking and operating wheels for Aristo locos. One of the goals was flanges that weren't so deep. 

From many hours lying on my belly staring at an E8 with the sideframes removed, I was very surprised at what I learned. Suffice it to say that the depth of the flanges made up for wheels lifting off rails. 

I learned a lot about how the suspension of Aristo and USAT locos "work". I'm also including 3 and 4 "axle" steam locos. 

I'm sticking to level track. If you have a lot of space to do nice long transitions, like a distance almost equal the the length of the "real" curve, I believe most locos could handle it, but that's a lot of real estate. 

Outdoors, where the 1:1 elements (raindrops 8 scale inches in size, etc.) really do their best to affect your level and grades, it seems that this would just make things harder to maintain. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## caferacer (Jul 22, 2010)

Greg and Stan and Totalwrecker going with the flat track idea rather than elevated its just that you read so much and without asking you just do not no what is the best so more than happy to listen and learn from the masters of the hobby flat track it is and again many thanks for the help caferacer


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Better leave my name off that list! ha ha


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well it's a good decision not to use unless you know how to figure out how to use it for G scale and then it still gets iffy. To many folks do to short of a spiral for there curves to make the transition. That's where the problem lies. As said flat is better. Later RJD


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

John, I believe Gregg included you, thanking you for your opinion and participation, even if he is not following your recommendation that it's no problem. 

That's how I took it. (yes, I re-read it a couple of times) 

Also, you can do it later if you want, considering the large radius curves Gregg is contemplating. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Tongue in cheek ... I ain't no Master!


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Me neither, I just have some good teachers! 

Tons of stuff to learn in this hobby... now I'm starting Z scale, like starting all over! 

Greg


----------

