Test run

Woo Hoo! I finally have all the unitrack pieces for my railway station layout and I was able to do a test run with a couple of locomotives. There are some connection issues at the unitrack joiners, but overall it works! As you can see, I managed to cut the table tops for each of the modular sections. The table tops are 3/8" birch plywood. These were cut several week-ends ago, but I didn't take any pictures of it until tonight. Getting clean looking curves on the reducer module was a challenge due to the lack of carpentry skills. I used a jigsaw to cut the plywood with a 20TPI scrolling blade. The large number of teeth on the blade helped to make nice clean cuts in the wood. It was definitely well worth getting the blade because it saved me from having to apply wood putty on any rough edges. Afterward, I used my electric sander to fix up parts of the curves. At times, the jigsaw had a mind of its own and decided to go in a different direction. I also used the jigsaw to cut the straight edges on the reducer and bridge section. I used my 90 degree angled aluminum strip as guide for my jigsaw to ensure the edges were absolutely straight. The next step is to attach the frame underneath each table top module. Although the birch plywood is good quality (it has seven layers), it still exhibits a bit of warping due to our dry climate. Unfortunately I won't have any time this Sunday to work on the framing due to the World Cup final. Spain versus Netherlands. There are too many other distractions keeping me away from the layout.

Kato Unitrack turnouts

After converting my layout to Kato Unitrack, I'd like to pass on some observations about the turnouts and double crossover. Kato has a limited variety of turnouts. In fact, there are only two turnouts - 481mm radius (#4 part number 20-220 and 20-221) and 718mm radius (#6 part number 20-202 and 20-203). What is odd is that only the #4 turnouts are DCC ready. As you can see on the back side, the turnout can be re-configured from DC to DCC by changing the position of the screws. As a consequence, they are more expensive than the #6 turnouts.

The #6 turnout can be made to work as DCC after a bit of re-wiring. However, this necessitates taking the back panel off the turnout. I have not attempted this operation as my layout is currently DC. If you're interested, there is a website by Allan Gartner who describes how to convert to DCC. Unfortunately he only provides schematics, no photographs. If you're like me and lack wiring skills, you're probably better off to buy the #4 turnouts. They're only a few dollars more, but at least you can quickly switch over to DCC when the time comes. Had I known this, I wouldn't have invested in the #6 turnouts. Fortunately, I only have a few #6 turnouts. The majority are #4, which I purchased specifically for the railway station layout.

For my interchange layout section, I purchased the double cross over (part number 20-210). Like the turnouts, the cross-over works flawlessly. No derailments at all. However, the cross over is insulated and the four quadrants each have to be connected to a feeder line. This is a problem as I was only planning to operate the railway station layout with a single power unit. To make it work with only one power unit I have to pull out the cross over and put in four turnouts. It's not as clean looking as the cross-over, but it works.

All in all, the Kato Unitrack works like a charm. Like I said in a previous entry, the point of going with Kato Unitrack was its reliability and smooth operation.

1:160 scale comparison

While work continues slowly on the railway station layout, I thought I'd take some time to compare the size of the high speed passenger trains in my collection. I've never had all of them sitting next to each other at the same time. My collection at present, include two Shinkansens, one TGV and four ICEs (Unlike the ICE1s, the two ICE3s in my possession are identical so I've elected to show just the one). The ICEs are built by MiniTrix and the others by Kato. I was curious whether there was a noticeable difference in size. I know that they are N-scale, but having read articles about the variability of structures between different vendors, I was curious whether this also applied to trains. I have no pictures to compare these trains at 1:1 scale. This is simply a relative visual comparison with no physical measurements to base upon.

Even if the models are not exactly 1:160 scale, it would be difficult to discern any difference. In all honesty, I wouldn't be able to tell if there were any discrepancies in scale. From the top view, you can see that the ICE1 locomotives are the shortest in this group followed by the TGV. Both ICE3 and Shinkansen E4 Max are about the same length. At least they are at N-scale. The longest is the Shinkansen 700. I haven't had a chance to connect all the cars together to see their complete length. I'll wait until the layout is completed before I pull them out of their boxes.

You can see from the front view that the Shinkansen is the wider of the high speed passsenger trains followed by the ICE1s. Then the ICE3 and finally the TGV. I thought this might be attributed to the track gauge employed in Japan was different than that used in Europe. However, the ICE, TGV and Shinkansen all operate on standard gauge track, which is 4' 8.5" wide. I had to look this up on Wikipedia. I recall feeling confined while riding in the Shinkansen. Several factors contributed to this feeling. The seats were packed closely to maximize the number of passengers. The other reason was due to the small cabin windows. I felt as if I was flying in a passenger airliner. This differed significantly from the ICE3, which I thought was spacious. Of course, the large reclining seats in first class probably helped to create that sense of openness as the European landscape sped past the expansive windows. It is no secret that North Americans are larger (okay, obese) than their asian counterparts. Perhaps this is the reason for the smaller seats in Japan. I hated flying JAL because of the lack of leg room.