Joined
·
2,693 Posts
There have been several calls for a poll to try to bring some sort of conclusion to the track quality discussion.
We have put together a multi-choice questionnaire. We realise that the choice of questions will be the start of yet another round of debate but we have to start somewhere. We have identified nine principal stages in the development of turnouts and ten types of plain track during the period from 1923 to the present day. We know that some pre-grouping track has lasted well into the preservation era even into the 1980's. However, we have to set the boundary somewhere. We have ignored many sub-options such as straight cut switches, undercut switches, chamfered switches, shallow depth switches, cast manganese crossings, welded crossings, swing nose crossings, soleplates and the huge variety of rail fastenings, which have been used over the years. One obvious omission from the questions is that of rail code. Our thinking is that since code 75 rail is smaller than scale and that both Hornby and Bachmann's latest wheels will run on SMP track then there is no reason why the rail size adopted should not be the correct scale for the type of track selected.
We are asking everyone to assume that an unspecified manufacturer is proposing to manufacture a new range of ready to run 4mm scale track comprising yard lengths of flexitrack and just one turnout in left and right hand versions. Our questionnaire allows readers to indicate their preferred specifications for these products.
The advantage to having an on-line multichoice questionnaire is that there is no collation of the results to be undertaken. The software will do the collating for us and work out the percentages allowing us to let anyone have a look into our site to see the results as the poll progresses.
What we are doing might not be the perfect answer to the problem but we appeal to everyone to let us know your preferences. The bigger the poll the more indicative the result will be.
We must make it clear that both Paul and I are completely neutral regarding the outcome of this poll. Paul is working in P4 and is more than happy to make his own track using kits from the P4track Co. I am nearing the completion of my OO layout and I am unlikely to have a requirement for more track in the foreseeable future.
Please give this initiative your support.
The poll can be found at http://mrol.gppsoftware.com/trackpoll.aspx
Graham and Paul Plowman
We have put together a multi-choice questionnaire. We realise that the choice of questions will be the start of yet another round of debate but we have to start somewhere. We have identified nine principal stages in the development of turnouts and ten types of plain track during the period from 1923 to the present day. We know that some pre-grouping track has lasted well into the preservation era even into the 1980's. However, we have to set the boundary somewhere. We have ignored many sub-options such as straight cut switches, undercut switches, chamfered switches, shallow depth switches, cast manganese crossings, welded crossings, swing nose crossings, soleplates and the huge variety of rail fastenings, which have been used over the years. One obvious omission from the questions is that of rail code. Our thinking is that since code 75 rail is smaller than scale and that both Hornby and Bachmann's latest wheels will run on SMP track then there is no reason why the rail size adopted should not be the correct scale for the type of track selected.
We are asking everyone to assume that an unspecified manufacturer is proposing to manufacture a new range of ready to run 4mm scale track comprising yard lengths of flexitrack and just one turnout in left and right hand versions. Our questionnaire allows readers to indicate their preferred specifications for these products.
The advantage to having an on-line multichoice questionnaire is that there is no collation of the results to be undertaken. The software will do the collating for us and work out the percentages allowing us to let anyone have a look into our site to see the results as the poll progresses.
What we are doing might not be the perfect answer to the problem but we appeal to everyone to let us know your preferences. The bigger the poll the more indicative the result will be.
We must make it clear that both Paul and I are completely neutral regarding the outcome of this poll. Paul is working in P4 and is more than happy to make his own track using kits from the P4track Co. I am nearing the completion of my OO layout and I am unlikely to have a requirement for more track in the foreseeable future.
Please give this initiative your support.
The poll can be found at http://mrol.gppsoftware.com/trackpoll.aspx
Graham and Paul Plowman