Handlaying a Gauntlet track - FAIL!

For my third and final handlaid trackwork piece, I wanted to do something different.  And, out of the whole list a gauntlet track seemed pretty easy. I did some online research and found pictures of some examples where gauntlets were used to bring the mainline closer to a station platform or farther away from a station platform to maintain clearances. They only had points, and no frogs. I found other examples where tracks crossed into each other (usually, for different rail gauges) and there were frogs but no points involved. Which was fine, as I didn't really want to make more points or frogs. My switch/turnout and crossing had been educational and fun, but I wanted to push myself to do something different.

But then I saw a couple of pictures online where tight streetcar track formed a gauntlet to allow it to get around sharp corners where parallel track wouldn't have enough clearance to do so. If you go to this website you can find some interesting street trackage pictures, including the ones posted here.  Photos are by Salada from Freerails.com and used with permission. This gauntlet is interesting because it is short, it features curved and straight track, it has guardrails on the track, and it has paved track. There is another picture on the link showing similar track in a stone-paved roadway.

I had four options for the frogs: (A) I could purchase a chunk of something (brass, steel, aluminum) and mill away the intersecting channels on my friend's mill. It would be pretty easy, as I think I can make both paths straight through the frog instead of curving one. (B) I could buy a chunk of metal but instead use my Dremel tool to cut intersecting slots. This wouldn't be as precise as a milling machine, but it really doesn't have to be either. (C) I could buy some thinner brass and use my belt sander to form four shapes which, once soldered together onto a sheet of brass, would form the frog. (D) I could take two rails and overlap them by cutting away the base of the "top" one and the head of the "bottom" one and soldering them together. I saw it demonstrated on Tim Warris' website (he makes the Fast Tracks jigs) and it looked like fun.

Unfortunately, I ran out of rail. And, LGB rail in 2' lengths might be too short for the outer rails. Aristocraft rail is longer, but isn't manufactured anymore. I didn't want to purchase long (3') lengths of code 332 brass rail for this project, as that will be expensive. So, I instead bought some code 250 aluminum rail from Llagas Creek.. Sure, it isn't the best for track power but for what I am doing it should be fine. And, it was only about $1.50 a foot. The only real downside is that it can't be easily silver soldered, so frog option (D) is out.

I sketched up some ideas for various radius measurements, and to preserve the look of the gauntlet I had one side curve away on both tracks and the other have one leg curved and the other straight. The radius I drew are extremely tight (about 17"R on the inner one) but my short wheelbase test engine will make it and these were, in real life, very tight. One frog has two straight intersecting rails but the other had a curved rail, which matches the prototype and also will be a bit more challenging (and, in my ignorance, interesting) to fabricate. It would certainly be a challenge.

So, I bought some 1/8" thick by 1" wide brass bar stock online and drew out some lines to represent where the rail surfaces would be. Then, I cut it apart into four pieces and took each one to the belt sander to clean up. After that was done, I soldered them to a thin piece of brass shim stock and waited for it to cool. And that is where trouble began. I didn't pin the pieces down and they constantly wanted to "float" on the liquid solder and come together into one unit instead of remaining four pieces. I managed to push them around before it cooled, but it was difficult. Final clean up included a bath in alcohol and then a trip under the wire brush wheel. The last step was to use my grinder shorten the frog to length.

I checked my clearances and they were slightly tight but nothing that a file couldn't fix. I also used my Dremel wheel and accidentally went through the shim brass sheet stock in one place (not a good thing). The real problem though was that the NMRA Standards require a flangeway to be 0.118" deep and I bought 0.125" thick brass to make it (which was taller than required), my actual train equipment has deeper flanges that rode on the bottom of the frog. I can't file them any deeper or else I will go right through the shim, so I will need to remake the frog with thicker metal. So, I ordered some 3/16" thick brass stock which should have been better.

However, things just then got worse. I built two more frogs with the thicker metal, and flange depth was not an issue. I then epoxied the frogs onto the board I had which I was laying my track on, and after that cured I spiked some of the aluminum rails in place (they bent by hand easily). But, different problems came up. "Large Scale" is a pretty loose term for trains that essentially run on Gauge 1, or 45mm, track. Tolerances are all over the map. Most trains are sold with trucks that have oversize flanges, non-conforming back-to-back wheel spacing, and run gigantic rail heights. It all works well in the garden, where obstacles can otherwise derail trains. But here, I couldn't make it work. I laid some rail and tested it with my freight car truck and it just kept derailing. Adding the guardrails won't help. The frog is to NMRA specs, but the truck isn't. Very few commercial models in G scale are.

So, I will need to take a step back and rethink the gauntlet track. I may just build a simple (cough... easy) "Y" style one that has just one frog and no points. Or, I may try and reuse one of these frogs and simplify the track arrangement by removing one of the curves and straightening out much of the track. But first, I will need to do a lot of thinking.