# [Guide]: How to get rid of derailments on turnouts



## Andrey

Hello! Here I will explain, how to modify turnouts to get rid of derailments on them. To achieve this, the following should be done:
1) Install high guard rails on your turnout. My turnouts are equipped with guard rails, which are 0.6 mm (0.0236'') higher than the top of the rails. This prevents derailments on the frog while allows diesel gearboxes to move above them.
2) If blades of turnout are not sharp enough, they should be sharpened. This will prevent flanges of wheels to climb up the blade.
3) Blades of turnout should be at the same height as the top of the rails, or slightly higher. If blade is lower than the top of the rails, you should glue a shim on the sleeper to rise it up. Try at least rise up the beginning of the blade.
4) All sharp angles should be smoothened with file. I will show this in following video.

This is video of modified turnouts in action:





This is video how to modify straight and curved turnouts:





How to modify double slip, Part 1:





How to modify double slip, Part 2:


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

You got stuck in moderation, I set you free and fixed your YouTube links.


----------



## Andrey

Thank you.


----------



## Dirk18

Hi Andrey,

Thank you very much for the tutorial. It is very informative. I am going to try this. I have one Kato diesel locomotive in my fleet that seems to derail for no reason on turnouts. 

I will give feedback as to how it turns out.


----------



## traction fan

Dirk18 said:


> Hi Andrey,
> 
> Thank you very much for the tutorial. It is very informative. I am going to try this. I have one Kato diesel locomotive in my fleet that seems to derail for no reason on turnouts.
> 
> I will give feedback as to how it turns out.



Dirk18;

Since you are having repetitive turnout derailments by one particular locomotive, the problem is most likely in that locomotive, not the turnouts. I'm assuming that this locomotive derails on several/all of your turnouts, but other locomotives do not derail on the same turnouts. Is that correct? 
In fact, you may have problems with both that locomotive, and the turnouts, but certainly with that loco, if he's the only "Bad Boy."
Have you checked that locomotive's wheels for proper gauge? You can do this with an NMRA standards gauge like the one shown in the photos beginning on page 8 of the attached file "Improving Atlas turnouts." If you don't have a gauge, I strongly recommend you get one. They are an essential tool for any model railroad. You can order one from www.modeltrainstuff.com 

While I don't disagree with most* of Andrey's recommendations, there are some other important things he doesn't mention. It's a good idea to look for each of these features when buying turnouts, and add each of them if the turnouts don't already have these features factory-installed. 

The file below titled "Improving Atlas turnouts", is aimed specifically at the popular, but flawed, Atlas HO-scale "Snap Switch" turnout. However, most of the critical measurements, and the fixes for most of the problems, can be applied to any brand turnout, in any scale. The second file, "All about turnouts," gives a lot more info on turnouts in general. 

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:

* The one recommendation on Andrey's list that I DO disagree with is using guard rails that are higher than the running rails. This should not be necessary if the guard rail flangeways are set to the standards of an NMRA track gauge.
Real, and model, guard rails are normally (intentionally) set lower than the running rails, not higher, as he suggests. This done to prevent snagging of any low-slung parts of a locomotive or car. The ends of guard rails are also tapered downward, lower than the rest of the guard rail, to prevent snagging of any dragging equipment on real railroads and of some track cleaning devices on model railroads.
The critical dimension related to guard rails is the width of the flangeway, not the height of the guard rail.
While Andrey may have some success with his oversized guard rails, his "fix" is actually a way of working around the real problem, which is that nearly all commercial turnouts come with flangeways that are both too wide, and too deep, to meet the NMRA specifications. Manufacturers do this to make their turnouts a little more tolerant of out-of-gauge wheels. The prototype's trains negotiate their turnouts without derailments for several reasons, a very important one of them being that their flangeways, and wheels, are all gauged to work together.

I think you will find that if you adjust the variables on your model turnouts, and all wheels, to the specs of an NMRA gauge, you will practically eliminate derailments on turnouts, without resorting to overheight guard rails. 

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:

View attachment Improving Atlas turnouts pdf version.pdf


View attachment All AboutTurnouts rev 4.pdf


----------



## mesenteria

I agree, apart from fixing the gap between the wing guards and stock rails, no guards should ever need to be raised in profile, not with hobby turnouts and tire profiles. I have heard of high frogs on some earlier Atlas turnouts which required heating them and pressing them down a hair into their plastic beds.


----------



## gordo53

Something else you might want to check is that your turnouts are level. It doesn't take much tilt to unsettle an engine, particularly a steam loco on a curve. I have been using a line level (3" long) to check problem turnouts and have had some success. On our layout, the issue has occurred most often on turnouts and curved sections of track that have been replaced.


----------



## Andrey

gordo53 said:


> Something else you might want to check is that your turnouts are level. It doesn't take much tilt to unsettle an engine, particularly a steam loco on a curve.


Yes, that's why I don't think it's a good idea to do superelevation on model railroad layout, because real locomotives have suspension, which can compensate track deviations from horizontal surface. But model locomotives don't have suspension, and they require track to be as flat as possible. That's why steam locomotive may derail on transition from flat track to superelevated, especially steam locomotive with long wheelbase like 2-10-4 or 4-12-2.


----------



## Andrey

Dirk18 said:


> Hi Andrey, Thank you very much for the tutorial. It is very informative. I am going to try this. I have one Kato diesel locomotive in my fleet that seems to derail for no reason on turnouts.
> I will give feedback as to how it turns out.


Hello, good luck in modifying your turnouts. If you will have any problems with it, I will do what I can to help you.


----------



## Andrey

traction fan said:


> Dirk18;
> Real, and model, guard rails are normally (intentionally) set lower than the running rails, not higher, as he suggests.


Hello. Sorry, that's wrong. Real turnouts are equipped with high guard rails, which are higher than the top of the rails. You can see it on this photos:


----------



## Lemonhawk

From those photos, the guards look to be the same height.


----------



## Andrey

I didn't find photos where it can be seen better. But I saw real turnouts and payed attention on this issue, and guard rails were higher, than the top of the rails.


----------



## Shdwdrgn

What country were those photos taken in? I've never seen anything like that on US railroads.


----------



## Andrey

Shdwdrgn said:


> What country were those photos taken in? I've never seen anything like that on US railroads.


Russia.
Are you absolutely sure, that US turnouts are different? I didn't pay attention on high guard rails on real turnouts, before I "invented" them. I mean, first I invented high guard rails and used them on my turnouts, and only after that I noticed, that real turnouts have the same feature.


----------



## mesenteria

Andrey said:


> Yes, that's why I don't think it's a good idea to do superelevation on model railroad layout, because real locomotives have suspension, which can compensate track deviations from horizontal surface. But model locomotives don't have suspension, and they require track to be as flat as possible. That's why steam locomotive may derail on transition from flat track to superelevated, especially steam locomotive with long wheelbase like 2-10-4 or 4-12-2.


I have those locomotives and more, and have no trouble with super-elevation. The transitions may have to more gentle and therefore longer, but I do it. As for turnouts, they must match the pitch and roll of the rails on either end of them, but that is also doable simply by letting the ballast grains suspend them properly.


----------



## Shdwdrgn

I mean, it could be a *newer* feature that they are introducing, or maybe they are used for specific situations, but I haven't seen that around here. I've been keeping an eye on turnouts on the local lines (since I'm hand-laying my own) and all the guard rails I've looked at were level with the track.


----------



## mesenteria

Shdwdrgn said:


> I mean, it could be a *newer* feature that they are introducing, or maybe they are used for specific situations, but I haven't seen that around here. I've been keeping an eye on turnouts on the local lines (since I'm hand-laying my own) and all the guard rails I've looked at were level with the track.


Nor have I, and I’ve walked my share of trackage. Even my hand-laid turnouts modelled after Fast Tracks turnouts use the same code of rail for the guards.

That said, Andrey is correct and TF is wrong; the guards are not of a smaller code than the bearing rails. That would raise the probability of their being ineffective against the inner flange faces of passing tires.


----------



## Shdwdrgn

mesenteria said:


> the guards are not of a smaller code than the bearing rails


For turnouts, yes, however from what I've seen the guard rails across bridges are frequently one code smaller than the bearing rails.


----------



## Andrey

Shdwdrgn said:


> I mean, it could be a *newer* feature that they are introducing, or maybe they are used for specific situations, but I haven't seen that around here. I've been keeping an eye on turnouts on the local lines (since I'm hand-laying my own) and all the guard rails I've looked at were level with the track.


I thought, that turnouts in all countries have the same design. All Russian turnouts have high guard rails, even turnouts on industrial railways. Most likely it is not new feature, because I didn't see turnout without high guard rails.

Traction fan, sorry for telling that you were wrong. You were right about US turnouts, I was right about Russian turnouts.


----------



## traction fan

Andrey said:


> Hello. Sorry, that's wrong. Real turnouts are equipped with high guard rails, which are higher than the top of the rails. You can see it on this photos:


 Andrey;

No, it's not "wrong" on any prototype turnout I've ever seen. I guess Russian turnouts are different than American ones. 
Your model railroad is just that, yours. If you like raised guard rails, you're certainly free to go ahead and use them.

I've never used them on any of the dozens of model turnouts I've scratchbuilt, and I don't know of any commercial model turnout that has guard rails that are higher than the running rails. All commercial turnouts that I have seen. including Atlas, Shinohara, Micro engineering and Peco, have low guard rails. In fact, point #1 on your own list of modifications to a Peco turnout, says to "ADD high guard rails" to it. The Peco turnout obviously didn't come with high guard rails already on it, or you wouldn't have had to add them.

Guard rails exist to guide the outside wheel flange toward the outside running rail, and keep it there. This forces the inside wheel, on the same axle, to roll through the proper side of the frog, and thus keeps the wheels from derailing. The high guard rails in your photo look like they might be intended to guide the side of the wheel tread, as much as the flange. It also looks like the frog may not have the same raised guard rails as the outside rails do, though that may be because it's unclear in the photos. To me that looks odd, since I'm used to having both the frog, and outside, guard rails at the same height.
I also see that the high guard rails are used on turnouts in a yard, where trains would be running slowly. I had speculated that maybe your trains run much faster than ours, and the Russian railway wanted extra guidance, at high speed. However that theory went away when I saw the same raised guard rails in slow speed territory. 
High guard rails are fine, if you want them, but they're not necessary if you have your turnouts and wheels set to NMRA specs. The low guard rails will direct the flange, and thus the entire wheelset, onto the selected path, through the turnout, without any raised guard rails. The same system works quite well on real railroads here. They don't have, or need, high guard rails either. I believe the same may be true of turnouts in England, Continental Western Europe, and Japan, though I don't know that for certain. Maybe MichaelE can post a photo of some German turnouts. He models German railways.



Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Andrey

mesenteria said:


> the guards are not of a smaller code than the bearing rails. That would raise the probability of their being ineffective against the inner flange faces of passing tires.


Yes, that's why high guard rails do their job. I even can record video, where BLi Niagara operates on that 19'' curved turnouts at high speed. But not now, because my DC controller is not powerful enough to run Niagara at high speed, I backordered Walthers DC controller in early October, but I don't know, when I will get it.

It looks like high guard rails will be not prototypically accurate for modelling US railroad.
Thanks for tip about superelevation.


----------



## Andrey

traction fan said:


> The low guard rails will direct the flange, and thus the entire wheelset onto the selected path, without any raised guard rails.
> Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


Hello. The problem is that American models are equipped with wheels with much smaller flanges, than European models. And flanges of American equipment have very small contact with guard rail. So flange can easily jump over the guard rail, especially if it is steam locomotive with large drivers like Niagara, especially at high speed.
But it is much more difficult to jump over high guard rails. That's why they solve the problem.

Honestly, I don't like modifying turnouts, this is time consuming process. But I like American 4-8-4s, and I like to run them at high speeds. But without this modifications they will not be able to operate on my 19'' curved turnouts without derailments.


----------



## traction fan

*I didn't say that.*



mesenteria said:


> Nor have I, and I’ve walked my share of trackage. Even my hand-laid turnouts modelled after Fast Tracks turnouts use the same code of rail for the guards.
> 
> That said, Andrey is correct and TF is wrong; the guards are not of a smaller code than the bearing rails. That would raise the probability of their being ineffective against the inner flange faces of passing tires.


mesenteria;

I didn't say the guard rails should be of a smaller code. I did say "normally set lower" but I didn't mean that as an absolute. It's just something I have seen on some commercial model turnouts. I make my turnouts with code 55 for both running rails and guard rails. However, I have heard of other scratchbuilders using a smaller code for the guard rails on the turnouts they build. In my pdf file "How I scratchbuild turnouts", I mention this as an option, and also indicate that I don't use it. On bridges, I do use code 40 rail for the guard rails.

Traction Fan


----------



## Shdwdrgn

One other thing that was mentioned earlier in this thread -- If a new locomotive doesn't match the NMRA wheel gauge, how would one make adjustments? My Bachmann 4-6-0 that I just got is most definitely too narrow. I actually took a file to my turnout guard rails on my test track to get some additional clearance, while even my old 1970's Tyco locomotive could run through those turnouts without an issue. I believe it's just the driver wheels that are too narrow, and I had read that others have seen the same problem. Are driver wheels even made to be adjusted?


----------



## mesenteria

Shdwdrgn said:


> For turnouts, yes, however from what I've seen the guard rails across bridges are frequently one code smaller than the bearing rails.


Agreed, and that has been my experience as well. However, the two instances are not serving the same function. The frog guards need only contact the flanges to keep the opposite flange from picking the frog point. The bridge guards keep the entire car from running off the bridge deck.


----------



## gregc

when i have problems wheels catching on the frog with my hand laid turnouts, the cause is often that the rails are not gaged correctly or the that flange width is not correct.


----------



## Andrey

Shdwdrgn said:


> One other thing that was mentioned earlier in this thread -- If a new locomotive doesn't match the NMRA wheel gauge, how would one make adjustments? My Bachmann 4-6-0 that I just got is most definitely too narrow. I believe it's just the driver wheels that are too narrow, and I had read that others have seen the same problem. Are driver wheels even made to be adjusted?


Hello. I don't know if it is possible to adjust drivers gauge. But you can try to install high guard rail on your test turnout. Use small amount of super glue, so it will be easy to remove this guard rail if you want to do so. If derailments occurs on the frog, high guard rail will most likely solve the problem, because it will be very difficult for driver to jump over high guard rail.


----------



## traction fan

*Adjusting wheels*



Shdwdrgn said:


> One other thing that was mentioned earlier in this thread -- If a new locomotive doesn't match the NMRA wheel gauge, how would one make adjustments? My Bachmann 4-6-0 that I just got is most definitely too narrow. I actually took a file to my turnout guard rails on my test track to get some additional clearance, while even my old 1970's Tyco locomotive could run through those turnouts without an issue. I believe it's just the driver wheels that are too narrow, and I had read that others have seen the same problem. Are driver wheels even made to be adjusted?


 Shdwdrgn;

Yes, in general drivers can be adjusted for gauge, and I would recommend doing that, rather than trying to make the turnout fit two slightly different wheel gages, one on that Bachmann 4-6-0, and the other on (presumably) everything else. That means a sloppy flangeway width, and that can mean derailments.
The steam locomotive drivers I've dealt with have been press fitted onto spline-equipped axles. The splines help keep the loco's drivers "in quarter" by preventing either wheel on a given axle, from rotating with respect to the axle, and the wheel at the other end of that axle. Drivers can usually be moved sideways a little bit to get them in gauge. There are even special tools called wheel/gear pullers made to do this job. Micro-Mark, Northwest Shortline, and Maxon tools, all make pullers for HO. Nobody makes one for N but I've adapted one. However, I've had success just prying lightly with a small screwdriver to move the drive wheels. Once you get the wheels in gauge, you might want to apply one drop of super glue to the axle/wheel joint to keep the drivers permanently in gauge. 

Good luck;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Shdwdrgn

@Andrey -- a high guard rail would just block the loco and bring it to an instant stop, possibly even causing damage. The loco was derailing itself because the drivers were riding right up over the top of the guards since the wheels are too narrow.

@traction_fan -- I was wondering about something like a small gear puller, just didn't know how the drivers were attached. I'll have to take a closer look and see what I can do here. They're not off by much, I think the article I read claimed around 2-3 hundredths of an inch? It was just enough that my carefully-gauged turnouts would cause the loco to go up-and-over or the drivers would bind while trying to push through the guard rails. I didn't mind making the physical modifications on my test track, but I would prefer to have the final layout all gauged correctly.


----------



## Andrey

*Comparison of turnouts (HO, Kadee truck).*

Turnout with high guard rails:









Turnout with standard guard rails:


----------



## gregc

shouldn't a standard wheel flange be easily trapped by a guard rail of the same height as the main rail?


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> shouldn't a standard wheel flange be easily trapped by a guard rail of the same height as the main rail?


No. Even high guard rails don't trap steam locomotives drivers, if the gap betveen rail and guard rail is the same as manufacturer did.


----------



## gregc

Andrey said:


> No. Even high guard rails don't trap steam locomotives drivers, if the gap betveen rail and guard rail is the same as manufacturer did.


what do you mean, "same as manufacturer did"?

i don't seem to have the problems you do. and As I said earlier, I've had problems caused by the rails or guard rail being out of gage. I use an NMRA gage.


----------



## mesenteria

gregc said:


> shouldn't a standard wheel flange be easily trapped by a guard rail of the same height as the main rail?


Yes. RP-25 flanges are about four times as high from the tire bearing surface as the flanges are on the prototype, and proto guards are at about the same height as the stock rails, as they are on every commercial and hand-laid turnout I have seen. 

I could be wrong, but even in his photos Andrey’s guards look to be level. They’re shadowed, and seem thin, which may account for the illusion...if there is one. But in N. America the guards are the same rail stock as the closure rails.


----------



## traction fan

*What scale?*



Andrey said:


> Hello. The problem is that American models are equipped with wheels with much smaller flanges, than European models. And flanges of American equipment have very small contact with guard rail. So flange can easily jump over the guard rail, especially if it is steam locomotive with large drivers like Niagara, especially at high speed.
> But it is much more difficult to jump over high guard rails. That's why they solve the problem.
> 
> Honestly, I don't like modifying turnouts, this is time consuming process. But I like American 4-8-4s, and I like to run them at high speeds. But without this modifications they will not be able to operate on my 19'' curved turnouts without derailments.


 Amndrey;

As long as your high guard rails work, and that keeps you happy, keep on using them. If you're having fun with what you have, that's all that really matters.  
You said you were running a 4-8-4 Niagara on 19" radius curves. Is that an HO-scale 4-8-4 and track, or N-scale?

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Andrey

traction fan said:


> You said you were running a 4-8-4 Niagara on 19" radius curves. Is that an HO-scale 4-8-4 and track, or N-scale?
> Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


Hello! That is HO Niagara from BLi. She can run on 19'' curved turnouts at high speed, if they are equipped with high guard rails. Also, on first post of this thread you can see BLi Greenbrier operating on 19'' curved turnouts, that is also HO scale.

This is the first advantage of high guard rails: they allow you to run large locomotives on small turnouts at high speed. This is important, if for some reason you need to save space.


----------



## Andrey

mesenteria said:


> I could be wrong, but even in his photos Andrey’s guards look to be level. They’re shadowed, and seem thin, which may account for the illusion...if there is one. But in N. America the guards are the same rail stock as the closure rails.


Hello. That is illusion. I saw the same turnouts with my own eyes, and guard rails were higher, than the top of the rails. On Sunday I will try to do photo myself.


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> what do you mean, "same as manufacturer did"?
> i don't seem to have the problems you do. and As I said earlier, I've had problems caused by the rails or guard rail being out of gage. I use an NMRA gage.


Hello. I mean, that I didn't change the width of flangeways. I simply glued a piece of plastic card on the top of guard rails, but the width of flangeways remained unchanged.

High guard rails work different from NMRA gauged guards. Since flangeways are wide, the opposite wheel can go incorrectly on the frog. But high guard rail have so strong contact with the backside of the wheel, that it forces the wheelset to return back to the correct route on the frog.

On pictures below you can see, that it is very simple for wheel to slide from standard guard rail towards the frog, because it have weak contact with the backside of the wheel









But it is impossible to slide from high guard rail, because it have very strong contact with the backside of the wheel, and if opposite wheel go to incorrect route on the frog, high guard rail can force wheelset to return back to the correct route









Since flangeways are wide, this eliminates need for NMRA gauge. Low quality equipment will easily go through wide flangeways. If some wheels go to incorrect route on the frog, high guard rail will force them to return back to the correct route.


----------



## gregc

Andrey said:


> Since flangeways are wide, this eliminates need for NMRA gauge.


i don't understand why wider flanges eliminates the need for using an NMRA gage.

as I've said, when i've had problems with turnout frog, the problem is often corrected by re-gaging both the main rail and guard rail

it is very important that the guard rail be in gage, not just the flange gap, so that the guard rail forces the wheel a proper distance from the frog.



Andrey said:


> Low quality equipment will easily go through wide flangeways.


low quality equipment?

not that I have exceptional quality equipment, but it sounds like those of us who have average quality equipment that meets with NMRA specification shouldn't have the problem you're having and have no need to make modifications to our turnouts.

i believe someone already suggested that if a particular piece of quipment has a problem and others do not, the problem is with that piece of equipment.

have you considered replacing the wheels on your trucks with higher quality wheels? I use Intermountain metal wheels.


----------



## mesenteria

Andrey said:


> Hello. That is illusion. I saw the same turnouts with my own eyes, and guard rails were higher, than the top of the rails. On Sunday I will try to do photo myself.


I believe you, Andrey. However, using simple engineering and logic, the higher guards are unnecessary in my view. The tire flanges protrude down well past the heights of level guards, even on our scale tracks. Especially on our scale models with RP-25 flanges that are grossly oversized. As the Greg is attempting to convince you, it is the gap width between guard and frog point and between the other side guard and it’s stock rail that keep thing moving through a frog, no matter what speed. And that only works if all axles are in gauge, all wheels are in trail, and the axles holding coupled drivers have side play.


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> i don't understand why wider flanges eliminates the need for using an NMRA gage.


Hello. I said wide flangeways, not wide flanges. Flangeway is a distance between rail and guard rail. If gauge of wheelset is too narrow, it still can go through wide flangeway.


gregc said:


> low quality equipment?
> not that I have exceptional quality equipment, but it sounds like those of us who have average quality equipment


I didn't tell about average quality equipment, I told, that even awfully low quality equipment can operate on turnout with high guards.

Imagine, that wheelsets of the truck on photo below are awfully low quality, awfully out of gauge.









In this case the wheel on the frog will derail. But high guard rail will hold opposite wheel so strongly, that derailed wheel on the frog will return back to the rails.

This means, that you may not care about what happens on the frog. Even if wheel derail on the frog, high guard rail will force it to return back to the rails. This allows you to run out of gauge equipment on out of gauge turnouts.


----------



## Andrey

mesenteria said:


> I believe you, Andrey. However, using simple engineering and logic, the higher guards are unnecessary in my view. The tire flanges protrude down well past the heights of level guards, even on our scale tracks. Especially on our scale models with RP-25 flanges that are grossly oversized. As the Greg is attempting to convince you, it is the gap width between guard and frog point and between the other side guard and it’s stock rail that keep thing moving through a frog, no matter what speed. And that only works if all axles are in gauge, all wheels are in trail, and the axles holding coupled drivers have side play.


Hello. Thank you for information, I thought, that RP-25 wheels are true to scale. But on photo below you can see the comparison between Kadee RP-25 and NEM 311 wheels (NEN 311 is European standard).









NEM 311 wheel flanges are large enough to completely eliminate derailments, but RP-25 are not, so we have to do something with our turnouts to get rid of derailments.

Also, on my experience, speed is important, because the higher the speed, the easier it is for RP-25 flange to slide from standard guard rail towards the frog.


----------



## gregc

Andrey said:


> Hello. I said wide flangeways, not wide flanges.


that's what i understood you to mean

if the rails are in gage and the "flangeway" is too wide, then the wheels is not pulled away from the frog and it may catch.


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> that's what i understood you to mean
> if the rails are in gage and the "flangeway" is too wide, then the wheels is not pulled away from the frog and it may catch.


Yes. The wheel on the frog can catch and derail. But that is not important. High guard rail have so strong contact with the backside of opposite wheel, that it will force derailed wheel on the frog to return back to the rails.


----------



## gregc

Andrey said:


> Yforce derailed wheel on the frog to return back to the rails.


but you said



Andrey said:


> Since flangeways are wide, this eliminates need for NMRA gauge.


it's important that the flangway gap be the correct width per the NMRA gage. This and properly gaged wheels should not hit the frog point, and move past the frog smoothly.

it sounds like you're overlooking the conventional cause of your problem by using higher guard rails so that when the wheel hits the frog point, the guardrail still prevents the wheels from derailing.


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> it sounds like you're overlooking the conventional cause of your problem by using higher guard rails so that when the wheel hits the frog point, the guardrail still prevents the wheels from derailing.


Yes, that's correct. This eliminates need for precisely adjust all your locomotives and rolling stock to NMRA standards.


----------



## gregc

Andrey said:


> Yes, that's correct. This eliminates need for precisely adjust all your locomotives and rolling stock to NMRA standards.


does it surprise you that many of us would prefer to avoid such problems by simply making sure our wheelsets and turnouts meet NMRA specs rather than modify our turnouts with higher guard rails as you suggest?


----------



## Andrey

gregc said:


> does it surprise you that many of us would prefer to avoid such problems by simply making sure our wheelsets and turnouts meet NMRA specs rather than modify our turnouts with higher guard rails as you suggest?


No, I understand you. You have a lot of turnouts, locomotives and rolling stock already adjusted to NMRA standards. There is no reason for you to switch to high guard rails method.

Method with high guard rails is good for beginners and lazy modellers (like me), who doesn't want to do a lot of routine job to precisely adjust every locomotive and every unit of rolling stock to meet NMRA specs. Once they install high guard rails, they can simply pull new locomotive or car out of the box, put it on the rails and press full throttle.


----------



## Andrey

*Real turnouts with high guard rails*


----------

