Conductor rail support orientation

[russe]

Calling all you observant drivers, I have a strange request.

On timbers that are not tangential to the track, e.g. on diamonds and slips etc, is it the norm for the conductor rail support bases to be oriented 'square' to the rail, as on the left, or oriented to align with the timber axis, as on the right:



Russ

[Deleted]

I have to admit to never noticing the way the supports are mounted. I am doing nights so I'll take a gander tonight and get back to you tomorrow.

[q8]

IIRC It makes no difference. We used to see the mounts in all sorts of angles, cockeyed among them. As long as the rail level is maintained then it's OK.

[russe]

Thanks in advance Jim, and to Q8. I should add that the information I am seeking is in respect of wooden sleepers - the concrete ones are pre-holed at their casting stage, and all will have their holes aligned 'square' to the sleeper axes.

I suspect Q8 is correct about a mixture of angles on wooden timbers, but it would be nice to know whether LT or its predecessors had a default standard. Any distinction will I think be evident only on acute diamonds and slips.

Zillions of karma points will be awarded for PE* of course!

Russ

*modellers' jargon for photographic evidence

[Deleted]

russe said:

Zillions of karma points will be awarded for PE* of course!

Russ

*modellers' jargon for photographic evidence

I'll take my camera with me, it will be dark though, and get some PE for you, I could do with zillions of Karma points

[q8]

Yes and don't forget that even with concrete sleepers the ceramic part of the support with the meatl prongs is rotatable.

[Deleted]

russe said:

Russ

I can confirm all the pot bases I saw last night were alligned with the sleepers as in the right hand pic.

Russ, you have a PM.