Roy et al -- The neat thing about bridges is that they are scale-less. The reason is that the depth of the span for a given loading is proportional to the length of the span. So, for example, an 87-foot HO bridge can be used as a 64-foot S scale bridge without sacrificing any realism. Your only headache would be the width of the deck, to accommodate the required number of tracks.
This also works the other way -- O scale bridges can be used for S, for the same reason. I have looked at the Atlas O scale double-track truss bridge for possible use across a 4' door opening. It would be just right for me -- It will accommodate three S scale tracks and will allow enough vertical clearance for catenary. I use several Central Valley HO single- and double-track girder bridges, widened slightly for S scale 13' track clearance. I also have a Lionel O gauge truss bridge with a scratchbuilt deck (replacing the Lionel sheet-metal deck). Dick Karnes BCE '62, Cornell University =========== roy inman wrote: > As others have pointed out, the size of bridges has varied widely through > the decades. Just wondering if these HO versions are so small as to look > undersized with S equipment. Anyone seen one of the beasts up close? The poll results are in....... To REPLY to the list, use REPLY ALL, to reply to the sender, use REPLY. I do NOT know if this works on all e-mail software, but it works on some of the most common ones. Change your membership, change your message settings, use our CALENDAR, view shared files or photos, view the list archives, GO TO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
