Note that the 4 cars are blurry suggesting speed, and that they are not too far apart, suggesting that the switching mechanism is quick.
Also they are not sliding suggesting that they have magnets.
Now there is not much space inside an F1 car, so how big do you think the chips are, and where are they going to be positioned? That picture gives out much more information than you at first think. Look for the clues.
Inte, thanks so much for the pic - my catalogue hasn't arrived yet.
A neat bit of enlarging, Nuro.
The blade tip looks awfully odd - possibly the whole thing is a publicity mock-up, purely to pop in the catalogue.
A shame we can't Photo Shop out the Renault to see the partner switch underneath it!
Normally I would assume that both switches are the same, and that both were powered by solenoids, both left and right, as per model trains.
Unfortunately it's not safe to assume anything.
(and one hopes that Mop isn't seriously suggesting that the picture is actually a live action shot!)
Perhaps a more likely alternative is that the switch blade is spring loaded to the main route and just a single solenoid flips it, momentarily, for a lane change, permitting the spring to flip the blade back again. That would seem simpler, faster and more reliable.
- Tropi, I'm afraid Moped's right : the picture shows a single LC, so there's only one "tip" (BTW, what's the correct term from the railways, it's "needle" in italian) and one solenoid - at the other end the lanes just merge
- That's still assuming that we're seeing the real LC - like I said, I thought it would be a double IXI LC
- I wonder where the sensor (the track component that "sees" the car and triggers the actuator) is - logically, it should be on the LC track piece, but then it's mighty close to the tip
- Would the tip surface be metal, so that it's energised by whichever rail it touches at the point - thereby eliminating dead spaces ?
- Someone (who may wish to remain un-named) mentioned the idea that the passing of the guide itself might reset the tip to its original position - assisting in LC response time. Looking at the picture : one would imagine that the tip pivots at its base - but if instead it pivots in the middle, you achieve just that !!
(these months until it's released are going to be long....)
The one person who is certain to be right here is Nuro when he says, QUOTE I wouldn't trust anything you see.
1. If you follow the unseen continuing slot line under the Renault, the lanes will converge MUCH earlier than the previous divergence. ie, the track section would be very assymetric. If you look carefully, this would produce a very bad kink in the car's trajectory. Not a prediction, but that would seem EXTREMELY unlikely.
I have no doubt that this 'photo' bears only a passing resemblance to the real thing and that there is nothing underneath the Renault at all. The picture is undoubtedly a composite and I think someone slipped up with the symmetry!
2. Based on the picture, the prediction of a single LC in the starter set makes no sense whatever! There would HAVE to be two. I see two basic alternatives - if there is only this one design/style of LC section, then in order to change from inside to outside lane, a figure eight circuit would be essential. That prerequisite is so ridiculous that I discount it completely. Therefore the other LC must be a mirror image of the one we can see - ie travelling in the same direction as shown, it would switch from the inside lane to the outside.
3. Although nothing really surprises me, the suggested constraint that cars would be compelled to travel CCW (anti-clockwise) is so crazy that I cannot possibly accept it. In any case, as has been pointed out, it's perfectly possible to insert contra-curves in a circuit. So a no-choice direction of circuit rotation is a complete nonsense anyway.
4. Again, though nothing surprises me and the converging slots under the Renault MIGHT indeed be 100% passive, this would be so silly as to be unacceptable. If this were so, then indeed the cars could only traverse this track piece in one direction. I cannot believe that the overall design concept would be so incredibly short-sighted and limiting. Whether it is actually so or not, both switches/points SHOULD be actively controllable, which would enable one matched pair of them to permit circuit rotation in either direction. The only alternative would be a similar matched pair, but with the active and passive sections swapped around. This semi-duplication of track parts would be madness, though madness is not impossible.
The physical switching apparatus, in rail/train terms appears to be a combined blade and 'frog'. its leading point or tip does look rather peculiarly unnatural in Nuro's zoom shot and I doubt that the real thing will look quite like that.
This is a fascinating topic for discussion and conjecture - well done Inte for making the pic available!
A forum community dedicated to slot car owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, racing, displays, models, track layouts, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!