TheRailwire
General Discussion => N and Z Scales => Topic started by: Dave V on March 21, 2009, 10:30:00 AM
-
Since I haven't had much time for modeling lately, I've been using all of the staff meetings I've been sitting through to figure out where I want to go long-term in my modeling efforts. Maybe I've had too many of Steve's waffles, but it seems like I've been here before.
I even briefly considered selling ALL of it and doing modern-day NS on the Reading Harrisburg line.
But back to PRR. My druthers have been:
1. 1-2 track heavy mainline in 1956
2. Survived relatively intact through Conrail into 1980
3. Used a variety of equipment from Sharks and Geeps to M1s and H10s
4. Had passenger service (preferably both eras, but if just 1956, that's OK)
5. Some sort of engine terminal and yard but not overwhelming
6. Some heavy industry
7. Rural running
8. Bridges
9. Coal traffic
10. Some sort of reasonable operating scheme
11. Limited or no catenary (I have a GG1, but am not looking for a fleet of electric locos)
The only line I can come up with that matches all of these is the Buffalo line. I know, I know... It's been DONE before. What can Dave do that the others haven't already done (Ken McCrory, Steve Mallory, etc.)?? In reality, probably nothing. But proto-lancing isn't scratching my itch anymore. So I'm willing to accept that it's been done before, and I think it's probably such a popular route because it meets the above criteria so well.
The line from Harrisburg to Northumberland meets:
1. 1-2 track mainline in both eras with heavy traffic. I would consider open run-through staging as representing both Harrisburg and Norry.
2. Even today, the Buffalo line is a great line to model under NS, and would be fine for CR 1980.
3. I have shots of almost every class of loco on the Pennsy running on this line, so I can use all of my kitbashed steam.
4. One passenger train each way each day in 1956 is the perfect traffic level (versus the 50 some-odd passenger trains on the Middle Division). No Amtrak, but I can live with that (or bend history) for 1980.
5. I would add a diesel shop to the open staging yard to represent Harrisburg and Norry engine terminals. If I had a huge amount of room, I could do a turntable and roundhouse, but all would be approximations. Norry was pretty big and busy, after all.
6. Sunbury has some decent industry. In fact, there's a PP&L power plant just downriver that can receive loaded coal hoppers.
7. Areas like Clark's Ferry and Millersburg offer scenic running through rural hills.
8. Walthers double-track trusses would be great for the Susquehanna crossings between Sunbury and Norry.
9. Lots of coal and iron-ore traffic. Would love to finagle a loads in/empties out pairing between a coal mine (representing the Shamokin line) and the PP&L plant.
10. A reasonable sampling of the train traffic on this line could be captured for an operating session.
11. The Harrisburg end of run-through staging could have a few token catenary poles for the G to sit under, but otherwise we're in good shape here.
I also love the Sunbury depot scene. I'm wondering if I could use modulars to kitbash a version of it.
Not sure how to proceed. If I started work on the layout here in Nebraska I'd need to make the layout portable somehow. I thought about trying to make it from 3 hollow-core doors, as they lend themselves well for moving. I don't know yet.
Just a few rambling thoughts...
-
Let us know when you have a basement...
(http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Team+Surgeons+Cleveland+Clinic+Discuss+Near+PX3lhDBEfu-l.jpg)
The team is ready! Note that David K is even wearing pearls...!
Lee
-
there is plenty of operations on the Buffalo line. i'm all for it. now you get to sort it out ;)
-
Ah, yes, Lee... But there's the rub. I have a basement NOW. What if I get stationed back in Florida next?
Hmm... I guess then I'll need to use the garage and insulate it so it's not so blinkin' hot. As long as the layout is truly portable, then I would need to bring it in for the hurricanes so I can put the cars in the garage...
Now I have to get buy-in from the missus...
Hey, how much money do you think I could get for my layout right now? Not the trains, but the layout and structures?
-
Hey, how much money do you think I could get for my layout right now? Not the trains, but the layout and structures?
$1.00
-
Do you already have "Western New York and Pennsylvania" by Paul Pietrak?
http://www.comoshops.com/si/OP-8566.html
That is simply an excellent book on the line from Buffalo south, including schedules, equipment, yard layouts, etc. Covers a lot of the 1956 era.
I'd highly nominate Olean, NY as a great model idea. Two PRR lines merged there; the Oil City to Olean line, and the Harrisburg-Buffalo line. That didn't change until the Kinzua Dam was built in 1965. But until then the MAJORITY of the coal traffic to Buffalo from points south came on-line at Olean - up the Allegheny River.
AND, best of all, you get to cross the Erie Railroad main line on a four-track diamond. So you can have some variety and maybe get Chris333 to help out!
The stations and yards were relatively small. Also remember that this was the 'north end' of the Keating Summit operation so that the helpers were based here.
Check it out on Terraserver. The line southwest to Warren shows as an abandoned railroad grade. The PRR roundhouse remants are south west of the diamond. The PRR passenger station was downtown, not that big. Another 'cool thing' is that the PRR and Erie were on opposite sides of the valley from Olean to Hinsdale, running parallel.
http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=2&S=12&Z=17&X=889&Y=5828&W=1&qs=%7cOlean%7cNY%7c
Back in 1898 you had even more of a mess of railroads converging there. You need Pietrak's book to sort it all out:
http://www.historical.maptech.com/getImage.asp?fname=olen98sw.jpg&state=NY
I'm only 45 minutes away from there. The 'new' WNYP now controls it all, Olean yard on the Erie is the headquarters. That's west of the diamonds.
And if anybody has ever done this one, in any era, I've never heard of it.
I don't know about 1956, but I had one memorable day of train chasing out there in 1975, jumping back and forth across the valley between PC and EL trying to determine which line I was hearing air horns on!
-
Randgust,
Does that book cover the Harrisburg-Williamsport segment, or just the NY State part?
-
Hey, how much money do you think I could get for my layout right now? Not the trains, but the layout and structures?
$1.00
Hell I go as high as $25.00.... ;)
-
I bet Dave's celebrity status would net him upwards of $50...
If it had Code 55 rail, I'd go all the way to $60.
Lee
-
Randgust,
Does that book cover the Harrisburg-Williamsport segment, or just the NY State part?
Basically goes down as far south as Emporium, which was the furthest extent south of the 'original' WNYP prior to full absorbtion into the PRR about 1920.
While its got a lot of older history, it's primarily a PRR book steam and transition diesel, and the only book that covers this corner of the state. It doesn't cover the P&E (Warren-Emporium) though at all.
-
Dave,
I wouldn't sweat modeling something that has been done before. It may not be the first time the Buffalo Line has been modeled before but it's new to you. When I got back into model railroading 5+ years ago after a couple of decades of zero interest, I decided to model the Moffat line from Denver to the east portal of the Moffat Tunnel. It seemed like a natural thing since it's local to me and scenically speaking, pretty spectacular. Only after I had decided to model this did I learn that Mike Danneman (who I had never heard of at that time) was modeling the same thing, on a bigger scale, in N scale! No worries though. I'm still having fun and am happy with my choice.
If the fact that it's been done before is your biggest detraction, I wouldn't worry about it.
Erik
-
Hey Dave,
I kinda like the idea of the Harriburg line, only I would suggest doing it in Reading Years. (just think, Lee will be over your house all the time with his WM equipment. hahahaha)
That being said, the several times I pondered modeling the PRR (and yes, I have PDY 1-6,) I thought the lines to Buffalo were the most reasonably modelable without having to have a barn.
Its a stretch, but if you wanted to include some other variety, you could include the B&O (Buffalo, Rochester and Pittsburgh) as an interchange somewhere as well since they went through there. (Covered Wagons, SD-9's, and Pups were the rule)
I lived in Kane, PA for a stint and loved it out there (except there is no work... ) Reason why I wouldn't mind modeling the BR&P during the 50's in that area.
Dave, might I suggest listening to Model Rail Cast episode 54? Excellent show on developing a decision Matrix? I'm still trying to figure out how to use it (excel files don't like playing nice with MS Works Spreadsheet)
I will say however that using doors as "modules" makes moving alot easier. Would be interested to see how a layout built around that concept works out.
Of course, you could always pull a "Crazy Ivan" and decide to model something completely different than the norm, oh I dunno, maybe the Modesto and Empire Traction company in HO scale along 4 doors, that measure 18" x 80" each?
I've already relegated myself to the fact that I simply will not be happy with one prototype, so even if I have a basement one day, probably be a few different smaller railroads instead of one huge empire.
Afterall, Variety is the spice of life, no?
J.
-
Ever thing of doing the Northern Central line from Harrisburg to Baltimore. I know it wasn't all double track but that should not be any problem. Freights, lots of locals to York. Exchange with the WM and Reading, PRR passenger trains and early Amtrak before the line went out of service. Could also have you electric trackage at the Harrisburg/Baltimore end.
Bob
-
Dave, two things:
1. I think the Buffalo Line is a great idea. I know lots of people who can help with questions. Ask around on the CRHS forum and you'll soon know them too (make sure to ask Kris and Bruce in May too...)
2. You NEED to come out in October for the CRHS convention. I can't tell you why, but just trust me...
-
PRR/CR works best because I have so many locos and cabins for that... Besides, I love the Reading but not as much.
No danger of HO or traction for me!!!
Ed, you'll have to clear that with my wife; she's already sending me to the CRHS Rail-B-Q in May!
I've thought a LOT about the Harrisburg to Baltimore line. Two things make it less attractive:
1. Didn't survive intact to Conrail (1972 and Hurricane Agnes took care of the line from the PA state line to Cockysville).
2. Loco restrictions... My M1 would not have been seen on the Northern Central south of H'burg.
But otherwise, it's a great line!
-
Looking in the WNYP book - they have a published passenger schedule on the Buffalo line (1967) that shows two Buffalo-Washington trains per day - 574/575 "Southern Express / Northern Express", and 570/571 "Baltimore Day Express / Buffalo Day Express".
Buffalo to Washington on the Northern/Southern still had a 10/6 sleeper, but the diner only ran Harrisburg-Baltimore-Washington.
Book has shots of DOUBLEHEADED M1's at East Aurora; shot of M1 6800 at Keating Summit; 6835 at Buffalo on the "Washington & Philadelphia Express" (1952), 6491 on the "Dominon Express" at Buffalo, so you're safe on that one.
-
Druther for the layout:
1. HIGHLY portable
2. 10' x 10' or smaller
3. Code 55
4. Provision for continuous running
5. Visible staging, preferably run-through
6. Includes Sunbury and Kase tower
-
Dave, you definately should come out in October. All ill say is Ken McCorry. ;). Also, when you come out for the RailBQ, we can go run up some of the Buffalo line so you can get a look at the south end. Russ
-
Dave,
In 1980, the D&H ran a pair of trains, WR-7 and RW-6, down the Buffalo Line (which was actually called "Main Line-Rockville to Buffalo" at the time, though Buffalo Line sounds 100x better!). Those always had neat power.
Mark
-
Awesome!!! So who's gonna help me design a layout? ;D
-
D&H ran those trains into Potomac Yard in Alexandria, VA. Used to see the power all the time when I worked near there. Lots of newsprint cars in the consists.
-
Dave:
I scanned a couple pages from the Mar 1957 Official Guide. Hope there of some help:
(http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa149/rkbufkin/scan0001-6.jpg)
(http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa149/rkbufkin/scan0003-3.jpg)
Also the New York Central had trackage rights on portions of this line. Good excuse to run a couple NYC trains (I know - there the enemy of any good PRR fan).
Bob
-
Wow, Bob, thanks!
I may have to use my Kato Broadway Limited consist as an occasional detour over the Buffalo Line (major derailment blocking all 4 tracks west of Marysville?).
-
Wow, Bob, thanks!
I may have to use my Kato Broadway Limited consist as an occasional detour over the Buffalo Line (major derailment blocking all 4 tracks west of Marysville?).
i don't think the BL would have gone past Lock Haven , so i take it you are going to model the connection with the Bald Eagle Branch?
-
Steve,
Correct in that it went down the Bald Eagle branch. Much as I'd like to model Lock Haven and part of the BE, I think I'm sticking with H'burg to Norry and that's it. Maybe a branch to a mine representing the Shamokin line. Same branch could stand-in for the D&H in 1980.
-
Dave, do you have "Along the Main Line" (Alexander) in your collection?
And I've collected some color shots of the PRR Erie-Harrisburg (New York) train 580/581 as it ran through here. Two E-units, baggage, coach, and a sleeper were all that remained at the end (1965). My father referred to it as "The Rattler". I rode it myself once before it was discontinued, in second grade. I have two distinct memories - the smell of the coach, and the guys in the front of the coach passing around a bottle in a paper bag. As this was a school trip, my teacher was trying very hard to keep us on the other end. The conductor made a comment that "this is the most people on this train in a long time" (the 20 of us plus the other half a dozen).
Having Bennett Levin's PRR E units up here in 2001 was way cool. Even cooler was the ex-CZ dome car, absolutely the one and only time that a dome was ever used up here!
-
Nope, I'll have to add that book to my wish list!
-
Steve,
Correct in that it went down the Bald Eagle branch. Much as I'd like to model Lock Haven and part of the BE, I think I'm sticking with H'burg to Norry and that's it. Maybe a branch to a mine representing the Shamokin line. Same branch could stand-in for the D&H in 1980.
what type of operations do you want?
-
I don't know. I guess lots of run-through with some switching. Really, that's about as specific as I can be.
I am THE most clueless model railroader that has ever been when it comes to operations.
I have Koester's books on realistic model railroad design and on operations, but still... Imagine the word "DUH" spliced with a jackass bray. That's me.
-
I have Koester's books on realistic model railroad design and on operations
right there is your problem. you need to find some guys locally who are into operations to really get a sense of how it all comes together
also, read these - some of it will be refresher from Sir Tony...
http://www.opsig.org/primer/
http://www.gatewaynmra.org/operate.htm
-
Dave,
As you find out more about the operations on your chosen line, you'll find designing the layout will be a lot easier. Especially arranging your staging for the run throughs.
The publications about MRR operating are useful in setting up your fundamentals, such as sequential train sheets, car cards and waybills and all that, but your prototype will tell you more about what connections to make, what locals to run, your time table (basically the details of the sequential sheet).
On mine, even the sequence goes out the window sometime. It comes down to what's in the yard that needs to move, and which way it's going. Sometimes we end up with west bounds with multiple sections (a real problem when they all arrive at staging and only one track is open...) and sometimes we send out half a train just to clear a track. It's really pretty organic.
It's fun when you get to that point, because it allows the extras to just happen, but you can still end up with a jam when one of the time freights arrives before the yard really wants it to... but then that's why it's a time freight!
My suggestion would be to use your little staging yard and your door and mess around with some scenarios. It will quickly tell you if you if you're missing something critical, like a wye track to access the yard from either direction, or if a crossover here or there will help traffic flow around you while you're switching. There's no better teacher than hands on experience.
Lee
-
As you find out more about the operations on your chosen line, you'll find designing the layout will be a lot easier.
this is usually the hardest part, because once you know how a certain section was laid out and operated, it's very difficult to modify it. wanting to keep prototype fidelity in a limited space is difficult at best. making a comprise you'll have to live with makes it harder. i'm not suggesting that our trackplans need to follow the prototype exactly, but it gets hard to rationalize trains heading in the wrong direction because it was easier to lay out.
if you compromise too much, you really haven't succeeded in modeling the prototype, you've got trains running on an imaged world.
-steve
-
Agreed. However, understanding traffic flow can help you decide which compromises you can live with. F'rinstance, I can get away with moving Maryland Junction and eliminating the yards there because there was far less switching on the through trains there. On my truncated model, I can do all of that at Hagerstown, then use MY to decide whether it goes on to Connellsville or Elkins. It would be nice to be able to model at least some of Knobmount, since that's where most of the coal marshalling took place, but I can do that at Bayard and Elkins, since there's not nearly as much emphasis on coal.
In a way, life follows art, as CSX downgraded and closed Ridgely and Knobmount almost immediately, yet Hagerstown still soldiers on, although in a lesser role.
The main thing I need to modify is my staging. That's where understanding the traffic flow becomes essential. I designed it originally for through running, where a train leaves the west end of the layout and returns at the east end. This was a terrible mistake, with the exception of coal movements (empties always running west, loads east..). I need to change it to more balloon staging, so the Reading trains going east disappear, then reappear as westbounds over the same route. Likewise the NW and PLE bound trains on the west end. To really make it more authentic, I should include similar balloon tracks that differentiate Baltimore trains, Hanover Sub and York trains, and Rutherford trains via Lurgan.
If it weren't for my itch to switch locals and my paper mill, I would model Hagerstown Yard, and the main line from Cherry Run to North Junction, and everything else would be in staging.
Lee
-
Well, here's the 1953 topo of Northumberland (www.historical.maptech.com).
The reason I love old USGS maps is they are generally detailed enough to show track layouts. These sure do.
http://www.historical.maptech.com/getImage.asp?fname=snbr53ne.jpg&state=PA
I didn't know that Lackawanna came right into there. Huh.
And I'm looking at that track on the south side of the river going 'what the heck was that???" for that wierd junction which I think was KASE, right? Reading obviously came in right in the center of town.
-
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=40.88646~-76.796322&style=h&lvl=14&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=22747018&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&where1=sunbury%20pennsylvania&encType=1
It's fun to do the before and after... That's a cool area.
Lee
-
Randy,
That junction is indeed where Kase tower was.
I think this is why I keep ending up in paralysis... Absent a large basement with no plans to move, I keep having to consider major compromises. And those compromises multiply until I end up throwing up my hands and playing with my roundy-round.
One strategy I've considered is to start amassing structures for the future layout, as there are a good many structures to kitbash or scratchbuild.
However, I haven't given up completely. I'm still hopeful that I can come up with some portable plan that doesn't compromise too much.
-
One of the 'druthers and givens' you have to work through is whether you really want a condensed version of Norry yard (roundhouse, turntable, and all) or whether that is 'off layout'. If you do, then that yard starts to have everything else designed around it.
I faced a similar problem with Winslow. I really wanted it. Putting in a series of relatively long, narrow scenes led to a 'split table' approach where a duckunder to the center let me isolate on a series of back-to-back scenes with completely different scenery. My entire layout is only 5'6" x 8'.
The big compromise I made early on was to push all the staging and reverse loops down a level. I didn't want the layout looking like a yard full of trains in the Arizona desert. Winslow was not to function as a staging yard, it was a classification yard, and the major function was to drop off and pick up blocks between trains, to other destinations, and for locals.
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/atsfplan.htm
But the yard, Flagstaff, Darling, etc. all pretty much correspond to USGS.
-
Randy, I think that's the first time I've seen your full track plan... what a great, versatile layout! I like the massive staging, and how functional it is, and the transition line that leads up to it. Brilliantly played!
Lee
-
Randy, I think that's the first time I've seen your full track plan... what a great, versatile layout! I like the massive staging, and how functional it is, and the transition line that leads up to it. Brilliantly played!
the staging is clever, but what happens if a train derails in the staging? how are you going to get in there? with the top and right side against walls, 2 operators are required to run 1 train since the backdrop will block the view of the inner pit area unless the operator ducks under to follow the train. it also seems the trains are in hidden staging much longer than they are visible.
-
If the backdrop is low, say 12" above the table, it's not a big deal. Perhaps a wide angle shot of the layout would help dispel that.
Also, when modeling a busy main line, the keys to success are to have enough staging to support the volume of traffic you want (plus a little more!) and the ability to enter/exit the visible part of the layout from either direction. The staging is there to support the "stage". Since the middle Y level rises up between staging and modeled, there's probably a good 8" or so vertical clearance above the staging yard, which should be plenty for giant 0-5-0 switching moves.
How long have you been running that layout, Randy? Are the issues Steve raises a problem for you? What are your "work arounds"?
Lee
-
Since the middle Y level rises up between staging and modeled, there's probably a good 8" or so vertical clearance above the staging yard, which should be plenty for giant 0-5-0 switching moves.
there are 2 tracks on a grade in front of the staging per this picture:
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/Chila_yard_1983.jpg
how do you get to that very back track, the one that drops from the visible to hidden "middle" level?
-
OK, one thing at a time....
First, the layout has been running, with that staging yard, since 1983. Still going...
In the room where I originally had it in 1983, I had no access to the back (behind Flagstaff). When I moved the first time, I fixed that, ended up with about 15". Enough to get in. When I moved again, it ended up tight into the wall one more time. Now what? (oh yeah, the entire layout was designed modular, six sections)
As I was building the wall, I made a built-in bookcase in the wall, with removable panels in the back to get to the layout. I've never had to use them, but if I REALLY have a problem, I can go through the wall! They are BEHIND the backdrop.
Vertical distance between levels is around 5". On the 'problem track' under Flagstaff (the single line) I can reach it from in front across the first four feet (between levels) and all the buildings come off across the top on the second four feet. More on that later, I'll show how that works.
On the Phoenix reverse loop, all the scenery lifts off so that about 3/4 of the loop is wide open. Only a small part under the Winslow yard is really tight, and I can get under that to clean it from the bottom.
Remember the entire staging yard is ONE SIDE IN and ONE SIDE OUT. None of the exit yard switches have switch machines, the points just push with the direction of travel. The tracks are equipped with diodes so there's only one way out, no reversing by accident. All the entrance switches are fully accessible from the side and 5" overhead clearance. The entire edge of the layout, all the way around, is open, with hinged masonite panels across. The RH side, LH side, and 'front' across the Winslow yard are completely open with drop-down panels. All the inside edges, including the control panels, drop down as well.
I have about one or two really catastrophic derailments in that whole system a year where I have to start pulling out trains, and cars, one at a time to get at it. I will say that I ran that yard for almost two years before I got brave enough to cover it, and I STILL designed all of Flagstaff to unscrew and come off as another 'worst case scenario' which has never been used.
The way the layout typically works is that with two operators, the dispatcher (me) handles all moves in and out of the yard, sets up and reverses the trains if necessary, and hands them off to the other operator at Williams Jct. The workbench (low) doubles as the dispatcher desk.
Every switch has indicator lights on position. Switches are protected by signals on all visible track so you have to get a green signal to confirm the route through Williams Jct. is properly lined in your direction of travel. The entire storage yard is ONE CONTROL BLOCK so you can't accidentally select two blocks against each other. Reversing gaps are marked on panels with red polarity lights. Suffice to say, complete and total overkill on indicators and control.
The reverse loops have indicator lights that track a locomotive around so you can see exactly how far a train is so you know when it is safe to flop the main line polarity for the cab.
If you look at the plan, you'll see that the entire lower level is a loop by itself. To clean track, I take one of the super heavy, overpowered trains (like 4 RSD15's) and run it in loops through storage, round and round. You'd be amazed how four spinning units can polish up the rails. I have to do that about annually.
The only thing I designed that did not work in practice was that wye, coming uphill, against the flow of traffic. That confused everybody. Taking that out kept the traffic flow up and down consistent. It also allowed me to add another storage track.
I started tinkering with hidden storage about 1970. I had a five-track staging yard under my 3x6 foot layout. I learned a lot of things to do, and not to do. I don't recommend this for everybody, but in my case, with the space I had and the operating plan I wanted, the biggest staging yard I could design, with the ability to feed trains in two directions (so every stored train could run eastbound and westbound on the schedule) gave me the complexity and train density I wanted.
Oh, and one more 'design feature' is that the backdrops are set at about 1" under my eyeball level, so that I can 'just see over' the backdrops to check a train on the inside. When inside, the only super-critical spot is checking the signals headed downhill to Williams from Winslow, and I have a spot mirror in the room corner when I can see the signal bridge indications from the inside.
Layout height is 48" underneath clear.
-
Dave,
I wouldn't sweat modeling something that has been done before. It may not be the first time the Buffalo Line has been modeled before but it's new to you. When I got back into model railroading 5+ years ago after a couple of decades of zero interest, I decided to model the Moffat line from Denver to the east portal of the Moffat Tunnel. It seemed like a natural thing since it's local to me and scenically speaking, pretty spectacular. Only after I had decided to model this did I learn that Mike Danneman (who I had never heard of at that time) was modeling the same thing, on a bigger scale, in N scale! No worries though. I'm still having fun and am happy with my choice.
If the fact that it's been done before is your biggest detraction, I wouldn't worry about it.
Erik
Dave,
Getting on this thread relatively late.
Considering how many Cajon Pass layouts (or attempts at Horseshoe Curve, or Ridgway . . .) I've seen I'd say I wouldn't worry about duplicating something that has been done. That's a necessary "risk" of prototype modeling - some scenes or stretches of line just seem to fire the imagination of more modelers than another.
It's neat to look at Ted York's HO scale Cajon, and then look at some of the other Cajon layouts I've visited - they all model the same line, perhaps the same era, but the emphasis each modeler places on scenery, ops, equipment, or whatever makes the layouts unique.
Marty
-
Randy,
That junction is indeed where Kase tower was.
I think this is why I keep ending up in paralysis... Absent a large basement with no plans to move, I keep having to consider major compromises. And those compromises multiply until I end up throwing up my hands and playing with my roundy-round.
One strategy I've considered is to start amassing structures for the future layout, as there are a good many structures to kitbash or scratchbuild.
However, I haven't given up completely. I'm still hopeful that I can come up with some portable plan that doesn't compromise too much.
Since I spent a number of years on active duty I know fully well where you're coming from.
I think there's a point of diminishing return for adding a yard to a layout . . . if the layout is a certain size (meaning there's enough "destinations" to require classifying cars in the yard) then I think a yard is a great use of space - lots of play value for the square footage. But there's a point where the yard can be nothing more (visually) than a "bunch of tracks" -
So, if you can figure out a way to run out of staging (and staging can be scenicked to look like a visible yard, through a couple of scenes, towns, or whatever, and then back into staging I think you'll find there would be an option to add or subtract from the "presented layout" (the layout that someone will see and you'll build, based on the space you have available in a specific site) - move to a place that doesn't have room for a 10 x 12? (or whatever) - only put out the one town.
An example is Steve Amitrano (who's Sn3 layout appeared in GMR an issue or two ago). Steve designed his layout so the entire thing could be set up OR he could set up only one of the two "sides" of the thing. In various duty stations he's done one or the other. I think he even left one half of the railroad stateside when he did a tour in Okinawa as he knew there wouldn't be room for both halves. He lost the continuous run option, but was able to run trains and work on that section of the railroad while overseas.
I have to confess, while I think the M1s are neat engines are you able to run the "Is" on this line? I've always kind of liked those Hippos.
Marty
-
Marty,
Your comments about yards emphasizes what I find so appealing about Randy's design. It's very simple, yet the combination of staging and the yard at Winslow provide a diverse set of operating opportunities. Definitely a lot of play value for the square footage consumed.
It's making me begin to re-think my yard plan (yes, even after we spent two weeks fiddling with it here!) to see how it can be minimized without sacrificing too much of its function... The goal here would be to open up some main line running, which is currently lacking.
The thing that would be most helpful to Dave, though, would be a more thorough discussion of how Randy "modularized" the multi-deck layout, so he can see how practical it would be to apply to his current transient housing situation.
Lee
-
The big compromise I made early on was to push all the staging and reverse loops down a level. I didn't want the layout looking like a yard full of trains in the Arizona desert. Winslow was not to function as a staging yard, it was a classification yard, and the major function was to drop off and pick up blocks between trains, to other destinations, and for locals.
http://gustafson.home.westpa.net/atsfplan.htm
Randy was kind enough to share his track plan with me a few years back. I think it is a brilliant design that really ought to be published!
-
Gee, thanks, and I appreciate that more from you than you know.
I guess the big thing to me is that it 'has survived' this long, been moved three times, and has lived to meet the original rather lofty goals of what I wanted to achieve. Operationally, I'm satisfied.
I mean, this was an impossible goal - modeling the Santa Fe main line in the space I had. In 1972, the Employee timetable I have showed 60, that's right SIXTY scheduled (not counting extras) in and out of Winslow in a 24 hour period. Only a handful of trains originated and terminated there, mostly to Phoenix (the "787" trains). The ETT shows arrival times and departure times for each train, not a running time over the railroad, but a published chart that shows the Winslow yard schedule. I've never seen anything else like it in an ETT. So by having a big staging yard and the loop idea with eastbounds and westbounds, I can get up to like 16 scheduled moves, and by that time most layout operators have had about all the fun they can stand. Ya get the point. The MOST fun I have with the layout is giving a visiting operator the Flagstaff local, which is just a bear to switch to begin with, and about the time he settles in, to start to pepper Flag with through freights running on the open main (bidirectional CTC). I've kept some real railroaders on their toes.
If I ever DO get more space, there is a plan to 'graft on 'behind Flagstaff' and take that main line out of the backdrop reconnecting Winslow and Williams. It comes over another three feet, giving me eight lineal feet to develop the 'missing scene' in my layout - Canyon Diablo, with that massive bridge over the gorge. Right where it belongs operationally. So still, even this many years later, I'm not looking to really tear it down - just keep adding on if I'd get the space and put in more main line. But I'd still leave that original track in there, just disconnect it.
As far as the modules. That came about because my former 3x6 layout - finished, sceniced, even more so than mine is today - couldn't fit down the stairs, or through the door, or anyplace else. Had to be scrapped. As I knew I'd be moving, probably more than once, I resigned myself to never having that to happen except by choice.
So each 'table' no more than four feet long. The Winslow yard table is 27" wide, as wide as I could fit through my doors upright. I can manuver a module that size up and down stairs and through halls. You can see that in the carpentry shots. There are basically four tables and two connectors.
Each table is fully self-supporting. All the roadbed was cut and lap-jointed at the tables. Every track is cut and has joiners in. Wing bolts hold and align the tables. Scenery is jointed through the plaster, and only the finish turf is across the gaps. The backdrops are also jointed, which I hate because they regularly crack and expand with the seasons.
But the BIG investment was electrical. I put EVERY inter-table wire through 12-pin Moulex connectors so that EVERYTHING could be yanked apart without cutting a wire. That decision really paid off. It's still really a pain to have to solder all the pins and joints up to put in circuits, but I still do it. There's a very real chance I may change rooms in the house and get more space here.
The end result of that is a truly 'finished' looking layout that I've been able to work on a long, long time, while I had kids, multiple jobs, houses, and a 'life'. I don't think anybody can count on staying anyplace that long to really finish a layout to the degree we all imagine we can unless you plan like this.
Now, on 'cheats, not fair' I'll admit that I have a precise 10" overhead radial saw that was my Dad's, and I've been woodworking my entire life and also have made furniture - a family trait. So the rather insane and complex nature of my benchwork is only possible because I have the tools to pull it off. It's kinda like owning a 25' cabin cruiser and not admitting to owning a truck to pull it.
-
Dave, do you have the PRR Triumph book featuring the Buffalo line? It has a wealth of info that may help your planning efforts.
Frank
-
Dave, do you have the PRR Triumph book featuring the Buffalo line? It has a wealth of info that may help your planning efforts.
Frank
No, but my book wish list is growing by the day!
Steve has me also considering Lock Haven to Renovo... But if I can I'm going to tour the Buffalo Line when I'm on PA in May. That will help me find my inspiration.
Either way I think I'm done with the Middle Division. I love it, but day-um, I don't have a chance to do it justice.
-
Well, Dave, here's another one of my cheats. Make that two. Or three.
When you're trying to build prototype operational density, what counts is basic visual difference. Think about that. Do you really NEED six different coal trains in a 24-hour period, three empties and three loads? No, if you can set it up so that can just do TWO, and those two can come out of staging in either direction, then two trains (an empty and a load) can 'cover' the schedule for all six.
Passenger trains on the PRR are similarly...uh.. predictable. You've always got head-end, coaches. Then the variable diner, that tended to dissapear at Harrisburg anyway. So then behind that, the Pullmans on the Buffalo trains and the Erie trains. See what I'm getting at? Visually, you'd be hard pressed to differentiate except for locomotive number to cover what was probably....six passenger trains by Northumberland? Eight? Only ONE trainset can cover that.
Concentrate on the number of trains that are visually different, try to do your staging so that they can run both north and south, have a train reappear as a different scheduled move more than once if you're building a sequential schedule.
When you're blocking in and out of your yard, one 'consist' blocks off the front end and the other blocks off the rear end representing two different trains, as in 35 cars you're not going to work the ENTIRE train, are you? So out of the same equipment set, say one scheduled train has cars to work out of the first ten, a 'different train' has to work the last ten cars, different functions and destinations.
I ended up with the following:
2 merchandise trains; a 'hot train' with reefers,pigs, etc and a 'dog train' with grain cars, gons, everything else. 3 units each; 35 cars; each train each way switches blocks at Winslow
1 passenger train; 9 cars; switches out a private car.
1 unit coal train; 35 cars; run through but does fuel stop
1 piggyback train' 18 cars; one setout/pickup at Winslow + fuel stop
2 short divisional freights; 10 cars; originate and terminate
1 work train 6 cars; set out and pick up cars
8 trains total, each can run east and west out of staging; makes 15-16 moves. Add to that two locals out of Winslow east and west.
Another tip: plan on night operations of a tower. That's the easiest way for more fun with the same trains and it feels completely different.
So in your case, you've got coal trains, passenger, merchandiser, and then the foreign-road (DLW, RDG stuff). It's coming down to managability.
Even if you did something relatively small, like a really accurate KASE, the downtown passenger stations...some river running scene.. think of the operations. It starts building fast. If staging can pump bidirectionally, you CAN do it justice. You can evolve pretty fast out of the 'roundy-roundy' to an operating session that recognizes the day-in, day-out precision machine that the PRR was.
And to Jerry's credit, I think we're playing off of the same script here. His N layout design had possibly the most massive staging yard I've every seen anywhere underneath everything, with a loop on the end, and feeding into a helix to come up to operations levels. That helix was really nice because he got a lot more vertical distance between levels than what I'm doing.
Oh, and in case you haven't noticed, my layout, at its heart, is still a 'roundy-roundy'. A lot of evenings I just set 'em up and run 'em. I can do a formal operating session, or just polish wheels.
-
Randy,
You've got the perfect formula. The design seems to be exactly what I'm striving for. From traffic flow, to scenic mix, to modularity, expandability...
But come clean... What's one thing that you would have done differently? Is there anything that absolutely drives you nuts when you're running? There's got to be something...
Lee
-
Things I DID NOT plan on, that I've just learned to deal with.
1) I used Lambert under-the-table switch machines with steel wire linkages. Over time, the end contacts on them loosen, drop screws and corrode. On this layout, that means either trackside signals or panel switch indicators go dark. All stop, I'm running blind. Sigh. Never again, I'd probably use Tortise.
2) Be more careful where I put the polarity gaps on the downhill reverse loop. A 35-car train headed down a 2% grade at 40 scale miles per hour,hitting a polarity conflict on a loop entrance, may as well be hitting a brick wall. The train telescopes and forces out on the curves, and will probably derail. I'd move the gaps further uphill, putting it higher on the hill, and plan that 'liklihood of dead stop/derail' deliberately where it is easier to reach from the side. I've learned to check, doublecheck, and check again the loop polarities before I enter and exit the yards. Putting it where I did on the downhill loop, yeah, that was a mistake - that S curve has seen more than its fair share of car scatters. I only put it where I did so the lower "Y" would work, and I pulled that out later as a mistake as well. And taking a long train downhill into the yard requires CAREFUL train handling; too slow and the train bunches up and has a nasty habit of random uncoupling. Truly random. I come almost to a stop at Williams Jct., then actually lightly accellerate going downhill to stretch the train on the downhill grade to staging. But creeping downhill doesn't work, the train slinkys and hammers into those S curves at the bottom.
3) I'd make the interior pit 6" wider if I had the space. It's a little narrow. It wouldn't fit in the room without it, but if I could, it would be. It would sure help the entire design for another six inches there. The tables would lengthen out on the ends, making it 6' wide.
4) Not a design issue, but I've been slowly tearing out track and replacing it with Peco C55 in the most visible areas. The industrial tracks around Flag are all done, and changing over switches to Electrofrogs.
-
Dave, Ron here. Have you given any thought to looking for a used camping trailer?About 10 years ago I bought a 8X16 foot construction trailer w/heat & air for 500.00. I'm sure you can pick up a used camper cheap, gut it except for elect,air & heat. most campers are about 78 inches inside width by anywhere from 12ft. to however long you want it. You can put a good size layout in about a 20ft. camper. Just make sure you have a rear wheel drive tow vechicle and check the towing ability.most 1/2 ton p/u trucks can tow up to about 6,000 pounds depending on 6 or 8 cyl. most front wheel drive only up to about 3,000 lbs.If you do a layout in it you will be able to take it with you and use it to haul boxes when you move. Just a thought for you. ron.
-
A 35-car train headed down a 2% grade at 40 scale miles per hour...
That sounds pretty gutsy to me in any case. Do you have any recurrent problems with this aside from the polarity? I'm anticipating ~20 spmh limits on my down grades (similar train length & steepness) -- at least until Lee's Rule G (Get me another beer) kicks in. ;)
-
Dave, Ron here. Have you given any thought to looking for a used camping trailer?About 10 years ago I bought a 8X16 foot construction trailer w/heat & air for 500.00. I'm sure you can pick up a used camper cheap, gut it except for elect,air & heat. most campers are about 78 inches inside width by anywhere from 12ft. to however long you want it. You can put a good size layout in about a 20ft. camper. Just make sure you have a rear wheel drive tow vechicle and check the towing ability.most 1/2 ton p/u trucks can tow up to about 6,000 pounds depending on 6 or 8 cyl. most front wheel drive only up to about 3,000 lbs.If you do a layout in it you will be able to take it with you and use it to haul boxes when you move. Just a thought for you. ron.
Ron,
Thanks for the idea... No place to put a trailer at the moment, though, and no gaurantee I can park it somewhere at the next assignment. These Nebraska winters are brutal too... would like to keep it inside.
-
Randy,
I really like your plan, and I'm liking the operating scheme quite a bit.
One challenge I'll face is that of adequate, yet small and portable, staging.
Clearly anything other than a branchline on the PRR is unsuitable for a small portable layout even in N...
-
(http://pictureisunrelated.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/wtf_pics-cheer-up-dude.jpg)
Cheer up Dave. Here. We've sent Gregg in a happy suit to make you feel better...
The Gang at Railwire
-
LOL!
That guy has the same hairstyle and everything!
-
A 35-car train headed down a 2% grade at 40 scale miles per hour...
That sounds pretty gutsy to me in any case. Do you have any recurrent problems with this aside from the polarity? I'm anticipating ~20 spmh limits on my down grades (similar train length & steepness) -- at least until Lee's Rule G (Get me another beer) kicks in. ;)
Because of my absolute paranoia about derailments, I've stayed with pizza cutters, because the slack run-ins and run-outs headed downhill can knock a car off low-pros. I've lowered frames, but stayed with PC's. I've also made MT's 100% mandatory, because the random uncoupling with accumates (along with spontaneous dissassembly) kinda turned me off.
Going uphill, I had to use Jim Fitzgeralds 'RDA notch treatment' way before MT ever put it on couplers, because the MT's would pop apart. Notching in the knuckles stopped that. When you can haul 17 piggyback flats uphill from Chila Yard, right up to Flag (just about completely wraps over itself) without a pull-apart, you've got it beat.
And Dave, I never met a layout so small that staging wouldn't help it. My current "Ross Run" logging module on the Hickory Valley has three storage tracks stuffed under it, and it is only 18 x 42 inches. I've got to do something with all that logging equipment I've acquired.
-
You can have reliable operations without pizza cutters ..