PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report

[wm3798]

I like this new arrangement.  Gives you that pit, handy for those shows you like to subject yourself to display your work in.  The Sherman Creek style crossing is a cool idea... you can never have enough stone arches when you're modeling the PRR.  As for the tunnel feature, it depends on which way a westbound train leaves the wye, doesn't it?  If westbound is to the curved leg into Lewisburyportville, then the tunnel is RR west, then isn't it?  And the coal mine/power plant is westward thence beyond the tunnel!  So the cut where the wye joins the main becomes the Philadelphia Project, wherein westbound trains disappear and become eastbounds...  Or where PRR trains from 1956 evaporate and become Conrail freights in 1980.

As for the New River Mine, we'll discuss that behind the green door and arrive at an amicable arrangement!

Lee

[DKS]

Dave, an excellent and elegant solution, one that gives you what looks on the surface to be a much bigger layout to boot, and with much less disruption to the existing units. One small suggestion, it appears the bridge piece doesn't need to be oddly-shaped; I'd say a plain rectangle would do the job just as well, and be easier to build. I imagine it would simply "hang" between the two doors on a pair of brackets with wing nuts.

[Philip H]

First, I think its really cool that I'm reply #101 on this thread (or there about) and its all been - if I can muster some of Dave V's mojo - a really constructive back and forth.  Makes it too easy to hang out here.

Second, I like Dave's current thinking, but I have to ask - do you want the bridge piece to be just, literally a bridge scene, or would a bridge and something else be a better idea.

Being a bayou boy, I have zero familiarity with the PRR, and while I've seen Enola yard in the last two years  I still don't have a good picture in my head of your geography.  That said, I'm just wondering if your simple scene - stone arch bridge and all - creates enough visual separation from the excellent recreation of Enola and the original door that reps Lewistown.  I do like the bridge scene, and I believe Lord Zox can offer guidance on making that match the high standard you have set here.

So, now that I've stirred the pot, I'll back away, get more coffee, and run for my life.

[DKS]

Phil, don't back away. Actually, you raise a point that I was going to a little further down the road, after things had perhaps settled in a bit more. I was going to suggest making the bridge module a bit beefier, possibly including an industry, station, or other feature(s) to maybe bring it into its own a bit more. Maybe make it a bit longer and wider to accommodate something more than just a bridge...

[Philip H]

DKS,
I only back away to keep my shirt clean - rotten tomatos are hard to wash out!

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Here's one. I disagree, keep it simple.

[Dave V]

2 caveats...  The first is, the more length I add to accommodate additional features, the larger the overall layout footprint is, and I still need to maintain an option of fitting this into a spare bedroom.  Second, there's a lot of empty scenery along the Middle Division, and considering how cramped it currently is, less may be more.

The temptation is always to add more, but I agree with Ed.

BTW, I want to echo Phil's appreciation for all of the thoughtful discourse here.  This is why RW is my primary forum presence.  Thanks!

[wcfn100]

The first is, the more length I add to accommodate additional features, the larger the overall layout footprint is, and I still need to maintain an option of fitting this into a spare bedroom.  Second, there's a lot of empty scenery along the Middle Division, and considering how cramped it currently is, less may be more.

Well the only thing I can add is that small bridge section could become an issue if you're going to continue to do train shows.  I know you've seen how uneven floors can be and I'm assuming you plan on just attaching that bridge module to both doors.  Lining everything up and adjusting or shimming the legs could add quite a bit of time to setup.  The longer the bridge piece, the more margin to work with.



Jason

[davefoxx]

Well, the "bridge" section could be built to make the layout fit the space in which it resides at home (noting that this piece could be redone as necessary in different homes as Dave moves).  Also, he could construct a "temporary" section for shows at whatever length he might desire.

My personal preference would be to build a stone-arched PRR-style bridge on the bridge section used at home.  If space allowed, do up Rockville!  If this section was fragile due to the arched bridge, leave it at home and use the temporary section at shows.

DFF

[Dave V]

Since the bridge piece would not have legs I think it would actually help uneven floors by "absorbing" some of the unevenness.  I did a show with both pieces attached as at home, and it was fine.  My basement floor leaves a somewhat more abrupt deflection that requires shimming.

Dave, I'd do Sherman's Creek because it's more manageable in size, but also because Rockville takes the track back over to the Harrisburg side.  Trains leaving Enola railroad-west for Altoona pass the Rockville flyovers but do cross Sherman's Creek.  There was a branchline into Duncannon that still exists as a siding that lies just west of the bridge, looking very much like the wye in my plan.

I would have to go with at least a 2" height above the creek for the bridge, actually making it look taller than in real life, since it abuts the overpass section on the Juniata Division which has a 1.8" overhead clearance.  I don't want the road to be below creek level!

[MichaelWinicki]

I think David K. makes a good point about making the bridge section "beefier", but I can also understand keeping it simple too...  In order to create a reasonably sized operating pit between the sections, the bridge section is probably going to be what? 30" or so.  I'd consider double-tracking that part of the layout if for no other reason it could serve as a switching lead for the yard. 

[wazzou]

I like it all.  I've always thought that Dave's is one of the best interpretations of a door layout that I have seen.  I am more prone to the latest revision of separating the two sections with the small bridge connector.

[DKS]

I'd consider double-tracking that part of the layout if for no other reason it could serve as a switching lead for the yard. 

Yes, this would be my recommendation as well. There ought to be enough room for a double-crossover to enhance ops options.

[Dave V]

You guys read my mind.  An extended yard lead with double crossover is exactly what I had in mind.  The real bridge has an interlocking (used to be View tower, now CP Cannon) so it would be proto.

Man, I'm juiced now.  If I weren't moving in 7 weeks I'd be on this right now!

[DKS]

If I weren't moving in 7 weeks I'd be on this right now!

What?? That gives you six weeks to model. Get on it, man!