Well, after musing about HO standard gauge I thought the better of it and decided that I still enjoy modeling the Colorado Midland in N scale. However, the layout as it stands has problems. I've been asked to make bringing the Midland to our local show (outside of pandemics it's usually a 3-time-a-year gig) a regular thing. So for familiarity, here's the current 2.5 x 5 foot Colorado Midland:
At first glance it doesn't look too bad. Maybe a little cartoonish but I was OK with that...at least at the beginning:
The twin bridges on the back side certainly attract viewer attention, as unrealistic as their proximity to one another is:
So, maybe it's best to start by explaining what's
wrong with the
current layout:
1) In an attempt to make the tight curves on this layout consistent I used sectional Atlas code 55 track. In spite of having soldered joints and dropping a lot of feeders, I still have dead spots. It seems that each time I solve one dead spot I find another.
2) I had to replace some track sections that were causing problems and in doing so have lost some of the curvature consistency and I now have some slight vertical deflections where--in my rush--I didn't sand the roadbed down sufficiently.
3) The Atlas code 55 switches are sh!t. Just gonna say it. I trusted those little metal tabs for powering frogs and the Chinese mystery metal bit me on the a$$ in almost every instance. So...even powered frogs act unpowered. In several cases I wired the frog directly and still have problems. And I'm also having problems with my slide toggle switches keeping the points aligned, although that's more a Dave issue than an Atlas issue.
4) The passing siding in Basalt has a pinch point due to my poor planning and lack of testing whereby longer cars like passenger cars will side-swipe a car or loco on the adjacent track.
5) The branchline has its own list of problems:
a) It also needs an almost complete re-wire.
b) The guardrails on Hagerman Trestle (the wooden one) like to lift up and catch locomotives. I've even Dremel-ed them back down again and
yet...problems remain.
c) The branch itself is operationally useless. The passing siding at Aspen is absurdly short, the mining tracks to the Smuggler mine and the stamp
mill are so short as to handle only one car each. Then there's the fact that I have to run all the way to Basalt at the bottom for the other passing
siding, which--see above--is worthless.
d) The two percent grade and 10" radius curves on the branch don't exactly welcome little steam locomotives and wooden passenger cars.
e) At shows, everyone wants to see the train on the big wooden trestle...meaning my most dramatic scene is essentially a static display.
6) Scenically it has some real problem areas:
...although to be honest I
do kinda like this scene even though the upper track goes to nowhere:
So, what do I want in a
Colorado Midland v2.0?
I dunno. I'm kinda lost at the moment. So let's start with givens/druthers:
Givens:1) Has to be transported in a Honda Pilot with the seats folded down. This means a maximum length of 6 feet, although with sufficiently vertical scenery fouling the tailgate, perhaps 5' 10" is better. Width probably shouldn't exceed 3' both for transport and for the room it will be in most of the time.
2) Motive power is going to be a fleet of these:
..which are wonderfully smooth running but have limited pulling power on steep grades and sharp curves.
3) Track will be code 55...although I'm torn between Peco and Micro Engineering (with Atlas when I have no other choice). While Unitrack would probably solve all of my operational ills, I'm not convinced the tall rail and rigid geometry would speak to a hastily constructed high mountain railroad at the turn of the century.
4) Power will be DC rather than DCC. Although it
can be done, I have no desire to try to squeeze decoders and speakers into those little Roundhouse 2-8-0s. These means I'll need to have a few places where I can power track off.
5) There will be at least one complete loop for continuous running
Druthers1) A practical small yard for storing locomotives and cars.
2) At least one passing track.
3) At least two mine structures.
4) One or more decent-sized bridges of the Colorado Midland style...these would include wooden trestles, wooden trusses, steel deck girders, or through plate girders.
5) A scenic divider with scenic running on one side and the yard and mining town on the other.
Additional thoughtsOnce upon a time I built the Atlas Scenic & Relaxed plan:
I had built it on a 36"-wide HCD which made it 80 inches long. However, the actual Atlas plan is meant for 3' x 6':
It has a nice long run that's twice around plus places for a yard and mine structures along with a little town. The negatives of course are the grades (I think I built mine with 3%...which was fine for a pair of ER Baldwin Sharks but potentially a deal-breaker for a 2-8-0) and the 9.75" radius curves all over it. So while my original attempt worked well enough for shows:
...it might be trading one set of problems for another. I don't know. If I could do it with 2% I'd be OK, but then again the 2% on a 9.75" curve is really asking for trouble.
So, I'm crowdsourcing this dilemma. I'll post my ideas as they flow but I'd love any input you guys have. Having been working in HOn3 I've been spoiled...but I've
also gotten much better at Colorado high country scenery, so a new Colorado Midland would benefit greatly from my experience with the HOn3 Rio Grande Southern.
For reference, version 1.0's engineering thread is
here.
