PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report

[MichaelWinicki]

I believe the doors in his drawing are all two feet wide--not a bad reach.

No, not at all.  And enough room to accommodate two lines that are separated somewhat by scenery and/or buildings.

[MichaelWinicki]

Right, those are 2' doors.  The idea would be to allow room for yard and industrial trackage.  The good news is that this plan could at some future date be extended by even more doors.

Then again, theres a very large part of me that thinks I should wait until I retire from the USAF before changing anything significantly, because until I have a permanent layout space, I will have to make lots of compromises.

Nevertheless, the shortcomings of the island-style Juniata Division and its ugly code 80 track continue to bother me somewhat.  It's still much better than no layout at all.

I dunno Dave.

I think if you have the resources and the space to do a layout that is more in keeping with your desires at your next assignment– I'd do it.

Waiting for the right time would have appealed to me 10 years ago, but you never know what the future is going to bring (or how long of a future you even have) so I'd strike when the iron's hot.

[John]

but you never know what the future is going to bring (or how long of a future you even have ??? ??? ??? ???) so I'd strike when the iron's hot.

wow

[MichaelWinicki]

wow

LOL!

Didn't mean to be a "debbie downer" John, but none of us can assume we're going to live until we're 90, with no health issues, have plenty of money and not have any personal worries. 

Dave's idea for an intermediate layout doesn't seem overly extravagant... So why not do it as soon as the opportunity presents itself?

[SAH]

Dave,

My first iteration of the AC&Y Spencer layout was 6x10 - Close to your new config.  It has moved every 2-3 years.  More often than that actually.  It has morphed with each move and I've not had to chuck it all and start over.  I've learned a few things in the process.  If you're not 100% sold on using doors as the base let me know.  I might be able to offer some alternatives for you to think about.

Steve

[Dave V]

SAH,

I'm not exactly stuck on doors...  But since Enola Yard is on one, it makes sense for sizing/height to continue using doors.

[DKS]

Dave, the cockpit design has a nice visual symmetry, but may be a pain in the butt to get in and out of, and also tough to share the space with friends. Have you thought about arranging the doors in a C or G shape, with a pair of blobs for return loops?

[Ian MacMillan]

Ditto what Dave had stated. When I was in college my apt layout was in a 16x16 room and I had a HO "cockpit" layout in it. After about 6 months I hated that layout because of the benchwork design.

[Dave V]

Hmmm...  Good thought fodder...  I guess I shouldn't be stuck on integrating Enola as built.  It's only a year old, but nevertheless, it can be cannibalized.

Moving away from a door design to something with a frame allows me to use under-mount switch machines as well, something I've been wanting.

[wm3798]

Before you dismantle Enola, I'd wait to see what the real estate market provides for.  You could do the U shape that David suggests, then wrap around a corner with Enola toot sweet!

[Dave V]

I'm not dismantling anything yet...  I have a feeling I'll be busier than I'd like when i get to Florida just based on the unit's mission.  I've thought about doing a U as well with Enola in the middle.  We'll see.  I just don't want to make too many compromises such that I end up with a layout only slightly less flawed than the one I have now.

I've given much thought to re-laying the track on the existing Juniata Division to change it to code 55.  However, the fact that I used that crappy Woodland Scenics trackbed makes it almost a guarantee that such a project would be frustrating and messy.  Plus, just from the few track adjustments I have made like replacing a dead turnout and the code 55 transition piece shows that ballast gets everywhere when the track is lifted.

I think, however, I've reached the logical end of the line of what can be done with a loop on a door.  I guess I should be satisfied that I have a scenicked layout for now.

[DKS]

I think, however, I've reached the logical end of the line of what can be done with a loop on a door.  I guess I should be satisfied that I have a scenicked layout for now.

I'd place bets you'd have no difficulty selling your "flawed" layout. It would be a more graceful end to that chapter, and provide additional capital to work toward loftier goals.

[flight2000]

Dave,

If there is a small chance the original section will be recycled, please let me know.  My son wants me to build a layout for him when I return from my deployment and this would be a good way to keep the Division alive.  Just a thought if you go forward with building the new layout.  

Best of luck in the move and new digs in Florida.  Being a Squadron Commander can't be all that bad...  ;D  Just dump everything on the XO...... oh wait, that's how the Army works, never mind....  :

Brian

[MichaelWinicki]

Before you dismantle Enola, I'd wait to see what the real estate market provides for.  You could do the U shape that David suggests, then wrap around a corner with Enola toot sweet!

The Enola section could be widened a wee-bit and a main could pass along the back.

[Brakie]

Dave,I'm a dinosaur but,I like small operator's pit type layouts and always will.The reason being everything is in reach and easy to maintain.Of course a narrow shelf layout is just as good providing everything stays in reach.

Again my thoughts.

I really don't like the idea of adding a secondary track simply because and if memory serves the area you are modeling was four track main line and to much track can kill any realism one is trying to obtain..

Over the years I seen a lot of nice layouts killed by that old "let's stuff track everywhere" approach and if I may be so bold I never could understand that reasoning.