Author Topic: Seaboard Central 2.0  (Read 271257 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Seaboard Central 2.0
« on: February 11, 2012, 12:56:18 PM »
0
As many of you know, a few months ago, I designed what I felt was a decent HCD plan for the RF&P.  That layout, however, will have to wait until we buy our next home.  In the meantime, I was building a 24" x 54" Aberdeen & Rockfish RR layout that was unfortunately damaged beyond repair when I was moving things in the basement.   So, while seriously jonesing for running some trains, I started brainstorming about a track plan for another small layout.  Thinking of space that might come available in the basement of our townhome, as we declutter and prepare to list our townhome, I settled on a manageable 3' x 5' table size.  While that isn't much bigger than the A&R was, the extra space adds valuable real estate for the track plan.

Because my trackplanning creativity is so-so at best, I decided to plagiarize the track plan for the 1980s Model Railroader project layout, the Seaboard Central.  That was the layout built live at one of MR's annual conventions and later connected to another project layout, the Kitty Hawk Central.  My family takes a vacation on the Outer Banks of North Carolina each summer, so the Kitty Hawk Central was memorable for its interesting and unique setting.  Because the subsequent Seaboard Central was added to the Kitty Hawk Central, I gave it more than a casual glance and felt that the Seaboard Central looked like fun and made for a good stand-alone layout.  So, I started messing around with Empire Express that I have loaded on my Mac, and voila!



For those of you who remember the MR layout, please note that I drew this up completely from memory, and I was not attempting to exactly replicate the original Seaboard Central.  First and foremost, for portability reasons, I removed the backdrop that ran down the center of MR's version.  I found that tall trees made for a great viewblock on my former HCD layout, the Virginia Central.  Second, this plan was designed for N scale and Atlas code 55 track.  I figure that it only needs eight #5 left turnouts, seven #5 right turnouts, fourteen sections of flextrack, and one carton of cork roadbed.  The minimum radius on the mainline is 11" (the passing siding may be slightly less) and 9.75" on the branchline.  The branchline rises up and runs along a ridge, so it will cross over the mainline.  The town near the yard will also be built on a grade rising towards the right end of the layout.  A small locomotive facility is at bottom left in the plan.

Since I have a good number of Seaboard System rolling stock and equipment to run on that future RF&P layout, I think I would base this layout in North Carolina and make it a former Seaboard Coast Line (ex-Seaboard Air Line) route.  I guess the moniker, Seaboard Central, fits this layout well, too.  If I stretch reality a little farther, I could possibly interchange with the A&R.  Maybe the A&R is the branchline... or maybe the A&R interchanges in the yard (the fourth track up from the bottom at right) and has trackage rights.  It might even be cool to handlay the branchline with code 40 rail.  This is fun!

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1071
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +28
    • Unnamed Switching Layout
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2012, 01:22:31 PM »
0
Digging it  :D
One of the very few Model RR books at the local library has some old eighties HO layout and diorama build article series, and that layout is one of them. I too really liked how it looked, and I'd say you captured it very well
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2012, 02:17:09 PM »
0
Thanks, Sawyer!

Thinking about this further, I've been plotting how to build the benchwork.  Obviously a HCD won't do, so I would go back to stick-building a frame.  I think I would avoid the thickness and extra wood necessary to build "L-girder" benchwork, as "open grid" should work fine for this small layout, with joists on either 12" or 16" centers.  I would prefer 1" x 3" dimensional lumber for the frame but might have to go with 1" x 4"s, if the local lumberyards don't stock a decent quality 1" x 3".  If I recall correctly, the 1" x 3" lumber is merely rough-grade furring strips.  If I owned a table saw, I would seriously consider ripping down plywood, and building the whole thing, joists and all, out of plywood.  Either way, a 3' x 5' layout should be easily portable by two people.

As for legs, I would like something finer looking than 2" x 2"s, but they're probably the best option.  My experience with folding table legs is that they allow the table to rock end-to-end, and I don't plan to push this layout up against a wall.  Fascia would be 1/4" Masonite, which is very durable, takes paint well, and would allow the installation of Digitrax UP5 panels into each side of the table.  Yup, this layout would be DCC, which simplifies wiring.  A layout this small would be a real pain to operate in DC with a bunch of short blocks.

I would cookie-cutter 3/4" cabinet grade plywood for the subroadbed.  That's pricey plywood, but I would only need one sheet and could cut the entire subroadbed out in one piece.  One other advantage is that I can also cookie-cutter the highway through town and form the road and town's base without any vertical kinks.  Yeah, I'm going old school and not planning on using 2" foam for the base.  However, I would fill in the gaps with foam to form the hills and dales.  By using cookie-cutter construction, I can still model plenty of scenery below track level.

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2012, 05:01:44 PM »
0
Is this by any chance the original form of this layout?



I was given the above plan to adapt for an HCD, and this was the result:

« Last Edit: February 11, 2012, 05:06:44 PM by David K. Smith »

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2012, 06:08:09 PM »
0
Yes, that's it!  Thanks for posting that plan.  I couldn't find it on the web, and I don't seem to have the Kalmbach book that it was published in anymore.  I may go back and refine my plan.  I see a few changes that I might want to make.  Considering I designed it from memory, I didn't do so bad.

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2012, 09:36:02 PM »
0
Considering I designed it from memory, I didn't do so bad.

Agreed!

wazzou

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4429
  • #GoCougs
  • Respect: +478
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2012, 09:45:58 PM »
0
Those are pretty nice plans Dave's.  They could really benefit from an extra 6" in width but I like them.
Bryan

Member of NPRHA, Modeling Committee Member
http://www.nprha.org/
Member of MRHA

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8925
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +3975
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2012, 10:49:09 AM »
0
Dave, it'll be nice to see you building a layout again.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

Member SlimRail Modular Colorado Narrow Gauge
http://www.slimrail.net/

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2012, 11:00:51 AM »
0
Well, I've tinkered further with the plan, and I really think this would be fun to operate, especially considering how much is packed into this small layout.  It's got three railroads present: Seaboard System, Aberdeen & Rockfish, and Southern Ry.  When I decided to add the interchange on the town side of the layout, I really started to feel like this was starting to take on a feel like the Aberdeen & Rockfish HCD layout I started last year.  However, letting go of trying to replicate the prototype as closely as we tried last year allowed me to fit more in.  In other words, I am merely just trying to capture the flavor of the area, rather than build Layout Design Elements based on the prototype.  But, I have actually pored over some maps and books and pulled out industries that are representative of those on the prototype, and I have used names and places from this area of North Carolina.  A big difference between this and the A&R track plan last year is that the roundy-round portion is now the Class 1 railroad and not the short line.

The latest incarnation:


Note: The scale is now off because of the resizing of the plan when posted to this thread.

DFF
« Last Edit: February 12, 2012, 01:30:03 PM by davefoxx »

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2012, 11:03:31 AM »
0
Dave, it'll be nice to see you building a layout again.

Thanks, Dave.  I agree.  I'm tired of sitting on the sidelines and watching you guys post on SNFF every week.  Besides, I sure could use a diversion from the everyday grind, and being active in this hobby is a great way to do so.  I just need to break it to my wife that I want to start yet another layout.

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2012, 11:39:44 AM »
0
Those are pretty nice plans Dave's.  They could really benefit from an extra 6" in width but I like them.

Bryan,

That's true, but I just don't have the space.  I'm busy thinking what I could even do with my design on a hollow core door, but that just is not going to happen.  I have to keep this small to make it even remotely feasible.

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2012, 11:48:55 AM »
0
DKS,

Did the original plan provided to you include the overall size of the HO layout?  Just curious, because I think I was able to fit in slightly more generous curves on the roundy-round portion.  My 3' x 5' design would convert to just over a 6' x 10' layout in HO.  I don't think that the original Seaboard Central was that large.  Am I wrong?

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2012, 01:31:50 PM »
0
DKS,

Did the original plan provided to you include the overall size of the HO layout?  Just curious, because I think I was able to fit in slightly more generous curves on the roundy-round portion.  My 3' x 5' design would convert to just over a 6' x 10' layout in HO.  I don't think that the original Seaboard Central was that large.  Am I wrong?

DFF

What you see in the scan is all I received. There were no other details provided--not even which issue from which it was sourced. Sorry.

Incidentally, what software are you using to render your plans?

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8656
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2024
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2012, 01:42:14 PM »
0
Empire Express 2.0, which seemed like the best option available on the Mac.

The original plan was in a Model Railroader issue in the mid-1980s, and it was republished in a Kalmbach book.  Unfortunately, I don't seem to have either anymore, but, thanks to your previous post, I've got most of the information that I need.  Actually, by going off memory, I was probably a little more creative with the plan than I would have been had I been working directly from it.  I'm very satisified with the latest version.  Refresh the page to see the updated plan just a few posts back  (now with trees!).

DFF

General Counsel to the Laurel Valley Ry.
Member: ACL/SAL Historical Society
A Proud HOer

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Seaboard Central 2.0
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2012, 02:14:52 PM »
0
With some very careful tweaking, it's possible to get the curves even broader. In this version, mainline minimum is 12 inches, and the inner curve is 10.5 inches (which could be pushed to 11).