Author Topic: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report  (Read 7161 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mike C

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 839
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +117
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2014, 06:21:13 PM »
0
  Did you know that metal studs come in different thicknesses ?    12 , 14 , 16 , 18 , and 20 gauge metal . The 12 gauge ones are really quite sturdy . You might have to look a bit harder for them though  .


Edit........Looking back at you pics it looks like you may have found the 12 gauge ones already ....
« Last Edit: November 04, 2014, 06:23:49 PM by Mike C »

C855B

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9911
  • Respect: +1841
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #16 on: November 04, 2014, 07:22:42 PM »
0
... The 12 gauge ones are really quite sturdy . ...

And heavy. They'd weigh almost as much as wood, and you certainly couldn't cut them with tin snips, you'd need a cutoff saw. In my shopping the 22 and 24 gauge seem to be the most common. My guess from the photos and the test performance is Marshall's are 22 gauge.

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #17 on: November 04, 2014, 08:46:08 PM »
0
Edit........Looking back at you pics it looks like you may have found the 12 gauge ones already ....

I used 24 ga. studs on the test module. Based on the load test results, you can reasonable expect improved performance with better gauge studs. But, this will also increase the weight.
Marshall

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #18 on: March 14, 2017, 02:43:45 PM »
+2
It has been awhile since I posted last. Here is a track planning update.

I have moved away from doing Free-moN modules due to the limited space I have available in the garage. I wanted to have a layout that had more ops/play value than a couple of modules.

Over the last few months, I been sketching and brainstorming and finally created a cohesive draft trackplan as seen below. I sent this over to @coldriver for comments a couple of weeks ago. Which resulted in converting the staging yard to an active yard allowing for more ops/play value at the cost of some run thru trains. I tried to maintain the feel of the prototype locations even though I had to make several compromises.

Here is the draft semi to scale trackplan:


Here is the scaled trackplan drawing in XTrkCAD:


Here is a version colored and drew buildings and etc:


General Layout Stats (As drawn):
- Min. Mainline Radius = 18"
- All Turnouts #7
- All track Atlas Code 55
- Track spacing 1.25"

Brief Summary of Ops Plan:
- Moscow Camden & San Augustine RR (MCSA): This will have 1 crew assigned to switch the plywood mill located at Camden and interchange with the SP.

- SP Corrigan Switcher: The job goes on duty at Corrigan and switches the plywood mill at Corrigan and then head over to Moscow to interchange with the MCSA. This job also blocks all loaded woodchip cars for pick-up by the termite train at Moscow.

- SP Lufkin Yard Job: Switches inbound and outbound cars and interchanges with ANR. Switches Lufkin Industries Foundry.

- Lufkin/Houston Local (alternates direction each ops session):originates/terminates at Lufkin, pick-ups cars blocked by Corrigan Switcher at Corrigan.

- Termite Train: Empties are set-out at Moscow and Lufkin and Loads are picked up in reverse.

- Rock Train: Unit rock train to/from Lufkin

I am open to comments on the trackplan. I already of some tweaks of Lufkin yard in mind.
Marshall

MichaelWinicki

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2091
  • Respect: +322
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #19 on: March 14, 2017, 07:56:50 PM »
+1
I like it...

Wish there was staging but hey I get you're trying to maximize switching potential.

That being said maybe the ops session could start with a train at a somewhat empty Lufkin yard that is then broken down and provides cars for the rest of the session.

And then the final train of the ops session is a train that is made up from outgoing cars from Lufkin yard...

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #20 on: March 14, 2017, 10:02:28 PM »
0
I like it...

Wish there was staging but hey I get you're trying to maximize switching potential.

That being said maybe the ops session could start with a train at a somewhat empty Lufkin yard that is then broken down and provides cars for the rest of the session.

And then the final train of the ops session is a train that is made up from outgoing cars from Lufkin yard...

Thanks! That is the general idea. The prototype had 2 locals that turned at Lufkin (one to Shreveport and the other to Houston).
Marshall

coldriver

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 324
  • Respect: +558
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2017, 12:26:27 AM »
+1
Looks great Marshall.  I really like that you so faithfully recreated the MCSA trackage and that you're going to allow an area six feet long for the Camden plywood mill.  I suppose if you wanted to make the scene even bigger you could bend the backdrop up into the Lufkin side at the left end and add a log deck!   

How about using the siding at Moscow for a pseudo-staging track at the beginning and end of sessions (perhaps trains seem to DOL there like clockwork ;))?   

Sounds like Lufkin Yard is going to turn into a pretty busy place but I suppose you could downsize it a bit if you find yourself needing the space elsewhere. 

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2017, 08:35:19 PM »
0
Looks great Marshall.  I really like that you so faithfully recreated the MCSA trackage and that you're going to allow an area six feet long for the Camden plywood mill.  I suppose if you wanted to make the scene even bigger you could bend the backdrop up into the Lufkin side at the left end and add a log deck!   

How about using the siding at Moscow for a pseudo-staging track at the beginning and end of sessions (perhaps trains seem to DOL there like clockwork ;))?   

Sounds like Lufkin Yard is going to turn into a pretty busy place but I suppose you could downsize it a bit if you find yourself needing the space elsewhere.

Thanks @coldriver! We will see about the log deck after I get a chance to start doing full sized mock-ups.

Using Moscow as a pseudo-staging track is definitely in the cards. One of the ideas was to have a train "staged" in Lufkin on the main. This would be the first train of the session and would do a loop around the layout before actually "arriving" in Lufkin. This also you be used for the last train of the session.
Marshall

mopacaustin

  • Posts: 21
  • Respect: +8
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2017, 09:22:19 PM »
+1
This is so cool! Love the relatively simple design but with plenty of ops potential, and *especially* cool to see the MCSA! Haven't ever seen someone model that before, such a cool road. Really such an under-appreciated and modeled area  :D Will MCSA locos just operate in reverse returning from the interchange?


SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2017, 09:36:16 PM »
0
This is so cool! Love the relatively simple design but with plenty of ops potential, and *especially* cool to see the MCSA! Haven't ever seen someone model that before, such a cool road. Really such an under-appreciated and modeled area  :D Will MCSA locos just operate in reverse returning from the interchange?

Thanks! Yes on the layout MCSA will have to shove cars to the interchange. On this layout I was not able to replicate the prototype interchange which includes a wye. But otherwise, I feel I captured the feel.  :D
Marshall

Denver Road Doug

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2120
  • Respect: +27
    • Mockingbird Industrial
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2017, 10:20:51 PM »
+1
Marshall, all this looks really great.    Didn't realize you moved away from the module idea.  The great thing is that, for Texas, you have some enormous scenic potential, too.
NOTE: I'm no longer active on this forum.   If you need to contact me, use the e-mail address (or visit the website link) attached to this username.  Thanks.

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #27 on: March 16, 2017, 09:46:39 PM »
0
Marshall, all this looks really great.    Didn't realize you moved away from the module idea.  The great thing is that, for Texas, you have some enormous scenic potential, too.

Thanks Doug! This plan is just a better use of the available space than I could get with modules. However, that does not mean I will not built a module or two in the future. I would like to do module of this bridge over the Trinity River.
http://railpictures.net/photo/52457/
Marshall

SSW7771

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 267
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +97
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2017, 07:56:19 PM »
0
Made a few tweaks to the Lufkin yard portion. I added a second engine track and curved the class tracks back toward the main similar to the prototype yard.


I got a couple woodworking projects to finish up which will free up space in the garage before I can start mocking up this layout. The plan is to make this sectional in 4 sections roughly 3.5' x 4' each. Additionally I will put casters on the legs so I can roll it up against the wall when not in use.
Marshall

squirrelhunter

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 586
  • Respect: +103
Re: SP Lufkin Sub Engineering Report
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2017, 11:26:07 PM »
0
Actually I think you have a good idea ditching dedicated staging and just holding trains out in the open. That's the SP I remember from the Houston area and South Texas.

I think as model railroaders we sometimes get too caught up in steam era ideas about whole trains not just getting left in the yard at the end of the run.

And with the trains you want to model, the only ones really going "off scene" are the locals from Houston/Shreveport and the termite train.