Author Topic: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report  (Read 99518 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

eric220

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3504
  • Gender: Male
  • Continuing my abomination unto history
  • Respect: +438
    • The Modern PRR
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #30 on: December 23, 2014, 07:30:24 PM »
0
I like the wye, but it will force a DC versus DCC decision pretty quick, LOL.

Since it's just a locomotive turning setup, a simple DPDT switch would solve that.
-Eric

Modeling a transcontinental PRR
http://www.pennsylvania-railroad.com

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #31 on: December 24, 2014, 08:15:09 AM »
0
From a locomotive perspective, I wonder what could be done bay adding a Bachmann cab and shotgun stack to the Roundhouse/Athearn 2-8-0.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #32 on: December 24, 2014, 12:14:44 PM »
0
Looks like N scale standard gauge (versus Nn3) was a good call.  Saw the neurologist again today (yep, on Christmas Eve) and after getting zapped and needled, she said things have gotten worse.  I will likely need surgery in the spring on my right (modeling) hand to prevent further nerve damage.  Yay me!  Oh well, it could be a lot worse.  It's not cancer, not diabetes, or anything else.  If all goes well I might even get more of my motor function back.

Now for a locomotive for the Midland...
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

timgill

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 155
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: 0
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #33 on: December 24, 2014, 01:48:42 PM »
0
Very cool project; will be following with interest. The bach-person 4-6-0 is a great locomotive, giant tender aside. I've heard that some have swapped it for the stock bachmann USRA small tender with very little hacking and sawing involved.

Chris333's tender mod is attractive too, if you are into doing that amount of bashing.
-Tim Gill
Subscribe to/Visit my Model Railraoding blog: www.marmionvalley.blogspot.com

glakedylan

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1135
  • Gender: Male
  • lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi
  • Respect: +147
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #34 on: December 24, 2014, 05:05:52 PM »
0
she said things have gotten worse.  I will likely need surgery in the spring on my right (modeling) hand to prevent further nerve damage.
Dave
so very sorry to hear of health problem
I hope there is timely healing and comfort in what time it takes
thoughts and prayers
may Christmas and the New Year
bring healing, peace and joy
sincerely
Gary

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11943
  • Dead Man Modeling
  • Respect: +3192
    • David's Modeling Journey
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #35 on: December 24, 2014, 05:34:37 PM »
0
In a nutshell, the original plan posted suffers from the spaghetti syndrome of its era. Recommend Chris' scaled-back plan as a starting point.

DKS did a rework of my plan in roughly that space for a member of here in that space, don't know if it's still online or not,

I don't even recall doing that, let alone what it was called... and I doubt I could find it among the 1000+ track planning files I had--emphasis on had--as I believe they may have been archived somewhere on a 2TB backup drive...
« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 05:37:57 PM by David K. Smith »
“Everyone leaves unfinished business. That's what dying is.” —Amos, The Expanse

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #36 on: December 24, 2014, 10:40:20 PM »
0
In a nutshell, the original plan posted suffers from the spaghetti syndrome of its era. Recommend Chris' scaled-back plan as a starting point.


Chris' mod is quite doable.  The more I was thinking about the wye the more I was thinking it might eat too much scenery space.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11943
  • Dead Man Modeling
  • Respect: +3192
    • David's Modeling Journey
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #37 on: December 25, 2014, 10:48:24 AM »
0
I have no idea if this is any interest. But, while trying to keep myself sane, I scribbled a bunch of fantasy track plans, with a halfhearted intention of possibly starting one. Nothing much came about, but one of them seems to be in vaguely the same vein as this project: the Tin Cup and Forked River. I reworked it from handlaid to Code 55 N scale track, and it sorta fits the 2.5 x 5 foot space mentioned.



Obviously curves are tight (minimum radius ~11 inches), grades are steep (>3.5%), and trains are absurdly short. Since it's N scale track, you'd either have to go with N scale standard gauge, N scale faux narrow gauge, or get really daring and try HOn3. But the latter might require even steeper grades, so I have no idea if this is even workable. I just thought it had a lot of character. Oh, and obviously it's not roundy-round, so that might put it in the circular bin straight away.

Merry and happy the TRW family.

Signing off for the day...
“Everyone leaves unfinished business. That's what dying is.” —Amos, The Expanse

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #38 on: December 25, 2014, 11:05:44 AM »
0
DKS,

11" radius is fine...  Longest cars would be the Overland coaches, but mostly 36-footers.  I'm using Atlas code 55 standard gauge.

I could probably incorporate some of those elements in.

For students of the Midland I'm thinking instead of Arkansas Junction to Leadville, doing Basalt to Aspen.  The Walthers "Clarkesville" depot is a dead-ringer for the Midland's Basalt depot (and is very similar to most of the Midland's stations).  Aspen had a large smelter.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #39 on: December 25, 2014, 01:17:25 PM »
0
Then there's this...  Still has the wye but I like it:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lDoGAuW09i4/TVqq_yvj3lI/AAAAAAAAArI/2FbA5absLaY/s1600/WKandW.jpg

Actually, it needs a pair of passing sidings to be anything more than a diorama...

Going back to my thought about doing Basalt to Aspen, Basalt had a little engine facility there to serve the Aspen branch.  Basalt is where the mainline coming down the Frying Pan River valley from Hagerman Pass met the Aspen branch and then paralleled the D&RG into Glenwood Springs.

The Midland depot at Basalt:



It's still there and has been lovingly restored in a pretty dark red with greenish-gray trim.  I really don't know what the right colors are, but I'd use the Clarkesville kit.  For my era (~1905, give or take a decade on either side) I'm thinking buff and brown, similar to D&RG(W).
« Last Edit: December 25, 2014, 01:21:48 PM by Dave Vollmer »
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

davefoxx

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8869
  • Gender: Male
  • "I like trains!"
  • Respect: +2305
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #40 on: December 25, 2014, 02:26:26 PM »
0
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lDoGAuW09i4/TVqq_yvj3lI/AAAAAAAAArI/2FbA5absLaY/s1600/WKandW.jpg

I like this plan, considering the space it has to fit into.  One thing I might try to make it a little more fun to operate (and it would add capacity by being a place to hold a train) would be to take that track that is buried under the layout and heads off at the bottom and try to convert that into a reverse loop in the tunnel.

So, imagine this: You are operating a train on the loop in a counter-clockwise direction.  Then, you can go up the branch, switch the town, reverse your locomotive on the wye, and build the train to head downhill.  Once you come back down, you are going clockwise around the loop.  There's nothing you can do but reverse movements at this point, unless you add the reverse loop, which would allow you to turn your train and head back up the mountain at some point.  It will be tight to get the reverse loop in and you might have to go with a Peco curved turnout to fit such trackage in, but, with access built in to the fascia, I wouldn't hesitate to put a turnout under there.  It is a small layout, so any derailments in there would be easy to deal with.  Just don't let Ed and his stick at them.

Hope this helps,
DFF

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

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #41 on: December 25, 2014, 03:51:01 PM »
0
@Chris333,

I have a ton of questions for you.  I think I want to go with your plan.  What sort of minimum radii did that have?

Also, your trestle...  Did you scratchbuild it, or was it a kit?
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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

Scottl

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4084
  • Respect: +505
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #42 on: December 25, 2014, 04:40:11 PM »
0
DKS- welcome back!  I love the potential of that layout. 

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 14199
  • Respect: +3099
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #43 on: December 25, 2014, 05:15:54 PM »
0
My trestle was 9.75" R and on a 2.5% grade all scratchbuilt. Used ME bridge flex that stayed curved after bending. I flipped it over and added the bents upside down and slightly un-straight to match the grade.
Forgot about my Railimages



/>
I know I said 12" R on the mainline, but it could have been 11" or 10".

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 9369
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +4808
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Colorado Midland Railway Engineering Report
« Reply #44 on: December 25, 2014, 05:51:24 PM »
0
Chris,

That's spectacular.  I'm sold.  I wonder, though, if I'm doing the Aspen Branch if one of my bridges shouldn't be an ME steel trestle, since:



The CM's Maroon Creek bridge still stands today just west of Aspen.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

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