Author Topic: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model  (Read 6779 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

brokemoto

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1078
  • Respect: +80
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #90 on: June 01, 2021, 12:24:21 PM »
0
I think that someone needs to model the L&NE. The diesel fleet wasn't very big and the steam fleet wasn't huge either. The large bridges through the water gap were spectacular and if you like big railyards you can certainly include Maybrook.

It and  L&HR were essentially bridge carriers/forwarding carriers with few on-line businesses.  If you are more a runner than an operator and like ALCos, either would be the road for you.

brokemoto

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1078
  • Respect: +80
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #91 on: June 01, 2021, 12:51:25 PM »
0
W&OD, Circa 1955 maybe?

That might not be bad.  The 70 and 44 tonners from B-mann are available, although getting the handrailings back onto those things is difficult.  You would have to print the decals yourself or have some one do them.  I forget when W&OD ended passenger service after World War II.  It initially had ended it in the late 1930s/early 1940s, but the War Production Board did order it to resume the service during the war.  It ran gas-electrics until the end of passenger service (1953?).  The B-mann gas-electric does look much like those that W&OD ran until the end of passenger service.

Someone does sell the shell for the Whitcombs (randgust?  Shapeways?)

The power is available. From what I can see of the cabooses, they were a mixture.  I saw one that you could bash from the B-mann four wheel caboose if you blanked out the middle window and removed the cupola.  You also could use the Arnold four wheel caboose and simply remove the cupola, but those cabooses are not easy to find.  I saw a photograph of one that appeared to have been protobashed from an outside braced wood boxcar.  There is another one with portholes that you might have to scratchbuild.  There are some cabooses along the W&OD trail, but those are Southern or RF&P cabooses on which someone hung W&OD markings.

Still, W&OD would work for a small or large pike.

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 20737
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +4093
    • Conrail 1285
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #92 on: June 01, 2021, 12:52:21 PM »
0
I have been there, but it has been a while.  As I recall, the railroad needs the snappers only one way, Railroad West.  This is different from some of the well known hills in the West:  Raton, Tehachapi or Sherman's, where the railroads need helpers both ways.  I forget exactly, but is it the Eastbound on Raton that is the nastier of the two grades?  One of them is nastier than the other, which requires even more power to help.  I would guess that now, as it is mostly AMTRAK that uses it, BNSF does not need to station as much power there as it used to.  If you consider that ATSF started bypassing it with the opening of the Belen Cutoff in 1908...........but, I stray........

The snappers came on at Altoona for the climb to Gallitzin, correct?  I am guessing that the snappers came off at Gallitzin or somewhere around there.  Did they return to Altoona light or did they wait for an Eastbound and attach them selves to it subsequently to come off once the Eastbound reached Altoona?

ATSF generally kept the power balanced, although in favour of the Western side of the pass, as the Eastbound was the nastier of the grades.  This meant that it did have to send power the other way light and in reverse.  This was, in fact, why it invented the 2-10-2,  It was using 2-10-0s as helpers.  The railroad noted that the tires on the aft two driver pairs were wearing more quickly than the others.  It resolved this by adding a trailing truck to guide the locomotive in reverse.  This is one reason why the trailing truck on many 2-8-8-2s looks like an aftterthought.  Its only real purpose is to guide the locomotive over a hill in reverse.  It is how Rivarossi got away with selling a 2-8-8-0 that was really a USRA 2-8--8-2 without its trailer.

The real estate requirement for the main line and the shops would be large.  Most modellers do not have that space.  Was there a test track at Juniata (as there was at Pittsburgh)?  Further, it would be too much for one modeller to operate both shops and main line.  Even the main line would be too much for one modeller.  The equipment requirements would be expensive.  It might work for a club layout, but for an individual?  If you started to build it  when you were twenty-eight, you might finish it by the time that you reached sixty.

Yes, helpers from Altoona would generally just work west to Gallitzin where they'd cut off and usually return light.

But... the issue with Altoona was that, in addition to being a helper base, it was also a huge shop and classification facility. At the turn of the century it had something like 5 different hump yards.

http://www.altoonaworks.info/diagrams.html

Here they are in 1905:

brokemoto

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1078
  • Respect: +80
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #93 on: June 01, 2021, 01:13:51 PM »
0
Yes, helpers from Altoona would generally just work west to Gallitzin where they'd cut off and usually return light.

Right.  I am guessing that the steam helpers were not turned; they returned to Altoona in reverse.  I am guessing that it used 2-10-2s and 2-8-2s from the First World War era to the early 1950s.  I do not know if it used 4-8-2s as helpers, ever.  It did not have many articulateds.  As the four cylinders had problems making steam and the curve would have been hard on those rigid frame things, I am guessing that they did not work as helpers, either.  Before the era of the First World War, I would guess that it used 2-8-0s, which meant that the shops were kept busy replacing tires on the aftmost driver pairs. By the early 1950s, the Centipedes and late phase F-3s would have been available, all but obviating the need for steam there.  From what I have read, the crews liked those late phase F-3s the best.


But... the issue with Altoona was that, in addition to being a helper base, it was also a huge shop and classification facility. At the turn of the century it had something like 5 different hump yards.Here they are in 1905:

I am guessing that there would not be that much difference in 1955.  By 1958, or so, some of the trackage might have started to fall into disuse.  Still, even in the modern era, it would require large amounts of real estate.  The real estate for modelling it would be too much and it would be far too much for even two or three to operate it.  You could get away with populating the shops with old Arnold steam locomotives or B-mann junky F-units, Mehano FAs and C-C hood units.  You could get away with C-C or Lima passenger cars for the passenger car shops, although you would have to erase the Lima/MP markings, as the font is incorrect for P-70/PBM-whatever-it-was.  You could get away with a few stripped and primered, only painted the Tuscan or even partially lettered, as they are in the shop.  You could use anything for freight cars.  For cabooses, that gets expensive, as only Bowser sells real Penn prototypes.  I suppose that you could  blank out some windows take the cupola off some of the foobies and have them in various states of being worked on.  It gets expensive just acquiring the yard queens.  We have not even gotten to the equipment that actually is going to be running.  You are going to spend more on that.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2021, 01:15:48 PM by brokemoto »

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 20737
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +4093
    • Conrail 1285
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #94 on: June 01, 2021, 01:18:36 PM »
0
Right.  I am guessing that the steam helpers were not turned; they returned to Altoona in reverse.  I am guessing that it used 2-10-2s and 2-8-2s from the First World War era to the early 1950s.  I do not know if it used 4-8-2s as helpers, ever.  It did not have many articulateds.  As the four cylinders had problems making steam and the curve would have been hard on those rigid frame things, I am guessing that they did not work as helpers, either.  Before the era of the First World War, I would guess that it used 2-8-0s, which meant that the shops were kept busy replacing tires on the aftmost driver pairs. By the early 1950s, the Centipedes and late phase F-3s would have been available, all but obviating the need for steam there.  From what I have read, the crews liked those late phase F-3s the best.


I am guessing that there would not be that much difference in 1955.  By 1958, or so, some of the trackage might have started to fall into disuse.  Still, even in the modern era, it would require large amounts of real estate.  The real estate for modelling it would be too much and it would be far too much for even two or three to operate it.  You could get away with populating the shops with old Arnold steam locomotives or B-mann junky F-units, Mehano FAs and C-C hood units.  You could get away with C-C or Lima passenger cars for the passenger car shops, although you would have to erase the Lima/MP markings, as the font is incorrect for P-70/PBM-whatever-it-was.  You could get away with a few stripped and primered, only painted the Tuscan or even partially lettered, as they are in the shop.  You could use anything for freight cars.  For cabooses, that gets expensive, as only Bowser sells real Penn prototypes.  I suppose that you could  blank out some windows take the cupola off some of the others and have them in various states of being worked on.  It gets expensive just acquiring the yard queens.  We have not even gotten to the equipment that actually is going to be running.  You are going to spend more on that.

It was originally 2-8-0s and then 2-10-0s. Some other steam stuff did occasional duty, but those were the biggies.

Interestingly enough, the engines WERE usually turned before heading back down. There was a big loop in Gallitzin where they'd cut off and head back down the mountain in either direction.

Remember, the PRR's mainline was a lot busier than most mountain lines. There's a reason it's legendary. 

Hell. They even installed flyovers in places like Cresson to get branch line trains over the mains so as not to tie up traffic.

This book is a great read on the subject, if anyone's interested: https://www.ronsbooks.com/PENNSYLVANIA-RAILROADS-MULESHOE-HORSESHOE-ALTOONA-AND-BEYOND_p_32049.html

TravelingCarpenter

  • Posts: 21
  • Respect: +9
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #95 on: June 02, 2021, 08:30:44 PM »
0
Ok, I get the west coast is what “everybody “ does. But what about the Midwest?, you have the GB&W, E&LS, WC, Algoma Central. Also there are nice spots you can model, Dayton’s Bluff in the twin cities,,or Byron Hill on the Soo Line that required helpers. Could even model the twin ports of Duluth and Superior. Erie mining,,LTV, DM&IR. You get the picture.

TC

cv_acr

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2495
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +47
    • Canadian Freight Railcar Gallery
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #96 on: June 03, 2021, 05:33:37 PM »
0
Ok, I get the west coast is what “everybody “ does. But what about the Midwest?, you have the GB&W, E&LS, WC, Algoma Central. Also there are nice spots you can model, Dayton’s Bluff in the twin cities,,or Byron Hill on the Soo Line that required helpers. Could even model the twin ports of Duluth and Superior. Erie mining,,LTV, DM&IR. You get the picture.

TC


Algoma Central is me, and I have a friend who's doing GB&W. (Both in HO)

I'm doing the 1980s, but an interesting "someone should do" would be to model the mining branches around Wawa in the mid-1950s in the early diesel era. By the 1980s those open pits were closed and iron ore came from a deep underground shaft and was transported directly to the sintering plant via underground conveyor. The railway still shipped the sintered ore from the processing plant to the steel mill though - but in the fifties a bunch of that ore was shipped out by boat via the nearby harbour. The harbour also handled vast amounts of coal for northern Ontario as well as fuel oil and diesel in that era.

w neal on this forum has an N scale Wisconsin Central layout.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2021, 05:38:02 PM by cv_acr »

Missaberoad

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 3061
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +702
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #97 on: June 03, 2021, 05:44:30 PM »
0
Escanaba and Lake Superior would be fun... Modern shortline crossed with private Baldwin museum. (Complete with Railfans keep out signage)
Lots of forrest products and some iron ore mixed in, its definitely on my list of temptations.

In that vein I would love to see someone model the CNW/Milw iron ore operations,  pooled equipment with baby trainmasters, Milwaukee F units and CNW high hood C628s.

Sploosh  :drool:

I've been planning a Minnesota based layout, maybe I need to look closer at the Upper Peninsula...  :)

Ryan in Alberta

sd45elect2000

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 845
  • Respect: +311
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #98 on: June 03, 2021, 06:39:31 PM »
+2
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Milwaukee ore trains are cool !

wm3798

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 14759
  • Gender: Male
  • I like models. She likes antiques. Perfect!
  • Respect: +3170
    • Western Maryland Railway Western Lines
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #99 on: June 04, 2021, 02:24:14 AM »
0
The first shortline that captured my imagination was the Hillsdale Central (or Hillsdale County?) in Michigan.  It wasn't in a modeling rag, but rather in a trade journal my dad used to get at work... Railway Age.
It had been spun off... maybe from the C&O?  Can't recall now.  It was the 70s.  Anyway, it was the classic tale where the Class 1 wasn't interested in maintaining a lightly traveled branch, and the local government and shippers stepped up to the plate to take it over.

Just looked it up.  Still extant, although now operated by the Indiana Northeastern.  Anyway.  It looked cool to me.  4 axle power, lots of covered hoppers and boxcars.  Could be fun.
Lee
Rockin' It Old School

Lee Weldon www.wmrywesternlines.net

brokemoto

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1078
  • Respect: +80
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #100 on: June 05, 2021, 12:38:56 AM »
0
It was originally 2-8-0s and then 2-10-0s.


...................right, I forgot about the 2-10-0s...............and how could I do that, especially given the TRIX decapod with its K-4 shell and  misaligned steam pipes and cylinders?  2-10-0s were,  in fact, good helper power.


Interestingly enough, the engines WERE usually turned before heading back down. There was a big loop in Gallitzin where they'd cut off and head back down the mountain in either direction.

I did not know that there was a prototype reverse loop there.  You could use that to cover a multitude of sins if you were to make a layout based on Horseshoe Curve. 

This would mean that they turned the locomotives twice:  once after cutoff to head back to Altoona and once on one of the turntables upon arrival in Altoona.  The diesels, of course, would not require turning.  As I understand it, they kept the Centipedes in their as delivered A-A configuration.  I understand that Penn ran those late phase F-3s in A-B-B-A consists, so that would not require turning, either. The hood units could, of course, run either way.

I would have thought that the Penn might have liked the FAs better for helper service, as those large GE traction motors could run at lower speeds without frying.  While the 567 prime mover was far more reliable than the 244, still, the facilities there could have kept them moving.  Most of the early diesel helper photographs from the mid 1950s to the early 1960s that I have seen of that area showed either the Centipedes or the late
phase F-3s working as helpers.  I do not recall ever seeing a photograph of an FA working as a helper there.  The Westinghouse traction motors also could run at lower speed.






Remember, the PRR's mainline was a lot busier than most mountain lines.



There is that to consider. While SP ran just as many freights over the Sierra Nevadas and both ATSF and SP ran just as many freights over Tehachapi, Penn ran far more passenger trains and mail trains than did the other two.  Once ATSF finished the Belen Cutoff in the early twentieth century, it was mostly passenger and mail trains that used Raton, as it was the shorter route.  Penn did run more trains through there than B&O did through Sand Patch, as well.


This book is a great read on the subject, if anyone's interested: https://www.ronsbooks.com/PENNSYLVANIA-RAILROADS-MULESHOE-HORSESHOE-ALTOONA-AND-BEYOND_p_32049.html

Thank you for the update.  I shall have to buy a copy.

u36b

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Respect: +2
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #101 on: June 05, 2021, 07:39:51 AM »
0
  It wasn't in a modeling rag, but rather in a trade journal my dad used to get at work... Railway Age.

RMC also had a nice article in the 80s covering a H0 scale Hillsdale County Railway layout - it was very inspiring and had both pre Conrail (PC) and post CR (HCRC) rolling stock. It was the beginning for me taking an interest in PC

Cheers

Stephan

Rossford Yard

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1046
  • Respect: +83
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #102 on: June 05, 2021, 11:37:54 AM »
0
Ok, I get the west coast is what “everybody “ does. But what about the Midwest?, you have the GB&W, E&LS, WC, Algoma Central. Also there are nice spots you can model, Dayton’s Bluff in the twin cities,,or Byron Hill on the Soo Line that required helpers. Could even model the twin ports of Duluth and Superior. Erie mining,,LTV, DM&IR. You get the picture.

TC

I have spent a lot of time up in MN and endorse all those spots, although, other than the scenery (probably using the HO Ore Docks, which are probably closer to N scale in size, if not detail) I have always thought switching of that would be a bit dull, just a long slow push to the end of the dock, then pull them back.

Dayton's Bluff would be nice. Not only 3 competing RR's, but side by side by (almost) side yards.

One thought did cross my mind.  There have been locos made for Algoma Central, GBW, WC and a few other roads you mention.  Mostly by Atlas, and I have always appreciated them being willing to do one off roadnames.  If those sold, I have to figure someone is modeling those roads?  It used to be they had to have 300 of a road name to produce, but I have heard of instances where they produced as few as 48 of a loco and paint scheme.  While there may have been sales to those who collect one of almost anything, you have to figure somewhere, somehow, there are at leat a few modelers for each of those roads?  I know I have seen a BN layou in the magazines focused on MN and ore operations, maybe more than one.

w neal

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1307
  • Respect: +378
Re: Prototypes Someone Else Should Model
« Reply #103 on: June 05, 2021, 04:51:16 PM »
+8



Doubtful, at best.
Buffering...