Comments for Notes on Designing, Building and Operating Model Railroads http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org A hobby journey with Eric Hansmann Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:43:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 Comment on Fun diversions by admin http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-412 admin Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:41:44 +0000 http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-412 <p>Thanks for your comments, Tim. I'd like to reiterate that the multi-level plan I drew was a very quick, one-pass kind of exercise. I knew the physical locations where I wanted to plot Canton Yard, Carrollton, Minerva, Minerva Junction and Oneida. Much of this was based upon your first plan. After I did the first quick sketch and measured the track distance around the room from the door, I realized there were possibilities with a multi-level plan and a main line grade that would not be difficult. Stemples and Mapleton were added because the distance between other points was stretched out.</p> <p>You and John know this branch and have taught me a good deal about topography, industries and operations along it. You mention Stemples is a bit close to Carrollton and I would agree. In creating another version, I would move Stemple more towards the door and try to keep that shelf level 12 inches wide, or less. I'd also curl the two interchange tracks into the corner of Canton Yard; not concentric with the yard tracks but slightly spiralling away from them. This would give just a little more room for freight interchange. </p> <p>I'll have to consult the track diagrams for Canton Yard and East Canton again. I must have missed the PRR interchange there. Or was this interchange on the Belt Line to the Ford plant? I also recall John's desire for junkyard and gondola switching and that's why the Belden Switch was included along the long wall to the right of the door on the lower level. The added bonus is a brick plant at the far end.</p> <p>I'm certain there are several tweaks to make this plan more desirable and buildable. I would probably aim the end of track at Carrollton into the corner and keep the team tracks parallel to the main there. This means the benchwork can be cut back in this area and gives the Minerva Junction scene a little more breathing room. Anywhere the track is on a narrow benchwork segment can be built more as a thin shelf with just a 3/4-inch plywood plank. This eliminates depth problems where the railhead height is less than ten inches. Keeping the scene profile narrow and thin enables the grades to work. If you treat these stretches of main line as scene connectors then deep, detailed scenes are not necessary. </p> <p>I'm very happy that the multi-level plan is being considered for John's new layout space. He's got a real jem of a room that few people have. Combined with a feasible prototype and operations scheme, he'll have a nice sized railroad to keep him and a few friends busy. He may even squeeze in workbench space under Mapleton.</p> <p> - Eric</p> Thanks for your comments, Tim. I’d like to reiterate that the multi-level plan I drew was a very quick, one-pass kind of exercise. I knew the physical locations where I wanted to plot Canton Yard, Carrollton, Minerva, Minerva Junction and Oneida. Much of this was based upon your first plan. After I did the first quick sketch and measured the track distance around the room from the door, I realized there were possibilities with a multi-level plan and a main line grade that would not be difficult. Stemples and Mapleton were added because the distance between other points was stretched out.

You and John know this branch and have taught me a good deal about topography, industries and operations along it. You mention Stemples is a bit close to Carrollton and I would agree. In creating another version, I would move Stemple more towards the door and try to keep that shelf level 12 inches wide, or less. I’d also curl the two interchange tracks into the corner of Canton Yard; not concentric with the yard tracks but slightly spiralling away from them. This would give just a little more room for freight interchange.

I’ll have to consult the track diagrams for Canton Yard and East Canton again. I must have missed the PRR interchange there. Or was this interchange on the Belt Line to the Ford plant? I also recall John’s desire for junkyard and gondola switching and that’s why the Belden Switch was included along the long wall to the right of the door on the lower level. The added bonus is a brick plant at the far end.

I’m certain there are several tweaks to make this plan more desirable and buildable. I would probably aim the end of track at Carrollton into the corner and keep the team tracks parallel to the main there. This means the benchwork can be cut back in this area and gives the Minerva Junction scene a little more breathing room. Anywhere the track is on a narrow benchwork segment can be built more as a thin shelf with just a 3/4-inch plywood plank. This eliminates depth problems where the railhead height is less than ten inches. Keeping the scene profile narrow and thin enables the grades to work. If you treat these stretches of main line as scene connectors then deep, detailed scenes are not necessary.

I’m very happy that the multi-level plan is being considered for John’s new layout space. He’s got a real jem of a room that few people have. Combined with a feasible prototype and operations scheme, he’ll have a nice sized railroad to keep him and a few friends busy. He may even squeeze in workbench space under Mapleton.

- Eric

]]> Comment on Fun diversions by Tim Moran http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-407 Tim Moran Sat, 28 Jan 2012 21:34:30 +0000 http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-407 Eric, Your description of the railroad is clear and accurate. Your design is thought provoking. I'd consider replacing the East Canton trackage with the PRR interchange at East End Yard. That would give John some place to "bang gondolas around". Scrap metal going up to East End Yard & Republic Steel was commonplace. Another thought would be the team track at Stemples. You would almost be "in" Stemples while trying to have room to switch in Carrollton. Your design is inspirational and ambitious. Thanks for sharing it with us all! Tim Moran Eric,

Your description of the railroad is clear and accurate. Your design is thought provoking.

I’d consider replacing the East Canton trackage with the PRR interchange at East End Yard. That would give John some place to “bang gondolas around”. Scrap metal going up to East End Yard & Republic Steel was commonplace.

Another thought would be the team track at Stemples. You would almost be “in” Stemples while trying to have room to switch in Carrollton.

Your design is inspirational and ambitious. Thanks for sharing it with us all!

Tim Moran

]]> Comment on Fun diversions by admin http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-382 admin Thu, 26 Jan 2012 00:10:39 +0000 http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-382 Good work John! I'll give you an A for this reporting term. Good work John! I’ll give you an A for this reporting term.

]]> Comment on Fun diversions by John Albaneze http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-381 John Albaneze Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:29:15 +0000 http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2012/01/24/fun-diversions/#comment-381 test test

]]> Comment on Hitting the fan by admin http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2011/12/08/hitting-the-fan/#comment-18 admin Sat, 10 Dec 2011 18:40:17 +0000 http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/2011/12/08/hitting-the-fan/#comment-18 Thanks for stopping by Bernie! I do hope to rebuild this and I hope it will be in a room larger than the original 11x11 foot space. No track was laid before the recent move so the plan can be altered when I get to that moment again. I'm trying to repost severl of the original psotings to illustrate the prototype area as well. You are correct that it is a complex track arrangement, but that is what the prototype was like with three railroads crossing at grade. I can't even imaging the original PRR traffic on their busy C&P mainline through here and trying to squeeze a W&LE or N&SS freight through the interlocking. Model wise, the PRR tracks are just scenery and not operational. Even in a future, larger space, I'd rather focus on the two smaller lines and their traffic density than attempt the PRR. - Eric Thanks for stopping by Bernie! I do hope to rebuild this and I hope it will be in a room larger than the original 11×11 foot space. No track was laid before the recent move so the plan can be altered when I get to that moment again. I’m trying to repost severl of the original psotings to illustrate the prototype area as well. You are correct that it is a complex track arrangement, but that is what the prototype was like with three railroads crossing at grade. I can’t even imaging the original PRR traffic on their busy C&P mainline through here and trying to squeeze a W&LE or N&SS freight through the interlocking. Model wise, the PRR tracks are just scenery and not operational. Even in a future, larger space, I’d rather focus on the two smaller lines and their traffic density than attempt the PRR.
- Eric

]]>