Apr
13
Billboard Project
Filed Under Projects
Since I’m posting new stuff… LOL.
Below are some in-progress and completed photos of an O-Scale scratchbuilt billboard that I put together a couple of years ago.
Apr
12
Layout 8.0 - Last and Final Layout Plan
Filed Under Layout Design
Incredible… It has been a little over a year since my last update.
So, what have I been doing over the last year? I scratchbuilt a Fireworks stand. I bought some more rolling stock and a beautiful set of MOPAC passenger cars. *And* I have also reworked my layout trackplan for the LAST and FINAL time. LOL
Layout 7.0 was a pretty good layout, however it used all FasTrack for the track. Even though I was happy with the layout design, the more I reflected on my track choice, the more reservations I had about moving forward with it. I was pretty limited with the curve radii available. The turnouts were limited to 072… being the largest size offered [which made some of the benchwork wider than needed]. I wasn’t super happy with the appearance of the “U” shaped rail with FasTrack, and the noise from the hollow roadbed and rail was a significant concern.
Ted Hikel suggested that I take a look at ScaleTrax. I did, and really liked this track choice. Going with MTH ScaleTrax eliminated all of the concerns I had with FasTrack. The big items for me was being able to increase the size of my curves, being able to go with numbered turnouts for smoother transitions, getting tighter track centers where needed to narrow up the benchwork around the passenger terminal, reduce noise because of the solid rail, and being able to go with a better trackbed material. Lastly, in my opinion, it is going to be easier to actually just ballast track than trying to rework, paint, and glue a thin layer of ballast over the FasTrack to *make* it look like ballasted track.
Frankly, looking at photos of layouts constructed with ScaleTrax by Dave Hikel, Rich Battista, and Al Z., completely sold me on how I wanted my layout to look, and confirmed my reservations about the appearance of molded road bed track.
Switching my track choice required that I rework the layout. I fiddled a couple of months with different ways to arrange the track, but ultimately decided that the overall “flavor” of my previous design was probably about as good as what I was going to get in the space I have available. So, while this new layout is pretty similar to the previous one… I feel that there are many improvements because of the flexibility provided with ScaleTrax.
All switches / turnouts will be #4, with a few 072 mixed in where it was necessary and only at sidings. The curves are 072 minimum, and range up to 0144 using flextrack.
The overall space allowed is approximately 16′ x 19′. The layout will be two levels, with a nolix connecting the upper and lower levels. To keep the grade down to 2.5% or slightly less, and to have as much of the decline in “open air” or visible, the decline/incline nolix will start on the upper level after the swing-out gate at the end of the wye. The track will decline down and cross under the upper level tracks, disappear, and go around the walls and level off near the main access swing-out gate on the lower level.
The visible portion of this run is shown in “Brown” on the upper level. The hidden portion of the nolix is in “Cyan”. I will need to slightly incline the upper level main at 1% grade, shown in “Green”, to make sure that I have at least 6″ clearance where the nolix passes under the upper main tracks.
On the lower level, the main is shown in “Red”. The nolix is still shown in “Cyan”, but after the last 90-degree curve, it will be completely visible with building flats behind it. Note: On the nolix, it will be approximately 57′ long, and 27′ of it will be visible and out in the open.
From an operational standpoint, there will be two types of traffic:
Passenger - The passenger terminal has the ability to hold two 8-car MTH Premier [18"] passenger trains and diesel locomotives. Besides the ability to be loop runners between the upper and lower levels, I will have the ability to switch out dining cars and sleepers, with seperate sidings for REA/Mail, and express head-end freight.
Freight - In the area I’m modeling, the traffic will be local freight runs. In the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, the MOPAC would send out a local freight with empties and deliveries, and drop off the cars on a siding. The local switcher would pick up and deliver the cars to their destinations, and pick up outbound cars to be dropped off on the same siding for pickup by the local freight later on in the day. There was no attempt to classify any of the outbound cars, as it would cause more problems than solved when classifying the cars at the divisional yard. On my layout design, this set-out / pick-up siding would be the one on the outside of the main at the top of the page. The siding on the inside will be used for local switching.
I debated long and hard, and decided to not include a yard. The prototype I’m modeling didn’t have one in most of the small towns off the main, so I’m using this as my rationale. Not including a yard also allowed me to have more rail customers. The operations on this layout will be geared to set-outs and pick-ups, with an occasional passenger train to work around. My goal is to have enough operational capability to keep things fun and interesting for the long term.
All of the benchwork is 36″ wide, except for the stick-out on the left side and the upper benchwork at 45″ wide. I agree that I’m going to have some reach issues with some scenery, but I am planning on doing these elements on separate sub-bases with magnets or catches to lock them in place. I believe all of the switches / turnouts ought to be within reasonable reach if a derailment occurs. Although, I do recognize the fact that I’ll need to use a track cleaning car for regular track maintenance.
The upper level will be set at 54″ nominal elevation, and the lower level will be set at 36″ nominal elevation.
Click on the thumbnails below to open up a new window with a much larger view. The larger images are less than 190K, so they should load fast. I’ve also included on each level view, a legend for the major scenic areas.
Mar
18
Layout 7.0! Finally.
Filed Under Layout Design
Wow! It has been a long trip.
As good as Layout 6.0 was, I STILL found myself longing for more. The passenger terminal was too small for the operations I wanted. My list of desired scenic elements greatly increased. I was not real fond of having all of the loop backs on the lower level. As I started drawing up the benchwork, I quickly realized that there were a few areas that would be difficult to build, and had deeper benchwork than what I felt I could reach. And, lastly, I did not provide an easy access to the thermostat in the room, and could be blocking off the return air duct for our 2nd floor heating / AC.
Cue Layout Revsion 7.0…
I believe that I have addressed all of the downsides in the previous layout design. I have simplified a lot of the benchwork, and have provided a way to fully scenic the lower level. This, in turn, will allow me to include all of my desired scenic elements. In addition to having a passenger terminal that will hold eighteen (18) 18″ long [72' scale] passenger cars, I have added a lot more industries and sidings. I also chopped the corner of the layout area on the lower left hand side to provide easier access to the thermostat and return air duct.
There are still a few compromises. In order to remove all of the loop backs on the lower level, I went with a single nolix… which will limit my separation between levels to 18″ / 20″, with no incline / decline track exceeding a 2.9 to 3% grade. The benchwork for the upper level will need to be thin, but I have a real good idea on how I’m going to construct this. Lighting for the lower level will be challenging. Again, I’ll need thin fixtures, and am hoping to find a LED fixture that will fit the bill.
Most of the descriptive items of the design are the same as before. All curves are 072 or 084. All switch turnouts are 072. I will be using Lionel’s FasTrack because of its durability and reliability of their switches.
* The grey track is the main track on the upper level.
* The dark grey track is lift out or swing out bridges to prevent any duckunders.
* The green track is an incline and decline track to go over the brown track.
* The brown track is a decline run that will go under a bridge for the green track, and will fed the nolix.
* The cyan track is the decline nolix to the lower level.
* The purple track is the lower level track.
* The orange track will be lift out or swing down gates to prevent duckunders.
I will have the ability to independently run multiple trains, and will be able to reverse any train’s direction by going forward and not backing up.
The upper level will be set at 48″ nominal elevation, and the lower level will be set at 30″ nominal elevation.
Click on the thumbnails below to open up a new window with a much larger view. The larger images are less than 190K, so they should load fast. I’ve also included on each level view, a legend for the major scenic areas.
Enjoy!
Feb
26
Updated Railroad Logo
Filed Under Background
As I’ve been working through things, researching more about railroad operations in the Texas Rio Grande Valley, and purchasing rolling stock for the railroad… I’ve changed my road focus to include a few more Fallen Flags. The Southern Pacific [TN&O] had a big presence in the Rio Grande Vally, but so did the Missouri Pacific. So, I have added the MOPAC to my empire. This change will also allow me to include another streamline passenger train, The Texas Eagle!
Likewise, I felt it is important to include local regional roads like the Texas & Pacific and the Missouri, Kansas, & Texas [the MKT or Katy]. The T&P, while eventually becoming owned by the Missouri Pacific in the early 1900’s, did not get fully merged into the MOPAC until the ’70’s… so this is a natural fit in many areas. The MKT did not have a route in the Rio Grande Valley, and didn’t go any more South into Texas than San Antonio. But, I love passenger trains and I have to have the Texas Special running on my layout, so I’m taking some artistic licensing on this.
Although citrus was King in the Rio Grande Valley, other produce was equally as important. Tomato shipping, canning, and juicing were common regional industries.
To this end, I changed the logo to reflect the additional Fallen Flags that I will be including and added a produce element to the design. The new logo will be…
Feb
26
Been a Slacker… Sort of
Filed Under Uncategorized
Wow! It has been a long time since I’ve updated anything on this site. Where does the time go???
While not active on this blog… I have been making progress. I’ve changed the logo for my railroad; bought a lot of cars; attended several shows; finished a few scratchbuild projects… and have been working deligently on yet another “final” layout design. I know, I know… the last one was “final” too. However, I found that my needs and wants have continued to evolve to a point where I *needed* and *wanted* MORE. My current design reflects all of these changes, and I really don’t think I can do anything else to pack in more operations given the amount of room I have for my layout. As soon as I am finished with the tentative scenery design layout, I’ll get this new plan posted.
My goal is to get this blog updated with everything I’ve been working on for the last year. So, to this end…
Nov
7
It has been a little over 10 years since I built a layout [HO Gauge]. On that layout, I used Poplar for all of the legs and L-Girders. I liked Poplar, and found it to be very easy to work with. Generally, it is a clean wood with no knots and blemishes, lightweight, and strong.
Now that I am getting geared up for my O Scale layout, I decided to take a trip to Lowes to check out the current lumber situation. I was happy to find that Poplar still is available in a bunch of different sizes and lengths… but I was also a little surprised at the price. Back 10 years ago, Poplar wasn’t that much more than Select Pine. Now Poplar appears to be almost double the cost of Select Pine.
I’m not positive which way I’m going to go. Given today’s economic environment, cost is an issue. However, I want to build a layout that will last for years. I’m unsure whether the pine will eventually warp or twist. The layout will be going into a climate controlled room with central heat and A/C… but, I have seen pine do some weird things over time. However, I really have not worked with Select Pine all that much, so I may have some reservations based upon cheaper grades of pine.
In the next two weeks, I’m going to have to make a decision…
Nov
6
Although I have not posted anything recently, I have been very busy moving my rail empire forward! I completed a scratchbuild project for a ’50’s style billboard [which I will post on soon], and… [Insert Trumpets], I have finally put together a track layout plan that meets almost all, if not all, of my goals / wants / needs. It is hard to describe how excited I am to finally be able to start building benchwork, and how relieved I am to finally have a layout design that I am 100% pleased with. It has taken me close to two years of revising, tweaking, starting over, and repeating everything again to get to this point.
Below is a slightly edited copy of my message thread that I posted on the Lionel FasTrack forum:
As many of you already know… I’ve been working and striving for a layout design that will make the best use of my available area. To date, I have gone through seven major changes, and hundreds of “what if” interim designs. I have finally put together a layout that meets almost all of my wants and needs. Whew!
The upper level view showing all of the anticipated scenery is just a basic concept for the scenic elements. Please keep in mind that this is just a rough approximation to make sure I had enough room for the items I wanted to have on the layout. The buildings shown are from the Lionel and MTH accessories libraries in RR-Track. I will be scratchbuilding most of the structures, so these are only scenic placeholders.
I am getting very excited because in two weeks I start building benchwork!
If you are interested, below is a lengthy description regarding this layout.
*****
I prefer a good balance between track and scenery, with the amount of track looking typical for the locale. From an operational standpoint, I would like to have continuous running capability, but also with enough rail customers / industries that I can keep things interesting with switching and servicing these customers. I want the layout to have a feel that the trains go somewhere and that they have a reason to be there.
Specifics:
* 16.5 ft. x 19 ft. room. This is located on the second floor of our house [typical Texas homes don't have basements], and is a finished room with the second story having its own central air and heat. The access is a stairway up to the second story. Not shown is a bedroom and bathroom opposite of the layout room from the stairway.
* The main visible track level has a 50 ft. long main oval, with 140 ft. total trackage.
* In a nutshell there is a lower level that will be comprised of two reversing loops and a staging area. A train can exit off the main upper [visible] level and travel off the layout for 185 ft. before showing back up on the main level. If it is desired to reverse a train, it can exit the upper level and travel over 142 ft. of track before re-entering the upper level.
* Layout will be set in the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas.
* Time period will be late ’50’s to early ’60’s, as this is the time I remember while being a kid.
* Locomotives will be diesels… F7’s, PA’s, switchers appropriate for the time, GP-9’s, etc. I may elect to add a steam locomotive later.
* Operations will be passenger trains and local freight.
* Rail customers will be a citrus packing house, cannery, box plant, mechanical icing dock, hopefully cotton gin, bulk fuel / oil, and “Area 49″.
* The upper level track will have 072 and 084 curves. All upper turnouts are 072.
* The lower level track will be 060 curves and turnouts to minimize cost and space requirements.
* The decline to the lower level on the “green line” is 2.5%.
* The decline to the lower level on the “orange line” is 2.6%.
* The lower staging / reversing loops area is 18″ below the top of the benchwork.
I really wanted the ability to be able to reverse a train from either direction without needing to reverse or back-up. I wanted some lower staging, although I am conceding that I don’t have the amount I originally wanted… but, I was able to get staging track lengths of 181″ - 181″ - 196″ - 211″. I also wanted the ability to have a train leave the visible portion of the layout, and return after some time had elapsed.
Looking at the track plan more closely… A train can travel around the upper oval unassisted. A train can also travel around the upper level, disappear, and reappear later in a continuous running manner. To accomplish this, a train going counter clockwise would exit off the main oval at the upper left corner. It would decline down below the upper level [the purple track is the track that is still above the benchwork top, with the green track below the benchwork], loop back around to gain more linear footage of track for the decline, and then come back around to the other side of the layout to enter a reversing loop. If it is not desired to reverse the train but to continue on to the staging tracks or to proceed continuously to the “orange” track, the train would exit the loop and come back around to the staging area. If the train is not diverted to staging, it will proceed through the staging area and exit on the orange track that is the reverse loop for the “orange line”. From here it would travel up and back around the layout to the double back loop for the orange line, and end up going up the purple decline / incline track above benchtop level and re-enter the main oval from the other side of the crossover, traveling still in a counterclockwise direction.
If the train is going clockwise, it would take a similar path as above except it would enter the lower level from the orange line, travel to the blue staging level, and then connect up with the “green line” to travel back to the upper level.
If you wanted to turn a counter clockwise running train, the train would not exit the reverse loop for the “green line”, and would travel back on the green line to re-enter the main level now traveling clockwise. A clockwise running train would be turned by exiting off the main, traveling around the “orange line” reversing loop, and then travel back on the orange line to re-enter the main level now traveling counter clockwise.
This arrangement will provide the ability to reverse a train by going forward only in either direction, and will provide a long travel path below the visible upper level to simulate the train going somewhere.
I also think that the lower staging could be used in an operational scheme such that a local freight switcher could set out empties and pick up full cars and then disappear to the lower staging.
On the passenger station… this has always been a problematic area for me, given the space I have. I will be running A-A or ABA passenger diesels with 7 to 9 of the MTH Premier 19″ long passenger cars. With a total train length of 14′ to 17′ long, it would look funny to have over half of the train sticking out both ends of the passenger platforms in a typical pull through set-up. I just don’t have the room to get a long passenger platform to fit the train length. In the course of researching typical track arrangements for towns in the lower Rio Grande Valley, I looked at many Sanborn maps of the area from the ’50’s. While looking at the maps for Brownsville, TX, I came upon an acceptable solution. The passenger station for Brownsville serviced two different railroads, and the station was located off of a wye for one railroad, and near the end of the other railroad. This station had a stub end set-up with two tracks for one of railroads, and another pair of tracks for the other railroad. Using this prototype set-up I was finally able to provide a passenger station set-up that would provide enough track to hold nine 19″ passenger cars. Granted, I’ll need to cut the train into three sections when it pulls into the station, but it is the best compromise I have. On a similar note, it will add for some additional operational action to make the two cuts and then to re-couple for departure.
The images below are thumbnails that will open a larger image.
Top Level with Scenery and Top Level Track with Visible Declines -
Lower “Green” and “Orange” Loopbacks and Reversing Loops / Lower Level Staging -
All Lower Level Track -
Jul
23
Layout 5.0 - Current Layout, For Now…
Filed Under Layout Design
Layout 5.0 is the result of hundreds of interim layout changes, what-if’s, and will-it-fit. I struggled long and hard to come up with a layout that had a little bit more scenic opportunities… eliminating the center peninsula blob while still providing a method to reverse long trains, *and* to add some off-layout staging.
I ended up positioning the reversing loop on the lower staging level, and located it in a corner to minimize its impact on the around-the-walls layout. The track leading to the lower level has a 2.6% grade. I was amazed at the amount of linear track footage that would be needed to drop to my desired lower elevation, while keeping the grade to about 2.5% maximum. In the main trackplan below, the light purple colored track is the start of the decline, and stops at a point where the train would be below the level of the benchwork top. In the lower level image below, the cyan colored track picks ups from this point and continues down to an interim level for the reversing loop, which is shown as dark purple track. After the reversing loop, the decline continues down a bit more [again in cyan], until it reaches the desired lower elevation for the staging tracks, shown in dark green.
Because I am still trying to shoehorn in a ton of scenery and commercial / industrial customers, I ended up going back to having the layout cut across the center of the room. This gave me enough room to properly put in a citrus packing house, box plant for the packing house, and a reasonable [read: acceptable compromise] length icing platform that would hold multiple reefers. I also had enough room to include a portion of a citrus orchard to further solidify the citrus theme.
The curves are all 072 or 084. All of the turnouts are now 072. This layout does provide for continuous running, while allowing for some pretty good switching operations for setting out / picking up freight cars. The lower staging also provides a place for trains to disappear for awhile, and then reappear later to give the perception that it is a part of a much larger railroad. I also was able to futher this even more by including a non-functional junction to simulate an interchange with another railroad.
This layout still has some significant downsides from my perspective. Not only do I have a Lift Up / Swing Down bridge to access the center of the layout, I ended up adding a second Lift Up / Swing Down / Swing Out section to tie the center area to both of the short ends of the layout. My aisle clearance has not improved either.
While Layout 5.0 is getting closer, it still is not 100% or close enough for me to be willing to start cutting and assembling benchwork. I may end up coming back to this layout, but I want to take another run at correcting or minimizing these two shortfalls. My dilemma has not changed much… how to fit in a method to reverse a train 13′ to 15′ long in a minimal amount of space, while not resorting to a “blob” peninsula, or using curves tighter than 072, or ending up with a track plan that looks ridiculous.
Again, the images below are thumbnails that will open a larger image.
Jul
22
Layout 4.0
Filed Under Layout Design
Real Estate. Real Estate. Real Estate
It wasn’t long after I completed Layout 3.5 that I came to the realization that my “dreams” were a lot larger than what my planned layout could hold. I needed more room. Actually, I needed the WHOLE room… and what few pieces of still remaining room furniture had to go. So, I proceeded to start putting together Layout 4.0. Now my wife, being a crafty and intelligent woman, looked over my shoulder while I was busily plunking track pieces around in RR-Track, and commented “So, you are now going to be using the whole room?”. “Yep” I replied. “So what are you going to do with all of the stuff that is already in the room”. “Move it somewhere else… maybe into the dining room”. Currently, we have a lot of our collections on display in this room. A lot of it can easily be relocated elsewhere in the house. My Star Wars props and 1:1 helmets, however, were going to present a problem. In a moment of brilliance… I subtly mentioned “You know… it would be kind of cool to go with a Star Wars decor in our dining room”. She didn’t balk or say anything… just nodded that it might be okay. I waited a couple of weeks and restated my plan. No opposition. EXCELLENT. Just that easy, I became my own version of the “Big Four” [Central Pacific / Southern Pacific - Huntington, Stanford, Crocker, and Hopkins] and acquired some MUCH needed real estate.
Layout 4.0 backs up to all four walls. I went with an around the room layout with a center peninsula to maximize my linear footage of track. This gave me a few longer straight runs, and also provided for larger radius curves. I still had a few 060 curves, but a majority of the curves were upgraded to 072 or 084. All of the turnouts were either 060 or 072. Although a leather couch was still in the room, I figured that if I couldn’t tuck it under a bit, I would need to move it out as well.
Overall, Layout 4.0 would provide some decent operational possibilities with a train running continuously, and a local switcher picking up and delivering cars to the local industries or warehouses.
The downsides to this layout is that it would require a Lift Up or Drop Down Bridge to access the interior of the layout and the aisles were pretty tight.
On the positive side, I would finally be able to get a fairly decent amount of run time in before a train would travel back into the same scene. Speaking of scenery, Layout 4.0 opened up a lot of potential. My small town could be larger, making the depot more realistic in size considering the passenger cars I purchased. The area for the carnival also increased and would allow me more room for more rides and booths / tents. Lastly, I also had a long wall that could be used for rural scenery that would help add more perceived distance to the layout. The center peninsula would be used for my industrial and commercial needs.
Below is a thumbnail link to a larger image of the track plan. As always, if you would like a file copy of the RR-Track layout, just shoot me an email.
Jul
16
Layout 3.5
Filed Under Layout Design
After a very short while, I quickly came to the realization that the “yard” was WAY too small, and it was not anywhere close to being designed correctly to function as a yard. The double leads would get fouled by the 45-degree crossing diamond. There was no escape or caboose track. The yard sidings would not hold more than 3 cars or so. Given the space I was trying to limit myself to, I couldn’t come up with a way to fix these problems. I looked at moving the yard to the right in place of some of the buildings I had to achieve longer sidings… however, this would foul the mainline.
Ultimately, I decided that the area I had pegged for a yard would be better used as an industrial/commercial area. This would still give me some good operational possibilities, and wouldn’t look as awkward as a small poorly designed yard.
Also, it was at this point in my layout design work that I became very hooked on the idea to include a carnival on my layout. I purchased the Lionel Ferris Wheel and Scrambler, and had also picked up a couple of Mr. Christmas Carousels that would be kitbashed into one carousel. From this point forward, all of my layout designs include a carnival. In many ways, Layout 3.5 was the beginning of my overall layout theme. This theme has been ever evolving, but at the core it has remained consistent for almost a year and a half.
Again, the images below are thumbnails that will open a larger image.
