Trains.com

The Saga of My Ever Shrinking Railroad...Part Deux

11305 views
71 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: North, San Diego Co., CA
  • 3,092 posts
Posted by ttrigg on Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:57 AM

Maybe you could bash a Mack into self-propelled coal mine car for the auto-reversing line?

Tom Trigg

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: North, San Diego Co., CA
  • 3,092 posts
Posted by ttrigg on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:18 PM

Triple Decker Pizza! Plan looks good, however, the "stub line" on the east (right) side looks as if it needs to be a bit longer. I still say it needs to curve around the north (top) side and become an auto-reversing streetcar.

Tom Trigg

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 209 posts
Posted by SandyR on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 8:44 PM

Oh man, Vic, what a bummer! That was such a nice trackplan that you had, too, and I'm sure that there were many more folks besides me who were looking forward to pictures of the finished layout (or at least, in progress)...Please don't give up on it altogether; some day maybe things will turn around and you can build it!

SandyR 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 7:55 PM

Yeah aint it...on MLS I was asked why after rebuilding the garage I have to tear down the layout yet again heres my answer and a pic on my new "downsized" direction:

...The garage was never rebuilt specificly for the layout, it was because the old one was in danger of falling over, and the attached room was intended for a home work studio but has morphed into a storage room, thats one of the big hangups, all the crap I cannot seam to convince the boss we need to dispose of, if I want to clear that room out I need to move it to the garage, so the layout which eats up a big chunk of the garage had to go to make room for things as well as an old car I either have to restore or get rid of. Add in my bikes and bike tools and the movable portable micro-layout starts making a hellova lot more sense...
 
 
Heres the new direction, with the existing portable nested on top so it will still be removable for exhibition. The entire thing will be on rollers so its possible to move it around as well. This plan shows an attachable fiddle track shelf at the rear, still thinking about that. Bit of a big change aint it? ....
 
Progress of the Portable can be followed here, beginning about page 5 or 6:
 
 

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: North, San Diego Co., CA
  • 3,092 posts
Posted by ttrigg on Wednesday, June 10, 2009 6:41 PM

Tom Trigg

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Tuesday, June 9, 2009 10:41 PM

Well the shrinking rairoad has done the Big Shrink, yet again, almost out of existance. Too many other outside pressures means I'v had to pull it up again from its permanant benchwork which have been reassigned to other uses. This turn of event is a major reason behind my downsizing. I still have the Portable Pizza, which will be my primary focus from here on out. I'm planning to add yet another (R1 loop) layer too it, this time it will be on rollers so it can be moved about, but my 10year dream and seamingly constant struggle to push the boulder up the hill and build a large permanant room size layout is over for good, or at least until I can freely devote a dedicated space (indoor or out) that will not have to do double duty with other uses, maybe in 10 or 20 years when I retire, or is that IF retire...but this is the 5th time I've had to dismantle a layout and quite frankly thats more than enough for a while... I'm still deciding whether to add to this thread for the new Portable additions or to add to the already developed Portable building log, thats all I had to say

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, August 26, 2008 5:34 AM

Hang more dry wall, pick up the 2x4s you slave! Eight Ball [8]

Toad

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: NJ (Kittatinny Mountains)
  • 436 posts
Posted by SNOWSHOE on Saturday, August 23, 2008 8:16 AM
Looks like it is going to be a nice layout.  Im glad you might be able to pick up work again on your layout.  I have been waiting for more progress and pictures cant wait to see more. 
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Friday, August 22, 2008 9:32 AM

OK now I know what the confusion was, The color version shows the tunnels that will be behind the buildings its colored solid, sorry for that.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Sykesville MD
  • 155 posts
Posted by gbbari on Friday, August 22, 2008 12:46 AM
Vic - I re-checked and looked at the original layout sketch that you linked to much earlier in this thread (black and white drawing) and it was much clearer than the color version you linked to recently.  The B&W drawing clearly showed trackage that I did not see on the color version (probably my monitor resolution or something local) and that lines up with the photos and rendering.  Sorry for the confusion.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:59 AM
Windows Picture, the photo editing feature has a limited paint program. Not much but its usefull.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    February 2004
  • From: North, San Diego Co., CA
  • 3,092 posts
Posted by ttrigg on Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:51 AM

Vic:

Your "plans rendering" looks good. Adds quite a bit more to "visualizing" concepts. What program did you use?

Tom Trigg

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:17 AM

I'm not sure if I'm reading your Q right, but theres no change to the plan, its likely just an illusion based on the rendering. If you look at the plan on page 1, the pictures used was taken where the words "north yard" appears on the right side of the plan, theres still the spur on the lower track that serves the mine siding, and on the upper track the mainline enters the curve back inward on top of the tunnel below, there is another spur to a mine beyond there but it will be hidden from view at this angle by the mesa's behind the upper mainline.

The building are just representations, I tried on the middle pic to mimick the actual model but it was too time consuming, so I just blocked it out on the other pic.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Sykesville MD
  • 155 posts
Posted by gbbari on Thursday, August 21, 2008 9:46 AM

Vic - Looking at the 2nd (middle) pix, raises a question:  Is your actual trackplan modified from the drawing you posted on MLS (and linked to)?   Specifically, the crossover in the pix is drawn as a spur (only one turnout) on the diagram.  Any other changes in execution?  Not criticism - just looking at operating scenarios.  Nice job on the scenery simulation.  I did spot one anomaly:  the station/building just to the right of the switch tower (lower left corner of 1st pix) appears solid in the first dwg but appears open with a post on one end in the second dwg.

Al

  • Member since
    March 2008
  • From: Australia
  • 39 posts
Posted by cmoore on Thursday, August 21, 2008 4:49 AM

Mate it looks good to me. Nice and tight too, I reckon both locos looked like they were taking it easy going up the grade as well. Do you get much or any wheel slip? Just by looking at the vids and the grade I thought that you might get a little bit that's all. Didn't look like you did though but over time you never know.

Cameron

He who has the most trains wins!!

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:13 AM

Been awhile since I updated here, mostly because I havent really made any progress due to too many Tim Taylor projects around the house, I might slowly now be able to begin to re-approach this project again.

When I was watching the extras on my "LOTR" dvd I was struck by the idea of the "Pre Viz" program, which uses blocky very basic computer 3D animation to study shots, camera angles, and how action sequences will take place before any actual film shooting takes place, so I wondered if I can do this with my layout, (not in 3D!) so I took the pics I had of my layout and the basic paint/editing program I have and just attempted to get a good idea of what the layout might end up looking like, so:

Dont mind the bright colors, or the chunky graphics, its really just to get a more basic visual "sketch" idea of what goes where with possible buildings and scenery.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Thursday, June 5, 2008 5:16 PM
 gbbari wrote:

Vic that is a great small layout design!  Have you built it yet?  Plus, what software are you using to create that? 

Al

Ya might wanna read from page 1 of this topic for progress pics Wink [;)], this plan is just an updated colorized "fancy" version of the original working plan. It was drawn on Autocadd.Big Smile [:D]

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Sykesville MD
  • 155 posts
Posted by gbbari on Thursday, June 5, 2008 4:44 PM

Vic that is a great small layout design!  Have you built it yet?  Plus, what software are you using to create that? 

Al

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, June 4, 2008 6:06 PM

Now I see what you been up to......

Good luck man, I like it!

Toad

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Wednesday, June 4, 2008 11:17 AM

Entered my layout is a design competition over one the MR forum, so I had to "pretty up" the drawing, even got it formated to Jpeg in color.

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageLayoutColor%20Model.jpg

Big image, so link only.

 

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Monday, April 21, 2008 10:32 AM

So far I've found most of the sound is coming from the metal wheels rattling around on the brass track. I had cork under the track on the previous incarnation, but I found it was nil effective when it came this wheel-on-track noise so I eliminated it this time around.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Delmont, PA
  • 10 posts
Posted by aspinallar on Friday, April 18, 2008 6:29 AM

Just a thought. I noticed on your video the noise of the train.

On my indor O-guage the plywood under my track was resonating so loudly I couldn't hear the train whistles. I installed Indoor-Outdoor carpet beneath all the track. It cut the noise down tons.

 

Alan in PA

Alan in PA
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Thursday, April 10, 2008 6:33 PM

In case anyone is interested

Some testing results, R1 curves with integral 4% grade, so far:

HLW Mack based engines:

Single units: 7 ore cars OK

Double headed: 12+ ore cars OK

LGB Porter based engines:

Single units: 5 ore cars OK (slicker wheels)

Double headed: 12 ore cars OK

LGB Toytrain based engines:

Single unit: 3 ore cars max, light engine, no pull

Double headed: 6+ ore cars, better performance doubled up

MDC Hustler based engines:

Single: 4-5 ore cars max, light engine, no pull

AC Centercab driveblock bashed engines:

Single units: 7 short (20')  boxcars+ (ran out of cars) these pull like a son of a gun! nice and slow. They are by far my best performers.

Double headed: not tested but I suspect I'd run out of cars

Big Haulers:

Gen 2 converted to 4-4-0, 3 short cars is limit, very poor runner, poor elect pickup, may end a shelf queen

Gen 4 converted to 0-6-0, 4 short cars OK, 3 large cars OK

Gen 5 stock. 4 short cars OK, 3 large cars OK

Bachmann Indy:

Pooper...only 3 ore cars more and the wheels slip, this is a flyweight of an engine.

Bachmann Saddletanker:

7 ore cars OK, 4 or 5 short cars OK, rough performer though, prone to clunking around the track.

AC Rogers:

7 ore cars OK, 4 short cars OK

Overall I am very impressed with the HLW mack bashes, they pull more than I would have suspected due to there weight, more than the heavier LGB Porters. The kitbash geared engines like the Shaykirk and the Climax have more than outperformed my expectations, they are marvelous pullers! The most dissappointing for me have sadly been the Bachmann products, Oh well.

Legend: 

Ore car = HLW Minicar or LGB ore cars

Short car = 20' freight cars

Large car = 40' big hauler frieght cars

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 11:07 PM
user="ToadFrog&WhiteLightn"

Vic, have to say I like the 0-4-0 better on the rails, seems to grab the track! You have a smoke unit for it?

Also like to ask but did not last time what track was that you got from your friend, brass?

Toad

Sorry I didnt reply to this sooner, the curve stuff is brass, but the straights might be stainless, I still havent layed everything out, been too busy during the weekends.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 11:02 PM

Sorry guys, just been real busy lately. Only been able to steal time at the workbench of late.

Been test running almost every engine on the roster, so far its been 60/40 with a few bad apples that may need to find new homes, they need some work and a couple are just too weak for the grades.

Ding this has made me keenly aware of what not having a layout to build for two years has done to my workshop, namely its overrun with engines, I really need to get a grip and consolidate my roster. 

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 7:46 PM
More pixs!!!!
  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Hurricane Alley, Florida
  • 469 posts
Posted by EMPIRE II LINE on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 7:20 AM
 vsmith wrote:

 

 I have to add power going up and throttle back like braking going down, I've already found trying to pull 12 HLW minicars behind a double header that the weight of the cars going down can push a car off the rails derailing it. 

 

 

Found your photos here again, finally, Vic....Another suggestion maybe....might be feasable and cheap for ya too!!!

Ever thought of trying a resistance circuit in your wiring with two way power toggles, so's you could run either direction and just flip the toggles over to the direction you are going and reverse a resistance circuit into the decline that U are coming down to lower/drop the voltage to that section of track coming down, than you could run and not have to adjust the power on the down hill run.

Just a thought here.....I really like your track configuration and design for your limited space. One of the best I've seen....

Byron 

He Wore Arrow Shirts Too
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Smoggy L.A.
  • 10,743 posts
Posted by vsmith on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 3:29 PM
 gbbari wrote:

 vsmith wrote:
Test running, my stock Bug Mauler pulled two full size boxcars and caboose around in both directions, some slipping on the 4% grade, just like the real thing only i dont have any sand to lay down, but it didnt stop. I take that as a success! I was more worried about derails on the transition sections but so far A-OK

Vic - Saw the video - great progress!  Are both sides of your grade 4%?  They seemed steeper than that but it's hard to tell from the YouTube vid.  I know you are watching your $$ but at some point if you can find some 2nd hand DCC decoders and controller that have a back-EMF feature, that would really help on those grades. Wink [;)]

Al

No DCC for me, dont want the headaches adding decoder chips to engines that have no circuitry all like by bashers do.

Both sides are 4%. Long Grade looks longer just because its spread out longer, Agony Point is wrapped up in a tight R1 curve so it looks more compact. Agony Point is tougher, due to the mechanics of climbing a grade and a curve simultaniously. I have to add power going up and throttle back like braking going down, I've already found trying to pull 12 HLW minicars behind a double header that the weight of the cars going down can push a car off the rails derailing it. If I keep the trains lenth to about 7 or 8 cars, its no problem. Just like the real world.

   Have fun with your trains

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • From: Sykesville MD
  • 155 posts
Posted by gbbari on Saturday, February 23, 2008 5:02 PM

 vsmith wrote:
Test running, my stock Bug Mauler pulled two full size boxcars and caboose around in both directions, some slipping on the 4% grade, just like the real thing only i dont have any sand to lay down, but it didnt stop. I take that as a success! I was more worried about derails on the transition sections but so far A-OK

Vic - Saw the video - great progress!  Are both sides of your grade 4%?  They seemed steeper than that but it's hard to tell from the YouTube vid.  I know you are watching your $$ but at some point if you can find some 2nd hand DCC decoders and controller that have a back-EMF feature, that would really help on those grades. Wink [;)]

Al

Search the Community

FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Get the Garden Railways newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Garden Railways magazine. Please view our privacy policy