seduction - questions questions ...

[Anonymous]

hi folks,

these days i am working on a part of our garden (a part can be seen on the picture above), a steep hill behind the house, still a real jungle at this time, and i feel an old dream arising even stronger than before.
it seems this time i will be seduced definitly to garden railroading.

until now i am collecting and operating european H0-scale (you can see some on my homepage).

following the wildness of my possible garden-RR-terrain, i was dreaming since a longer time about an LGB outside. but now by studying several us-websites i got infected by Shays, Climax, Logging-Cars etc. and of course i find outstanding solutions to lay track on this terrain by using an american theme as a (freestyle-) prototype.

fascinating models i found with bachmann, which is also easily for me to get over here in germany. now there are several questions arising which i'd like to pose you cause i think garden railroading ist more advanced in america, and of course when it's about an american theme.

what kind of couplers do you prefer? the bachmann automatic or kadee or even LGB (not really ;-))

how do you steer your layout? digital or radio-controlled and what are your favorite systems?

what kind of tracks do you use? i have some LGB tracks stored since years, but i think the rails are too strong.

so far for today. thank you in advance for your responses!

best regards

klaus
http://www.sulka.de

[kstrong]

For couplers, my personal preference is towards Kadee. They're easy to install, look good (even better if you cut off the pin), and are 100% reliable. I've never had one break. If you want a more prototypical appearance, I'd go with the AMS couplers. They work just like the real ones, and look fantastic in the process. I wi***heir draft gear was longer to allow more side-to-side play, but unless you're going around tight curves, this shouldn't be much of an issue.

Power considerations vary. My preference here is battery power with RCS radio control, but it seems everyone has their own personal preferences, and they're as varied as the weather. Each has its mertits. Much of it has to do with how you envision yourself operating your railroad. If you're a "turn 'em on and watch 'em run" kind of person, then traditional track power will likely be a good option. If you're more of a prototypical operator and like to do switching along the line, then R/C will be more user friendly. From what I glean from magazines, it seems track power is by far the most prevalent means of powering trains in Europe, so finding someone with R/C who can let you test drive it may be more difficult than it is over here.

As for track, you may want to look at AMS's new flex track. I don't know if it's available in Europe, but I've got a few samples here and I like the looks of it. The rails are smaller than LGB's rails, and the ties larger--giving it a very American narrow gauge look. The drawback is that switches are much harder to come by for rail that size. If you don't mind spending a small premium for switches, or can build them yourself, then that's certainly one option I'd entertain. If you don't feel up to the challenge of building switches, then probably the LGB track (or Aristocraft) will be your best option. Once outdoors, the rails really do visually shrink a bit. They still look a bit large, but for the ability to have ready-to-go switches, it's not a bad trade-off.

Good luck! That looks like some pretty untamed wilderness you have to work with. Should be fun.

Later,

K

[Anonymous]

Thanks for answering.

This piece of garden is really a rough one ;-)) The place to be seen on the photos is approximately the half of the possible station yard (appr. 30 ft x 4 1/2 ft). It's the smoother part ;-)

Even if I'd wi***o go around in a circle, it wouldn't be possible. I prefer the prototype manner to go back'n forth. So in any way I will prefer a wireless radio control or digital system to walk with the trains.
Here I found a radiocontrolled-digitalsystem called train control (http://www.train-control.de/) which works without a central unit and can control locos as well as switcges and signals. it is independant from the manner of powersupply. sounds interesting.

in europe exist also the revalda track. same size as LGB but made of stainless steel. I read it would be better to keep clean. I suppose I will use track power. should be possible to make several sections and it's not a big deal to lay a cable below the tracks.

Back to operating: I imagine a kind of logging railway, maybe with a little public passenger traffic. The lower station could be located on the riverside (the little wineyard-wall could be the bank where the logs go down the water. This could be the switchpoint to the exterior world for this autarc little RR co. I even found a picture of a shay being transported on loggins to its opperating field.

quite like the prototype it seems to be a severe act to get to the point of starting construction. I have enough work to get the area prepared for laying testtracks. Although I guess I have to make the severe discission to skip H0-railroading. As I have also to spent a lot of time on working, I guess my RR-time will be to short to run two systems. And as I find the interessting point in running a "real railroad" with the challange of a real terrain, the changing seasons and real goods to transport, I fear the outdoor-RR-company might cost all my sparetime ;-)
I will report and pose questions along the devlopement of the "Hatchetstone RR" (at least a name is still existing ;-)))

thank you

klaus

[whiterab]

Klaus,

You area is less overgrown than my area when I started.

For your questions. I have converted all my couplers to Kadee, run regular track power and use Aristo track.

Since you are looking at doing a wilderness railroad, have you considered making a loop using a trestle?

How long is the space for your layout? Logging railroads sometimes ran up to 3 to 4 % grades. A Shay with a few cars can easily make that much grade.

Viel Glueck

[John Busby]

Hi Klaus
I have analog track feed manual live steam and battery powered trains.
your wild terrain looks great for your chosen theme.
I use LGB track and a little Aristocraft I would recomend iether of these brands of track.
I am converting to the English center baffer and thre link chain style coupling by personal choice a lot of my stock still has LGB hook and loop couplings.
keep your grades as gentle as possable that will alow a reasonable train length to get up the hills easy.
It may be worth getting a little bit of some easy to obtain home land and hopefully cheaper loggtng stuff say a Loco a couple of wagons and a coach just to get you a quick start and have something to play around with different ideas with to see what works for you.
regards John

[Anonymous]

Hello Joe & John,

the space for my layout is approximately 27 x 10 yards with a difference of height of appr. 13 ft. it should be possible to get this difference at a maximum grade from 3-4 degrees of angle as I have a length of appr. 109 yards according the raw plan below.



at least 2 of the loops need a trestle maybe one in combination witg a tunnel.
the big challenge is the real landscape, not laying track and then adding mountains ;-) I feel I am not going to build a model-layout but a real railroad. that's what it makes easy to leave most of the H0-stuff. Now I have to deal with things I've never dealed with before like trestle-bridges. As I think of building much on my own this will be no quicky but, just like in reality, a real hard procedure for the nest years.
"not the goal is important but the way of reaching it"
Next time I will take the gathered LGB-Track outside to give me a better idea of how to go on. Used to plan in H0 on paper or on computer, in a real wilderness I can forget.
also next time I will see what geared steamer occassion will let me find and also some rolling stock.

recently I saw a publicitiy: "live is outside" - that's it!

with all this euphoria HRC Hatchetstone Railroad Co. has already its webpage ;-))))
http://www.sulka.de/sites/moba/HRC/index.html

best regards from lower franconia

klaus

[whiterab]

I love the track plan! I'm a retired engineer and I think the challenge of making the track fit the terrain was one of the most fun parts of building my layout.

However that is a lot of track to get into that amount of space. I have three concerns. The first is the tighter the curve, the less grade you can take. The effect of tight curves and grade is additive. Plan on taking more grade on the straight sections and less on the curves.

The crossovers will also be a problem. You need at around 23 cm between the top of your track and the bottom of your bridge to clear your engines. When you add the height of your roadbed and the structure of the bridge you will need to allow for at least another 3 cm.

Third, you have a couple of places in your plan where you have reverse S curves. Be sure to allow for a straight section at least as long as your longest car or locomotive between the end of one curve and the start of another.

Don't worry about building the trestles and bridges. To anyone with good skills in modeling they are not difficult. They look far more complicated then they are. Real trestles were built fast by common labor - The design was kept simple. The trick is to build a jig and then you can make the trestle bents quickly.

I don't know any suppliers in Europe but you can get good plans for bridges and trestles from several different companies here in the states. The plans I use for bridges and trestles are from Garden Textures http://www.gardentexture.com/ Just make sure the wood is something that won't rot outside. We use redwood and cedar in the states but I'm don't know what is available in Germany.

One trick I used for laying out my layout: I bought a couple of hundred meters of really cheap garden hose. I laid the hose out according to my original track plan and found several impossible situations. After several days of moving the hose around I discovered a what is my current plan. With the hose, wood stakes and some carpenters string, I could confirm my grades and the diameter of my curves. A lot cheaper than buying track.

Keep us posted. Your layout looks like it will be fun to build. The natural rock will make your train look great!

[Anonymous]

Hello Joe,

I drawed this plan quickly tonight without any detail work just to give you an impression of my ideas. Of course there may not be any S-curves without a straight intermediate (funkillers in any scale ;-).
The hose to explore the tracks is a very good idea.
I plan to keep a minimum radius of + 1 meter for the curves. grades should be max. 4 degrees, but this I will decide finally the optical impression I will receive at making tests on the hill.
Another reason for me to quit H0-modelling was the impossibility to have a satisfying impression of complete mainline-trains on my indoor-layout. the room is to small.
The Garden is much larger, but so is the rolling stock. As a consequence my chosen theme allows to make realistic trains with 3 to 5 cars. this will be trains up to 3 meters. I think this should be alright to give a sufficient realistic impression of narrow gauge in the landscape.

I already found some plans for trestles on the web, so i could already study some principals. You are right, it should not be that difficult. The lowest level will follow the ground and the levels above can be standardized.
Wood: From my own source I have acacia, well it's a real logging-train ;-) I do also have a nice collection of other cutten wood and the machines to cut it. I think I will impregnate the construction. this should last a good time.
This is also another thrill of gardenrailroading: you have to maintain your material really, you have to inspect it, to repair it. If it's not a stupid short-circuit you have to serach, this can be fun and alternation too.

back to the loops and the crossovers: thjere is also the possibility of using pointed-turns, but I will try to avoid them. Though if the layout gives the impression of too many bridges I will overthink it. As I will have to transport real (acacia-mammut-trees I have to take care with the necessary profile of the trains and tracks. To bring home the harvest of the black-berries will be the easier job ;-))

I will keep you informed about the progresses of the Hatchetstone RR

best regards

klaus

[whiterab]

Klaus,


With your garden, you should be able to put in a lot of trestles and bridges. They will blend in well and it would take a lot to overpower your natural scenery. One problem with going from HO to G is that the things you build look so BIG when you are building them and then look small when you get outside. I'm not the one to ask about too many bridges. I love them and tend to overdo them myself.

Keep us posted. That is a great site and it will be fun to watch it being built.

[kstrong]

One thing jumps out, and it may be a terminology/language thing. You mention grades of 3 to 4°. Is that as opposed to 3 to 4%? They are two different animals. A 3% incline rises 3" for every 100" of run, and is fine for our trains. A 3° incline is equal to a 5.2% grade. Grade is measured in rise divided by run, which is also equal to tanØ, where Ø is the angle of incline in degrees. A 4° grade is equivalent to a 7% grade--very steep, and not many trains will handle that, even with the short trains you propose. Add the relatively tight 1m radius curves into that equation, and that puts a lot of drag on the train. I forget the exact equation, but for every x amount of curvature, it effectively adds y% to the grade. Best to keep the curves flatter if they're going to be tighter.

You say you've got 109 yards of track from end to end. That's 327' with a rise of 13'. Assuming a linear rise from start to finish, your average grade will be 4% (2.3°). That's at the upper end of workability, and also assumes a continuous and even rise from end to end. Assuming you'll have perhaps 1/4 of the track as level for yards, passing sidings and such, your average grade jumps to 5.3% (3°). That's pretty steep.

Is there a way you can bring up the level of the bottom end as much as 1meter, perhaps by building a planter type arrangement at the bottom? This would lessen your average grade to 4%. taking into consideration yards and passing sidings. (And it has the added bonus of elevating the lower portion of the railway to waist height--very good for the back.)

Later,

K

[Anonymous]

Hello Kevin,

you're right, I meant 3 - 4 % grade. the curves I plan to make with r > 1 meter and if possible with a minor grade. the whole altitude is estimated. I'm nit yet sure that the number of loops of the sketch is sufficient.
picture: this is also possible, but I don't really want it this way ;-)



klaus

[whiterab]

Klaus,

I'm not very familiar with logging lines but there is an article in the Spring 2005 issue of Tall Timbers and Short Lines magazine showing a 35 percent incline to lower log cars down to a harbor in Northern California. It is not very clear on how the full cars were lowered.

One option is to go to an upper section and a lower section. The two sections are then connected by either the use of an incline or some other means of transferring the cargo.

I have an unused area on my layout that has a similar problem. It is too high to connect to the mainline with normal trackage.

I have looked at two options based on mining operations in Colorado since my layout is based on Colorado Narrow Guage and the area is perfect for a mine. The two options are;

1. The use of an incline where the ore cars are lowered using a donkey engine and cable.

2. Using a tall ore tipple where the upper line uses ore cars on a small mining railway to dump the ore into a tipple where it is loaded onto full size gondolas for shipment.

Because of space considerations, I am leaning to option 2 for my layout. There are mining prototypes in New Mexico that use option 1.

I do not know what would be used on a logging railroad to do the same things. If you are interested, there are modelers that I know who specialize in logging operations that could tell me what a logging operation would use to transfer the wood from the logging line to a branch line.

One option would be a Saw Mill at the mid level. The logs come in at the higher level and cut wood would be loaded into flat cars at the lower level. A meter change in elevation could be gained this way. The downside is having two seperate sets of tracks. However, this would allow you to model both logging operations and Narrow guage mainline operations.

Just an idea that I had while reading your post.

[Pagardener]

Joe...very interesting..I am doing Colorado in the 1890s (the D&RG at Silverton). Prior to the 1900s the ore came from the mine using mule pack trains and mule powered freight wagons down to the railhead..which is what I am doing...a switchback road with a pack train and a mule powered freight wagon. Logging operations had timber wagons (probably mule powered as well..POLA has one) if they weren't floated down a river. Later on they may have used cable as well until the rails came in...then the trucks.

[Anonymous]

hello,

may I invite you to make a first little round on the terrain of Hatchetstone RR and tell you some of my thoughts.

click & see

http://home.arcor.de/sulka-de/GRR/HRC1/terrain1e.html

best regards
klaus