Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse Coyote, Let me see if I have this straight. You are modeling a 100 mile stretch of the Santa Fe between Flagstaff and Holbrook. The three main geography features that I can discern from what you have presented is 1) There is a grade up from Holbrook to Flagstaff. 2) There is a bottleneck at Canyon Diablo and 3) Top of the grade is at or near Angel. There are 2 "major" cities: Winslow and Flagstaff which are 60 miles apart. The Santa Fe does not end at either Flagstaff or Holbrook, but continues on quire a ways in either direction. Now looking at the physical space of your layout as you have it currently set up in terms of scenes: 2 at Flagstaff 1 at McPhetridge 1 at Winona Darling 1 at Angel-Diablo 1 at Diablo-Sunshine-Denison 1 at Winslow 1 at Hibbard-Joseph 1 At Holbrook Ideally, you want your train to pass through each scene only once. A double track like the prototype is fine, but would point out that you have three distinct routes from Diablo to Flagstaff. You simply don't need them. You can do everything with just your dual mainline. Right now a 6 car passenger train stopping in Denison will still be in Canyon Diablo. Since all the geographic action takes place between the two largest cities, I would suggest modeling between Winslow and Flagstaff. Your instinct to put a yard at each end location on your layout is good, but the railroad you are modeling really doesn't end as you have it represented. It continues on in both directions. You have really provided the solutions perhaps without noticing. The yards you have designed are just to small to work well for you. So this is my solution based upon the info you have supplied. Obviously you have read more about the area than I since I haven't read squat, so you'll have to bring up my errors in assumption. Make Canyon Diablo / Angel your visual focal point like you have it but do it up big and run it from the mid-point between Dennison and Sunshine to the tip of the Angel side of the peninsula. Make Flagstaff and Winslow the ends of your layout and give them both larger yards. Start your Flagstaff yard where Winona is now. Remove the backdrop from the Flagstaff and expand the city street and add industries. Where the yard terminates in your return loop place your backdrop and run the single track you have nowrunning to A1 behind it. Open that track up to 4-5 tracks for your west staging yard--personally I would just call the area Los Angeles to give it significance as it represents all points west. Between Angel and Flagstaff you can put a town scene where Darling is now. It can be either Darling or McPhetridge. ON the other end of the layout the Winslow yard would start where you have Hibbard and extend to V17. What you call Holbrook becomes staging or Albuquerque (all points east.) Denison is where Winslow is now and Sunshine is On the point at N18. All your towns have room for industrial sidings if you choose. You can still connect at U19 (but I would connect via tunnel to maintain the one train per scene illusion.) Let me know what you think. I know it is hard to visualize from word pictures. [/quote] [:0] Now that is some advice!!! [:D] Chip, Thank you, that -is- a lot to try and digest and visualize.. Let me see what I can contribute, ask, or comment on .. as far as grade.. yes the land falls away east from flagstaff .. here is an elevation map of the area from the AT&SF (I apologize if the quality is bad), it should expand out some when clicked) [img]http://mysite.verizon.net/coyote97/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/layoutelevation.JPG[/img] Winslow was a fairly flat area on the line and the AT&SF used the Winslow yard as an interchange to switch cars etc. since it was the only level area for many hundreds of miles in either direction (or at least that is my understanding, if someone knows better please feel free to correct me.). I see what you mean about too many multiple lines running behind the edges of backdrops and making for unrealistic and displeasing look, I was thinking this same thing myself last night and I agree, it must go. I do want to keep the double track at all costs. it follows the prototype and I want to be able to have trains pass each other one, one heading 'east' and one heading 'west', to get the look of many tremendious pictures I have seen of the line... Like this one: [img]http://mysite.verizon.net/coyote97/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/sf6612.jpg[/img] (my apologies for not properly crediting the individual who took the picture, I no longer remember who took it. [:(]) I also agree that Canyon Diablo should become a more main foucs, not just scenicly but also because of the bottle neck crossing and the operations that I am gathering will be fun there. However I don't want to stretch it out too much because, although it is an awesome bridge in the middle of nowhere over a fairly deep cut, it isnt too long all the way across as shown here (yes this is a picture happy post [}:)]). [img]http://mysite.verizon.net/coyote97/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/sf6609.jpg[/img](western side) [img]http://mysite.verizon.net/coyote97/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/sf6610.jpg[/img](eastern side) My best guess is that the crossing is somewhere between c. 850 -900 ft. long (which admittedly is c. 10' on the layout, but I feel (don't know, mind you) that some compression would be good so as to not throw off the compression of the rest of the pike.... Now all that being said, I am with you, it needs to be longer at least 4 or 5 feet on the layout I'm thinking right now. I definately want to keep Darling on the pike for serveral reasons... It has the ballast pit which provides me with some industry originating inside pike (outside of passengers) and a very fine gentleman, Mr. George Harris (*tips his hat to George*),who has provided me with countless pictures, maps and details used to live in darling and it is a sign of appreciation to a good man to keep it there... did I mention the ballast pit also? [;)] Following your idea, what do you think of the idea of trying to keep Holbrook in but adding in some of the short line for the Apache Railway that runs almost due south out of Holbrook (perhaps using it as staging??), good idea, or unrealistic pipe dream.. I'll sit down and try and draw out some of your advise and post it tonight or tomorrow. Any more you can add is always welcomed.. Thank you again greatly for your sound advice. Peace. Coyote
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag

Update Reply

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Model Railroader Newsletter See all

Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!

Subscriber & Member Login

Edit post

Post Body

Tags (Optional)

Subscriber & Member Login

Users Online

Search the Community