Hi all
I need some help adapting the 1st G&D RR to fit in 8' X 5'
No matter what I do I don't seem to be able to get curves and grades right.
I also cannot find anything that would complete Daphetid (spelling) as a station and allow it to be an operational station and still be able to grow.
Even though it defiantly will not grow (yeah right where have I heard that before.)
What bought this on well I finally bit the bullet and started assembling the DG & H Roundhouse car kits I have.
Oh well I had better hide from the collectors hit man now .
regards John
The G&D as presented in 101 Track Plans is a 3 1/2 x 7 ft layout. So you can increase it to 4x8. Use the extra foot of width to relocate the turntable engine house to the front as the plan in Model Railroading with John Allen shows. The plan in 101 uses 15" radius curves, this would be 17" on a 4x8. Going to 18" might be tight on a layout this small.
Personally, I would go to 5x10 (if you have the space or 4 1/2 x 9 at least). That way you should be able to use 18" curves and Atlas #4 turnouts with gentler grades for a more relaxed recreation of the G&D.
Good luck
Paul
Hi John,
it might help when you would be more specific besides adding the drawing you made. What is the minimum radius you want, what is the maximum grade, which are the switch numbers you want to use?
And above all how is your layout placed in the room? A width of 5 feet is way beyond any bodies possibilities; access from 3 sides is needed.
On John Allen's layout radii were applied under 14", besides very steep grades and custom-build turnouts. The latter just like on the plan in 101 Model Railroads.
John Allen had only two feet of length for his Daphetid station; just enough for two spurs. Imagine however the original G&D had been built against a backdrop 4 feet away from the front. It would leave you a narrow one foot wide space for a small terminal at the other side of the backdrop.
Smile Paul
A couple of observations about the original G&D:
If John had specified that Daphetid was a mine, the temptation to make it a full-blown town would go away.
John was, originally, a builder/photographer, and the first iteration of the G&D was little more than a minimally-operable diorama. Its gradual expansion to a basement-filling empire reflected John's increasing interest in operation.
I have rolling stock which would have been happy on either the original G&D or a slightly-expanded version in a little more space. (My coal originator has 400mm radius curves and a 4% ruling grade.) MY desire for more, and more varied, operation has filled my roster with rolling stock that is forever embargoed from that route, but has plenty of room to roam where the curves are wider, the grades are easier and the catenary motors can find wire to run under...
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Hi guys
The main thing I want to do is capture the essence of the plan and have it an operable layout
still leaving Daphetid as a (I tell you its not going to happen {Yeah right }) place to expand
All curves will be Peco code 100 set track R2,3 & 4 will get back to you with accurate radius but R2 would be pretty close to 18" Peco is slightly different to US std geometry.
Points will again be Peco set track which match exactly an R2 curve unless its the Y point. and curved points can only be used between R2 & 3. Use of flex track will be limited as it don't mail to well without being strapped to a great big bit of wood.
Rolling stock is limited to the few Devils Gulch and Hellengon cars I have 8 in total, and a couple of shorty old time coaches that are yet to be purchased.
Motive power is a Bachmann 0-6-0 with short haul tender and a Model Power fat boy 0-4-0 tender loco( only if I can sort a front coupler for it some how, Cow catcher is a problem.)
It is also proposed to permanently couple two Grandt line box cabs together to form a B+B set that can only run as a set.
It was anticipated trains would be short and grades steep, But would like to get at least 4 car trains up the hill in a train so it looks like Daphetid will have to be a crossing loop to be able to get the loco out for the return run.
Taylor lake will be an in the centre operating well as two sides have to go up against a wall or I cannot have it 8' X 5'
Hope this helps until I can get more accurate track information I have no idea what No a set track point is but its sharp.
Take a look at the Rosston, Joelberg & Holly RR (CSX branch line), featured in the February 2011 issue. It is an interpretation of the G&D Line on a 4 by 8 footprint.
When re-creating this nice little layout, try to stay away from setrack curves and switches.
Hi
Believe me I would love to stay away from set track but as I said it doesn't mail to well and doesn't store well.
As I would not need a full box of it to build the whole layout its not worth my while ordering flex track the cost of sending the wooden protective sleeve down is not worth it and its made for a whole box of track.
So until I can build the big shed layout which is no time soon. I am stuck with Peco set track which is easy to get locally at least from my perspective its the right brand. I could possibly go with the smallest streamline points in a lot of places which again I can locally source. The local toy shop won't bring in flex track he cannot sell it.
My local hobby shop is only 610Km away
John BusbyHope this helps until I can get more accurate track information I have no idea what No a set track point is but its sharp.
It's about a #2.5, very sharp. R2 radius is about 17.25". As others have noted, in your space one could design a much more operable layout. The G&D was designed around constraints that you don't have and built by a master craftsman with handlaid track to fit. Besides the John Allen "aura", there's not that much to recommend the plan (I know, heresy to some).
In particular, a design that places more of the beginning of the climb of the branch outside or inside the main oval before crossing over would significantly ease the grades throughout the layout.
One could source PECO flextrack on-line without buying a full box almost anywhere in the world. The small costs of the shipment of the extra packaging would pay dividends in smoother operation using PECO Streamline track and components, which a different track plan (in your same space) would allow.
By the way, I imagine that John Allen operated to Daphetid by shoving cars up there from the runaround (passing loop) in Gorre -- no runaround needed in Daphetid.
Good luck.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Hi cuyama
Noted and thanks had not thought of moving that about a bit.
Besides the John Allen "aura", there's not that much to recommend the plan (I know, heresy to some).
I would argue good scenic potential (this is the bit I like to "think" I am good at ) well I enjoy it the best.
Being a mountain railroad Ideal for short over powered trains therefore easy to model and still have big power and look right.
Just why is it we seem to like the big power even when We don't have the trains to match it??
For a small layout I see the big problem as being Daphetid its self not user friendly or operationally good.
I have my own eccentric thoughts which I think would change the character of the line and make it mine
Vane signals being a starting point on that.
After all there was only one John Allen and it sure isn't me.
Although I would love to know how the witches hat station roofs where done that I liked..
a train with a tiny engine shoving two cars can't be called an over-powered train with big power.
On a small layout you have to do with its limitations; E.G. very short spurs beyond the bridge. You could replace the bridge and spurs by a larger terminal; or add a cassette.
Drawn with an 18" minimum radius and #4 standard turnouts. The grades could be eased when you could accept a vertical clearance between 3"and 3,5" only. The bridge crossing Gorre could be placed more to the left as well. Most engines will be able to shove or pull the maximal four 40-ft cars up the hill. Trainlength is rather limited, 30" on my drawing.
Could it be you have chosen the G&D for the amazing pics John Allen took. He was a professional photographer and an outstanding scenery builder. Completely different layouts would have been covered for the modelrailroad community with awesome photographs by him, if he had chosen a different track and/or scenery plan. The layout Ulrich mentioned could be an alternative, though reach-in issues will be the very same.
Smile
Hi Paul
I like that thanks for taking the time to do the drawing
Any chance of moving the branch junction to the opposite side of the bridge and doubling the bridge
Please Can you rotate it 360 degrees then flip it over.
For want of a better description it needs to be in the opposite corner but on the same wall of the room.
I have enough of the MDC Devils Gulch cars for a train and it just seemed fitting that the layout they run on has a certain J A influence to things.
I am sure the pictures of the real G&D have had an influence on me as scenery is the part of model railroads I like doing and try to do it well I will never match JA but I don't think many could match it with him.
He was the big man of US modeling when my interest in building a "proper" railway was forming and naturally I read about him at the model railway club I belonged to at the time.
Yes his photo's where brilliant and gob smacking. But to get that the railroad behind the photo had to be that good as well as kicking the real world and undesirables like un- prototypical couplers out of the pictures
I can tell you the camera can be very cruel you think you got it and you take a picture then its DRAT!!! I will have to fix that bit.