Virginia & Truckee track arrangement ?

[mbinsewi]

gregc

i also wonder if there is a RR preference for pulling or pushing trains up a steeper grade? Add Quote to your Post

I'm not a steam expert, but, it seems keeping the boiler pointed up hill had an advantage.

The lay out, and switching moves we're dissecting, shows the railroad doing just that.

If your thoughts are that the trackage is not designed for "optimal for operation interest--" but only for entertainment?, than design your own.

Greg, I totally respect your electical expertise, you MUST be an electrical engineer.  Some of the things you come up with.... 

But why keep disecting something that is all ready built, and operating the way the builder/owner wants.  Whats the end result and goal of your post?

Show us what you would do, we'll hash it over, and be done.

Mike.

 

[Colorado Ray]

gregc

 

  

 

i also wonder if there is a RR preference for pulling or pushing trains up a steeper grade?

 

On a switchback line the engine alternates betwe pushing and pulling.  It's impossible to always have the boiler crown sheet "down" as the train alternates legs of the switchback.  

The Bradshaw Mountain Railway from Prescott to Crown King Arizona had, I believe, seven or more switchbacks on the final climb to Crown King.  You can drive the old roadbed to get to Crown King.   It's an amazing drive with spectacular views.  I highly recommend it as a side trip for anyone heading north out of Phoenix up to Sedona or Flagstaff.

Ray

[gregc]

mbinsewi

I'm not a steam expert, but, it seems keeping the boiler pointed up hill had an advantage.

whether a steam locomotive is facing up or downhill is independent of whether it is pulling or pushing the train.

if there's a preference for pushing uphill, then I understand the need for the runaround.

mbinsewi

But why keep disecting something that is all ready built, and operating the way the builder/owner wants.  Whats the end result and goal of your post?

when looking at a track diagrams i often wonder why trackage is laid out the way it is.   is it an oversite of the designer, for some operational reason I don't understand or for challenging operation.

i think Tony Koester wrote that he's modeled particular prototype trackage without understanding the need for specific turnouts or spurs only to understand after operating

i'm trying to understand the reason(s) for this track arrangement on the V&T and the limitation(s) it imposes

[richhotrain]

I went out yesterday to buy the April issue but no luck. The March issue is still on newstands. So, let's see if I understand the train movements correctly.

In the following 4-part diagram, a loco, two empties, and a caboose, move east uphill toward the Camp 2 switchback on the first part of the diagram. On the second part of the diagram, the empties and the caboose are shoved onto the middle track. On the third section of the diagram, the loaded cars are moved from the bottom track to the roundaround track (the track above the middle track), and the empties and the caboose are moved from the middle track to the bottom track. On the fourth section of the diagram, the loco uses the middle track to reach the roundaround track in order to push the loaded cars onto the tail end of the fourth track, in preparation to pull the loaded cars downhill on that fourth track. Is this correct?

Rich

[mbinsewi]

That's the way I called it out, Rich, except the caboose stays on the middle track while loaded and MT cars are switched, than the caboose is coupled on to the end.

I think the trackage works well. Everything is right there, on a some what level grade, and cars don't have to be moved very far.

I believe Greg's idea is to put the run around on the 4th track.

Something to keep in mind about prototypical ops for a logging railroad, track was for the most part, temporary, a lot of it with no ballast, as the camps moved as the logging operation progressed.

I've read an interesting book  about the Roddis logging and railroad in northern WI.  They didn't have many grades to contend with, but they did have many creeks and ravines to negotiate.

Mike.

[richhotrain]

mbinsewi

That's the way I called it out, Rich, except the caboose stays on the middle track while loaded and MT cars are switched, than the caboose is coupled on to the end.

OK, so the caboose remains on the middle track, and I see that there is enough space on the middle track to shove the caboose out of the way so that so that the loco can get behind the loaded cars on the runaround track.

mbinsewi

I believe Greg's idea is to put the run around on the 4th track.

Yes, I agree, and I think that Greg misunderstood me in my earlier reply to you when I said that he was referencing the 3rd track as the roundaround track. Greg replied by saying that he was referring to the 4th track. However, the 3rd track is the runaround track. What he meant was that he wanted to move the runaround track to connect off of the 4th track. But there is no good reason to move the runaround track to connect off the 4th track. The runaround track belongs where it is placed in the track diagram.

Rich

[richhotrain]

Doughless

What I can't see is the need for that short runaround at camp 1.  And I would want a longer tail track at the camp 2 switchback. 

It seems to me that the 3-track configuration at Camp 1 serves the same purpose as the 3-track configuration at Camp 2. At Camp1, the loaded car(s) are presumably held on the lower track. The empty cars would be dropped off on the top track, and the loco would use the middle track as the runaround.

What puzzle me is Camp 3. Without a roundaround track, the loco cannot pull cars into Camp 3. It would need to push empty cars into the campsite and then how would the loco retrieve loaded cars?

Rich 

[gregc]

richhotrain

The runaround track belongs where it is placed in the track diagram.

i don't see why.  it force the train to be only long enough to service camp #2

richhotrain

What puzzle me is Camp 3.

suggests that at least a portion of track 4 is on level grade

for camp #3, is the train pushed up the grade and pulled down?

is the opposite true fro camp #1, the train is pulled up?

 

[richhotrain]

gregc

 

for camp #3, is the train pushed up the grade and pulled down?

is the opposite true fro camp #1, the train is pulled up? 

I would love to see a video or an animation of how those three camps are operated. What I wonder is if the loco is pulling cars headed for Camp 1 and Camp 2 while at the same time pushing cars headed for Camp 3. 

Rich

[richhotrain]

gregc

 

richhotrain

The runaround track belongs where it is placed in the track diagram. 

i don't see why.  it force the train to be only long enough to service camp #2 

If the runaround were connected off the 4th track, it would take more moves and the loaded cars would have to be pushed downhill instead of pulled - - - probably a safety issue.

Rich

[mbinsewi]

richhotrain

I would love to see a video or an animation of how those three camps are operated.

Same here.  The more I look at this, and wonder on it's operation,  what we are calling the 4th track, seems to be fairly level, at 50 1/2".  Now I'm thinking a double ended siding would work good before ( to the left, as we look at the track plan) of the trestle, just for storing MT log cars.

This whole section of the lay out is dedicated for logging operations.

There also appears to be a loco shed at camp 1, suggesting that the loco might tie up there occasionally.

Unless during operating sessions each camp is handled seperately.

The operations section of the article only talks about using a "deck of task cards", and nothing about actual moves.

Mike.

[richhotrain]

mbinsewi

Unless during operating sessions each camp is handled seperately.

Yeah, I have been wondering the same thing.

Rich

[gregc]

got in touch with Don Tolley the owner of the V&T thru Steve Otte

Don said there is a rule that "no engine can pull more than three cars". 

As well as the main near camp #2 has a grade and is something logging railroads would have to deal with

[richhotrain]

gregc

got me in touch with Don Tolley the owner of the V&T thru Steve Otte

Don said there is a rule that "no engine can pull more than three cars". 

As well as the main near camp #2 has a grade and is something logging railroads would have to deal with 

Wish we knew that in advance. So many questions for Don. Plus a video showing the movement of cars back and forth to service Camp 2. Also, how does the operator deal with Camp 3 with only one spur track available?

Rich

[Sierra Man]

Hello everyone. I've followed this thread from the start. What I don't get is why all the criticism about the track plan? Let's remember this is a hobby. What the owner likes is his choice. Why are we nit picking some track? How about some comments on the beauty and craftsmanship that went into his railroad?

[richhotrain]

Sierra Man

Hello everyone. I've followed this thread from the start. What I don't get is why all the criticism about the track plan? Let's remember this is a hobby. What the owner likes is his choice. Why are we nit picking some track? How about some comments on the beauty and craftsmanship that went into his railroad? 

Phil, no one is criticizing the track plan. We are all looking for clarity on how the owner operates those three camps. If anyone is at fault, it is the magazine for only providing a superficial explanation of the operational aspects of the layout. I ran out to buy a copy of the April issue only to be disappointed by the limited discussion. I learned more from this thread than I did from reading the article.

Rich

[mbinsewi]

Phil, we are not criticising or picking the layout apart.  As Rich said, we are only trying to figure out how it's operated, as far as the lumber camps, and coming up with our own ideas on operation and alternate track arrangements.

It is a beautiful lay out, no doubt.

Mike.

 

[rrinker]

 It is, in fact, something I may have attempted for my own layout - well, the theme anyway. We had 3 of the old AHM V&T locos, and they were the best runners we had when I was a kid. And somewhere my Dad picked up a copy of the V&T book, the smaller paper one, by Beebe & Clegg, and I loved reading that. I could very easily have become a V&T modeler. As a little kid, Gunsmoke was my favorite show (I was in the hospital for a minor procedure when I was 4 - me and an older kid in the room snuck out of bed to go watch it on TV until the nurse found us and shoed us back to bed). When i got older, I discovered the Wild Wild West (the show with Robert Conrad - true fans pretend the Will Smith movie never happened), and while not the exact loco used in the show, I had cars sort of close enough to make their train and run it around my layout. Yes, 1870's-1880's Wild West would almost certainly be what I did if not 1950's Reading. So this is a layout article that is particularly appealing to me.

 Seems the more detailed aspects of how it operates are saved for articles in Model Railroad Planning. Though other MR articles have gone into more depth - like a few paragraphs tracing the run of a train. 

                                             --Randy