Layout plan Mark III... Comments and opinions apreciated

[Anonymous]

Well guys and gals I took to heart some of the fine advice I was given by Ed, Selector, TZ, ereimer, and of course SpaceMouse, who put my mind on the right track, all puns intended [:D]

Please sound back with any and all opinions, criticisms, advice.. any things at all.. as a greenhorn I can use any and all help that anyone cares to offer. I'm open to any level of redesign.

First here is the basic info:

• Time frame is betweem 1954 and 1955.


• Location is running between Flagstaff Arizona and Holbrook Arizona.



• Ho Scale layout.


• #6 Turnouts.


• Minimum curve radii is 24" but in most areas is 25" for inside curves and 28" for outside curves.


• Minimum S curve straightaway is 12".


• Distance between rails in most places is 3" (this was arrived at by adding in a bit of extra space for conservative leeway as per John Armstrongs recomendations.)



• The Minimum reach area has been measured as 30"


• The Crosshatched areas are unreachable areas.



• Minimum clearance of isles inside the layout is c 30"



• The thick blue lines are double sided backdrops.



• The long strench of track from A-1to A-6 leads from the layout to the built in worktable (not shown) to move trains off the layout for maintance, etc. (Sorta silly idea but read about in MR and loved it.)


• The 'bottleneck' at N-21 to N-22 is a recreation of the prototype "bottleneck" bridge crossing at Canyon Diablo.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, if I've missed any needed info let me know.

Here is the pic of the layout plan, it will expand if you click on it. (My apologies for how big it pops up to.. wanted to make sure any and all details could be seen.)



Thanks in advance for taking the time to take a look and add in.

Peace.

Coyote

[selector]

Let me be the first to say...I like it!!

Just one question. You will have walk-around cabs so that you can see what's happening from end-to-end, behind those partitions?

Otherwise, I think you have something going...[^]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Let me be the first to say...I like it!!

Just one question. You will have walk-around cabs so that you can see what's happening from end-to-end, behind those partitions?

Otherwise, I think you have something going...[^]

Selector.. thanks [:)]

Yes the idea in my head right now is to have it be DCC with walk around controls either on long tethers or with multiple plug in locations.. sorta shying away from infared controls.

Coyote

[Anonymous]

I also think it is starting to come together. I really like the idea of the track leading to the workbench. I have thought about doing that for sometime now.

Do you have any staging in mind? Or is that what V-Y is all about? I didn't plan for staging on mine, and I regret it now, but I do work around it. If you don't have a ton of cars or engines I guess you would be okay. We know how us model railroaders are, never enough cars and engines.

Are you going DCC? Possibly wireless cabs. You have a lot of mainline to follow.

Can you expand more on the benchwork RIP track?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dthurman

I also think it is starting to come together. I really like the idea of the track leading to the workbench. I have thought about doing that for sometime now.

Do you have any staging in mind? Or is that what V-Y is all about? I didn't plan for staging on mine, and I regret it now, but I do work around it. If you don't have a ton of cars or engines I guess you would be okay. We know how us model railroaders are, never enough cars and engines.

Are you going DCC? Possibly wireless cabs. You have a lot of mainline to follow.

Can you expand more on the benchwork RIP track?

David thanks for the input. [:)]

I was planning on using the area at B-7 to G-9 as staging area.. athough the area at V-12 to Y-18 could be used instead but it might need to redesigned more functionaly, what is there now was all I could come up with.

Right now I have only one train [(-D] a Athearn-Genesis Super Chief set -http://www.walthers.com/exec/page/super_chief - although in time when money premits I'd like to add some freight. [;)]

The idea in my head right now is to have it be DCC with walk around controls either on long tethers or with multiple plug in locations.

As for the benchwork RIP line.. Im not sure what to tell you [D)]??? What would you like to know?

Coyote

[Anonymous]

Coyote

My take on staging was always to have it more out of the way, which is why I thought what I did. Guess I need to re-look at your design.

On the benchwork, I am just curious as to how you plan to do it, but more important, would love to see the completed idea. I ask because I want to do the same thing.

[jacon12]

Coyote,
I'm still very much a novice at all this so I can't comment on yours, but if you don't mind a question.... what type industries are you thinking of and where would they be located on your layout? I know you still must be in the preliminary stage of it but I thought if you had already figured those things out it would be interesting to know.
Thanks,
JaRRell

[Anonymous]

I like the bottleneck. Those are the types of things that make DCC such a blast.

[SpaceMouse]

Hi,

I think it is 100% improvement. Like Jarrel I would like to know what the industries are and how the towns are located.

All of the yards and spurs need runarounds. The yards especially. The way you have them set up are head in. Once an engine heads in, how does it drop off the cars and get out. That is an easy fix.

You have double tracks for most of the main. Personally I prefer a single track with strategically located passing sidings. It ads a lot of operational complexity--and more fun when operating with your pards.

ON th subject of staging I dug this up for GearDrivenSteam. It was a soap box I got on a while back..

***

To the casual observer, staging just isn't that important. Just a place to store trains. True, but it is the conceptual part of what staging represents that makes it important and changes a train set into a model railroad. Staging represents a link with the rest of the world.

Lets take a brewery as an example. Without a staging yard, you can pick beer up, and you can bring back empties. Just like the liquor store--it magically appears. But in the real world, the brewery needs hops, barley, preservatives, fuel, glass, aluminum, etc. etc. Without a stating yard where do these things come from? You could add a hops farm. But then where does the fertilizer come from for the hops. You just can't make an enclosed system that works like the real world. You have to suspend a lot of reality and give up a lot of operabilty.

With a staging yard, the hops can come from somewhere else. The diesel fuel needed at the coal mine can come from somewhere else. The town's factories can be suppled raw materials from somewhere else. And all their goods can be shipped somewhere else.

In other words, what you can do with your layout is expanded exponentially.

Even if all you can do is get a track or two under your "low hills" you are opening up a world or possibilities.

[SpaceMouse]

What's the purpose of the track that ends at 10 B-C?

[Anonymous]

Grandpa, it looks really nice. You're gonna have a lot of fun with something that size.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Hi,

I think it is 100% improvement. Like Jarrel I would like to know what the industries are and how the towns are located.

All of the yards and spurs need runarounds. The yards especially. The way you have them set up are head in. Once an engine heads in, how does it drop off the cars and get out. That is an easy fix.

You have double tracks for most of the main. Personally I prefer a single track with strategically located passing sidings. It ads a lot of operational complexity--and more fun when operating with your pards.

ON th subject of staging I dug this up for GearDrivenSteam. It was a soap box I got on a while back..

***

To the casual observer, staging just isn't that important. Just a place to store trains. True, but it is the conceptual part of what staging represents that makes it important and changes a train set into a model railroad. Staging represents a link with the rest of the world.

Lets take a brewery as an example. Without a staging yard, you can pick beer up, and you can bring back empties. Just like the liquor store--it magically appears. But in the real world, the brewery needs hops, barley, preservatives, fuel, glass, aluminum, etc. etc. Without a stating yard where do these things come from? You could add a hops farm. But then where does the fertilizer come from for the hops. You just can't make an enclosed system that works like the real world. You have to suspend a lot of reality and give up a lot of operabilty.

With a staging yard, the hops can come from somewhere else. The diesel fuel needed at the coal mine can come from somewhere else. The town's factories can be suppled raw materials from somewhere else. And all their goods can be shipped somewhere else.

In other words, what you can do with your layout is expanded exponentially.

Even if all you can do is get a track or two under your "low hills" you are opening up a world or possibilities.

Space mouse great food for thought as always! Thank you [tup]

I have updated the layout to show the towns (many of which are tiny little places and will only be shown in part, in case you worry about there being so many [:)]). I'll post the new picture at the end of this post.

Ok silly question of the year: What is a runaround? [D)] (meaning I have no idea what one looks like in terms of trackwork [%-)][:I] Any source/pic/drawning you might direct me to?)

As for industries: my primary industry in this area is Passangers.. although when I can get some more cars etc. I will be putting in the ballast pit at Darling (which was the main ballast pit for the entire AT&SF railroad) and run Ballast out of there... How easy will that be in terms of getting realistic loads for my cars [:)] just buy extra ballast. [;)] Also some processed timber/lumber comes into Flagstaff.

As to the double track its there to reflect that this entire line was double track on the prototype.

Here is the updated Pic:




Also if you any of the gang is intrested here is the prototype line:



Thanks again SpaceMouse always great stuff from you buddy.. looking forward to hearing back.

Coyote

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dthurman

Coyote

My take on staging was always to have it more out of the way, which is why I thought what I did. Guess I need to re-look at your design.

On the benchwork, I am just curious as to how you plan to do it, but more important, would love to see the completed idea. I ask because I want to do the same thing.

David the idea right now is that, that single track shotting of the layout will run along a fairly thin stretch of benchwork, with no scenicing on it, across to the top level of a 9' x 3' built in wooden worktable that was in the garage when the OL and first got the house.. once over there the train could be taken off the track directly like in a fiddle yard to be worked on/repaired/painted/what have you.. and then put back on that track and allowed to run back into the yard just below it... at least that is what is my head.. it might just be madness [:)]


Coyote

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

Coyote,
I'm still very much a novice at all this so I can't comment on yours, but if you don't mind a question.... what type industries are you thinking of and where would they be located on your layout? I know you still must be in the preliminary stage of it but I thought if you had already figured those things out it would be interesting to know.
Thanks,
JaRRell

JaRRell,
The industry I'm primarily running is Passangers... But I also plan on running Ballast out of Darling (shown in the updated pic) and some already processed lumber coming into Flagstaff.

Coyote

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by RevMattCNJ

I like the bottleneck. Those are the types of things that make DCC such a blast.

RevMatt,

Yes it looks like it will be fun [:D]

But boy was it a [censored] to get to work at least for a tenderfoot like me [;)]



Coyote

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

What's the purpose of the track that ends at 10 B-C?

It is one end of the Point to Point outer line.. In all honesty I wasn't sure how to fit it back into the yard there [:I]

Coyote

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by GearDrivenSteam

Grandpa, it looks really nice. You're gonna have a lot of fun with something that size.

Thanks Gear... the OL and are looking forward to a enjoyable time over the next few years putting it altogether... I'll probably wake the neighboors with hoots on the day its done for its first run [:D]

Coyote

[SpaceMouse]

This is from a post I did for GDS.

Suppose that you want to set off a car in your upper right hand siding. Right now, your engince can pull the car in, but not be able to get the engine out without backing the car out.

With a runaround you can pull the train onto the track right next to the red track I drew in on the left. You diconnect the train at the coupler directly in front of the car you want to drop off. The front part of the train pulls a head and backs int the siding and back onto the main to position itself in the back of the train. The engine then moves forward pushing the car into the side where it can disconect, thereby leaving the car.

It then pulls the train back on to the main adjacent the siding, disconnects the engine from the rear of the train. The engine (and cars) then runs around and positions itself in front of the train and reconnects.



The same type action happens near the yard. Then engine drops of the train on the main and uses the siding to get behind the train. It can then drop the cars (classifies them) in the appropriate classification track. If they are all mixed up, this will result in the train backing out and changing tracks quite a bit to get them sorted.

[SpaceMouse]

Although you can do passenger operations on a layout, I'm not familiar with passenger operations as apply to your layout. There is an article in this months MR that talks about a passenger terminal. You might want to check that out.

Last week in order to get the club members familiar how we renamed the locations on the layout, we made up a series of 8 trains or so and sent people out. Basically they moved from town to town hold a specific amount of time at each specified station. Each person who ran a route completed a circuit in 30-45 minutes. No one wanted to take out a second train. The challenge of passenger trains is composing proper cars for the route traffic and abiding by a time table.

Many people love this kind of railroading. I prefer moving freight in and out of sidings, providing materials for industries and picking up finished product. I like a passenger train running through and messing up the freight schedule, but to me a passenger train is an obstacle. At most op sessions I've been to, passenger trains are for newbees. If there are no newbees, we have to ask for volunteers, etc. Most everyone prefers the challenge of freights. It just seems like there is more to do, more to figure out.

Passenger trains run just fine on mainlines that have a lot of industrial switching. Freighters that don't have industrial spurs just run around the track, but don't stop for passengers.

You have a lot of good space for a layout, yet what I see so far is a lot of running with little to do. I'm not saying that you can't get there from here. I just don't see it. My gut feeling is that you are still a couple evolutions of consciousness away.

Think about it this way. You are building a layout that may take upwards of 5 years to build. Will you have evolved beyond it before it is done?

[ereimer]

if you add another track or 2 to the area a tthe workbench it could become a staging area representing the world west of flagstaff . to really make things work you'd need more staging tracks over by holbrook

fantastic work so far , i really like the plan . chip's comment about your interests evolving before the layout is 'complete' may be valid . while it's certainly great fun to run a beautiful passenger train through well done scenery , how often can you do it before it becomes just another lap around the layout ? staging helps a lot with this as you can build several trains to be run through the layout during a session , heavy traffic through canyon diablo is going to be fun !

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

This is from a post I did for GDS.

Suppose that you want to set off a car in your upper right hand siding. Right now, your engince can pull the car in, but not be able to get the engine out without backing the car out.

With a runaround you can pull the train onto the track right next to the red track I drew in on the left. You diconnect the train at the coupler directly in front of the car you want to drop off. The front part of the train pulls a head and backs int the siding and back onto the main to position itself in the back of the train. The engine then moves forward pushing the car into the side where it can disconect, thereby leaving the car.

It then pulls the train back on to the main adjacent the siding, disconnects the engine from the rear of the train. The engine (and cars) then runs around and positions itself in front of the train and reconnects.



The same type action happens near the yard. Then engine drops of the train on the main and uses the siding to get behind the train. It can then drop the cars (classifies them) in the appropriate classification track. If they are all mixed up, this will result in the train backing out and changing tracks quite a bit to get them sorted.

Chip
I'm sorry but I dont follow at all. [:(] [D)]

I searched through John Armstrongs book but haven't found anything yet that helps explain it to me either...

Maybe another try?

Coyote

[NZRMac]

A Runaround is pulling a train forwards in to a siding, uncoupling moving forward (loco only) Throwing a turnout and reversing past the train to another turnout back onto the siding, throwing that turnout and hooking on the back end of the train or leaving the train there and moving out of the siding in reverse.

Ken.

[selector]

Grandpa, Chip is talking about when an engine is leading a train and has to drop a car at a point, but the car is in the middle of the train, or even right up at the loco. The loco can stop, separate the train at the rear coupling of the subject car, and pull forward to drop the car where he needs to. He then coninues past the 'runaround' switch. It reverses along the adjacent track (the runaround), and past the lower switch, and hooks up to the rest of the train he left parked. Now a whole train, he continues along his route, with car(s) delivered.

I hope I got that right.

[Anonymous]

Ken & Selector,

Ok I think I understand the principle now, thank both of you gents a lot....

Now all I have to figure out is how to institute such a thing.. hrmmm well Chip said it should be relatively easy... sooooo

Back to the drawing board.


Thanks again.

Coyote

[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.

[West Coast S]

Relocate Flagstaff to area A5, eliminate the third track diverging at Diablo (K23), eliminate Joseph City and the return feature for a good sized yard. Radical enough?

Canyon Diablo should be the focal point. Since passenger operation is the primary traffic , you have a proper balance of industrial activity in my opinion.

Dave

[Anonymous]

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.

[: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)



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:


(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 [}:)]).

(western side)
(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

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by West Coast S

Relocate Flagstaff to area A5, eliminate the third track diverging at Diablo (K23), eliminate Joseph City and the return feature for a good sized yard. Radical enough?

Canyon Diablo should be the focal point. Since passenger operation is the primary traffic , you have a proper balance of industrial activity in my opinion.

Dave

Dave thanks for the input *nods* sounds like you are near the same page as Chip.. I agree with you both.. I'm gonna try for the 4th redesign tonight and then slap it up here to see what you gents think...

Thanks again.

Coyote

[West Coast S]

By all means I would included the Apache.....Here's my thoughts on the matter..

You could route the Apache in the area of T18, off the Holbrook branch and terminate along the aisle behind Dennison, you could depress the track or use scenery to disguise it from normal view and impart a sense of distance.

So what have we accomplished? Additional operation! In this scenario, the Holbrook branch would begain at the south end of the new yard, continuing southbound, for a interchange with the Apache, the Holbrook branch would then continue east to terminate at Y15.


The above arraignment would permit live interchange, moving cars from the Apache to the yard and vice versa. One small note, I would include an additional crossover between the two mains at Winslow to permit operating flexibilty.

Don't see a logical reason to remove the ballest pit at darling, as stated previously I would make no changes to any of the industrial spurs.

Getting ahead a bit, I would use a photo backdrop of Diablo canyon behind the bridge and blend the scenery to tie it all together. A little illusion goes a long ways!


I do like the concept you've got going, I could get into a track plan like this.

Dave

[ereimer]

this just gets better all the time . the canyon diable scene and bridge is going to be fantastic!

an amusing thought .... if you head about 50 - 60 miles west from flagstaff to ash fork and turn south , and turn the clock back to 1900 - 1910 you'll be on the Santa Fe , Prescott and Phoenix , the railroad i'm basing my layout on [:)]