This plan based on the 1950s Missouri Pacific in San Antonio, Texas concentrates on local switching between Cementville, the downtown depot area and the Union Stockyards. The yard near the downtown depot is NOT intended as a main switching yard. The main Missouri Pacific yard for San Antonio in the 1950s was South San Antonio. The depot area yard is only for sorting local pickups and deliveries, with transfer runs between that yard and South San Antonio (SOSAN) for connection with mainline trains. It is therefore a minimal yard, and fitting all the desired passenger, industry switching and minor yard switching into some dozen feet of length took away from room for off-main switch leads and other niceties.
The layout, while concentrating on local switching, has provision for the Texas Eagle passenger train from St. Louis arriving and SWITCHING to make up the stub run that continues to Laredo with connections to Mexico City via the NdeM Aguila Azteca. Not much running- but some interesting passenger switching. The “surround staging” provides a place to keep a few mainline freight trains that function mainly as “background,” passing through the scene. There is very little “operation” as such for the mainline trains- mostly running-- although there are two places where through trains can make meets and passes: Adams Siding alongside Cementville, and in the downtown station area. Mainline trains mostly run from staging to staging.
A word about “surround staging”: the layout has a double track around its outer perimeter, with some kind of background just inboard of the tracks. That background could be a full scene, a foot or more taller (with TV cameras or detectors to monitor trains?)-- or it could also be a cutout of buildings and foliage only six inches tall to hide staging, and allowing reaching over with some difficulty, and observation from overhead with strategically placed mirrors. In the case of a short ground-row background, a scene of sky and more distant objects, etc. would be behind the staging. (I used a six inch tall ground row of pine trees to hide the staging on my East Texas layout, in this old shot I have posted repeatedly:
link: http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/554/johnston.jpg )
The visible mainline runs once around the 9 by 18 foot space. Clockwise represents southerly direction and counterclockwise is north. This puts Cementville, the IGN passenger depot, and the Union Stockyards. east of the tracks on the prototype, on the BACK side of the round-the-room line, where the viewer-operators faces them.
I laid out Cementville on a slight diagonal. I thought it just NEEDED to be on a long tangent of track-- I’ve always seen it that way when driving past. A period aerial from Trinity University shows the track as a long straight line across the picture.
An employee timetable shows both a passing siding named “Adams” and a “Cementville business track” here. The passing siding allows an occasional mainline meet. It also allows running a local switcher out from the downtown yard, picking up and setting out, and using the Adams passing siding as a runaround for the return trip.
I placed the passing siding on the east/ outer side of the mainline to be on the same side as the Cementville business track. I have NOT found track diagrams for the area. It seems to be outside the city area covered by the Sanborn’s maps. I made the Cementville industry spur double-ended to give it a difference of scale from the one-two- and -three-car spaces of the smaller industries. I don‘t know actual track arrangements into the plant or what the loading facilities were like. In mid-1950s, dry cement was probably shipped in bulk in 2-bay covered hoppers and smaller amounts bagged in boxcars.
The mainline runs straight past the plant. The Adams passing siding was laid out a short distance away from the end curve at the north end of the layout to ease a possible S-curve situation. The end curve curves towards the inside of the layout while the entry to the passing siding curves to the outside.
Alamo Cement’s signature smokestacks have been preserved as part of the Quarry Market shopping compex. They are of course a got-to, got-to, got-to have it.
The Quarry Market complex displays a Plymouth industrial switcher and a car used in the quarry operation at Cementville. It would be simple to add either a static model of the quarry tramway or a back-and-forth run to a layout.
The former quarry became the Quarry Golf Club.
Former quarries make up several entertainment and recreation spots in San Antonio where you can research the appearance of quarry rockwork. The famous Japanese Sunken Garden in Breckenridge Park is one such location, with preserved lime kiln and industrial buildings on site.
Another is the Fiesta Texas theme park. Ignore the fake steam locomotive and look at the rockwork.
And here is a rock car at Fiesta Texas. (This was in 1992- don’t know if it is still there...)
A discussion of the layout from Cementville to the downtown depot will have to wait for another installment.
I failed to mention elevation. Obviously, the track just “north” of Adams Siding and Cementville passes over the track just “south” of Stockyards which requires a minimum 3 ½ to 4 inch elevation differential. The track runs about 35 feet around the space, 420 inches, divided into 4 inch rise = a little less than 1 percent average grade. In the prototype, there is an elevation drop as the line passes San Antonio International Airport- 809 feet; Adams Siding 741 feet; IGN depot 657 feet; junction with SP Kerrville line 641 feet, and a slight rise to 649 feet just south of Union Stockyards.
Just south (clockwise) from Cementville I drew in a small residential subdivision. This makes a little visual transition between the relative open space of Cementville and the crowd of industry spurs as the line approaches downtown. In real life, the line passes 20 or 30 blocks of residential neighborhoods with an occasional neighborhood business street... no spurs, no passing sidings, just backyards.
The area at the “top” of the plan is constrained by the placement of the line along Cementville at a diagonal, leaving very little room to cut in a turnout. I drew in a turnout to service a lumberyard spur in the short bit of tangent. That turnout HAD to go toward the inside of the layout to avoid a serious S curve problem, since it is between two inward turning curves. A lumberyard is the first and the most typical kind of industry you would pass coming in San Antonio on the MoPac in the 1950s, and you would pass several on your way to town.
In order to use any space outside the curve for industry on the top of the plan, I had to come to it from around the end, using an 18 inch radius curve. The mainline curves are laid out at a compromise 24 inch radius. Most of the industries are not laid out to match the prototype specifically, and I have included only a handful out of the 30 or so on the prototype. But despite leaving many out, the industries ARE in the correct ORDER, and on the correct EAST or WEST side of mainline. In general, I preferred larger buildings for the east side of the mainline, against the background, and open outdoor type industries for those on the west, inner side of the layout, so as not to block the view of the mainline excessively.
On the east side is Prasel Sash and Door, a dog food canning plant (picked partly because it sounds interesting and secondly because it would make use of byproducts from the stockyards), National Grocers, and a furniture warehouse. Shipments inbound would be wood to Prasel, cans and boxes to the dog food place, various food products the grocery warehouse and furniture to the furniture warehouse, mostly in boxcars except some REEFERS for the grocery. Outbound only from Prasel Sash and Door and the dog food place.
(This selection omits a construction company materials yard and a block-square lumber company, two paper goods companies, an egg-drying plant (?) and a customs broker on the east side of the line.)
The mostly open-air industries on the west/ inner side of the line include a gravel yard (gondolas IN), Delaware Punch (tankcar syrup IN), Conoco bulk plant (tankcar petroleum IN) and Acme Brick (boxcar & bulkhead flatcar IN). This selection omits Negley Paint factory, a trunk factory, a concrete ready-mix plant, another furniture warehouse, a beer distributor, a foundry on a long spur a block off the mainline, four more building materials and lumber yards, a stone cutting and ornamental concrete works, still another lumber company, a clay pipe distributor, an asphalt contractor, all west of the MoPan main line. So your choices may well differ from mine.
I felt I had no choice with SCOBEY FIREPROOF STORAGE. It is at the other end of the block with the big IGN depot and in line with it. I saw it on a 1940s Sanborn’s map and in photos taken at the depot in the 40s, 50s and 60s. I photographed it in 1988 and it is still there on GoogleEarth.
Note especially the tank on the roof, which seems to show up in pictures from every angle. Houston Street is a major San Antonio thoroughfare. I wanted to locate it so it would not be blocked by cars on sidings and spurs, so I put it across the middle of a crossover, where the moving points of the turnouts are outside the roadway.
Somewhere, between Houston Street, the IGN depot and Commerce Street should be a view of the San Antonio skyline as seen from the west. I could not find the right angle (especially HEIGHT) for a 1950s skyline, but the Library of Congress provided a panorama from 1910.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?pan:4:./temp/~ammem_yMdQ::displayType=1:m856sd=pan:m856sf=6a10119:@@@
A few skyscrapers missing...
Now to the layout of the tracks in the north end of the downtown yard, which is small for a major point on a prototype railroad but still hard to fit into our space. I am reposting the top of the plan so you follow the explanation...
The streamliner Texas Eagle needs a long station track, ands that needs to be adjacent to the station building. The through mainline for freights that pass through going to SOSAN needs to be on the straight alinement, so the passenger track needs a jog over to the east (right on the plan). That jog itself creates an S surce, and therefore requires a slow speed- but that is appropriate at a station. I did not want the outward turning S-curve for the passenger track to make an immediate reverse curve from the big curve at the top of the plan, so that moved the entry to the passenger platform track ONE turnout length from the end curve at top. That turnout could have been noriented to go either inside or outside the mainline. Getting to use the outer space at the top of the plan without interfering with the passenger terminal and Railway Express tracks was so critical that it took precedence. I took special pains to line up the trackside edge of Scobey with the trackside facade of the passenger depot. The access to the industries on the west/ inner side of the mainline is off one of the yard body tracks.
I cut the plan in halves because both my Railimages account and the Trains.com forum would cut my original drawing down too small to read easily. So- to the passenger station and beyond, on another “episode.”
Here is the bottom half of the plan started a day or two ago.
Near the middle of the plan would be a representation of the IGN passenger station.
Scaling the Sanborn’s map show the depot to be about 111 feet square. There would hardly be room for that much depth here, so it has been cut in half.
The depot hosted the Texas Eagle, shown here in 1958
A later view of the train in “Jenks Blue”?
PHOTOS FROM http://www.txtransportationmuseum.org
An interesting passenger operation would be switching the train from a full length streamliner from Saint Louis to the stub train to Laredo with connections to Mexico City. I incoluded an express track and a “coach track” on the north side of the depot (top half of plan) to facilitate passenger car switching.
My Sanborn’s map (“base 1912 map updated to 1951”) showed a roundhouse and turntable just across from the depot. I have not found them in any photos of the depot area, and I don’t know if they were still there. But if you WANT to have a turntable and roundhouse in the area represented by this layout, this would be the spot. I found a 1960-something union work rules agreement that says Missouri Pacific engine crews report for duty at the roundhouse at South San Antonio.
Commerce Street would be an important “scene setter.” There is now an overpass for Commerce Street that changes the whole scene.
This plan calls for four double-ended tracks in front of the depot- a passenger train platform track at right, the through mainline next, and two more tracks to the left of the main for passing, runaround, minor classification for local switching, and access to the three industries to the left of the south yard ladder. Once more, I wanted the passenger train track to be as long as possible EXCEPT that in order to crossover toward the OUTSIDE of the mainline, I needed it to be one turnout length away from the end curve which curves toward the INSIDE. The turnout to the two yard tracks on the inside takes that place, since it is a continuation of the inward curve.
In order to make the passenger platform track as long as possible, I was forced to use the end of that that to access two spurs which run toward the bottom right corner. Up against the backgroun d and cut at a diagonal is a long building with loading spots for the Missouri Pacific LCL freight station, Armour (REEFERS), and Aviation Coffee. The Sanborn’s map shows all three uses in one long building, in the half block just south of the depot. The track right in front of the freight house spur represents a Southern Pacific interchange. The interchange was actually located several blocks south of the depot, alongside a Southern Pacific
Kerrville Sub. branchline that made a diamond crossing of the MoPac mainline and continued north, a block or two west paralleling the MoPac for a mile or so. I wanteds to work in the diamond crossing, but nonce more space prevented it. However, in a minimal copying of the prototype, the SP transfer makes a V angle with the MoPac main. An odd-shaped nondescript warehouse district view block building obscures the fact that the SP transfer runs into the background and does not actually connect to anything.
The three industries on one spur inside the layout south of the depot accomodate Wright Oil (TANKCARS) , Banana Supply (REEFERS) and a beer distributor.
Coming around a curve on the lower right corner of the plan, the track passes a scraggly brushy area with a little trestle, no more than two or three bent, over a San Pedro Creek, hardly ever more than six or eight feet wide. There are actually two pretty minor creeks between the industries south of the depot and the crossing of the Southern Pacific Sunset main line. Both are about a third the height and length of this Southern Pacific trestle over the San Antonio River not quite a mile east.
But this little creek is like a smaller version of a similar scene. I believe there were a number of small substandard houses in the brushy area near the tracks and creeks. Modeling some would give the layout a small sense of “social commentary.” My impression was that this area had some houses similar to these which succumbed to the Urban Renewal effort for San Antonio’s 1967 HemisFair exposition.
This is my 1988 photo of the prototype crossing of the MoPac line with the (double track) SP Sunset Route, modeled just above the Stockyards. The curve to the left in the mid-distance is the connection from the SP to the MoPac.
The Stockyards were just to the left of that curve. There seems to be no trace of facility (except possibly the kind of “trace” the water quality people worry about.) Tracks from both the MoPac and SP had access and a Swift meat packing plant occupied a spur on the south side of the stockyards. One spur parallel to the MoPac mainline can be used for spotting MoPac stockcars and the same track serves double or even triple duty by extending to the right and “suggesting” the general alignment of the SP-MoPac connection and ALSO the SP access to the stockyards. There is room for only a six to eight inch depth of stock pens instead of the acres of the prototype, but letting the stocfk pens run for five or six feet along the bottom of the plan suggests the sprawl. I could not find a general overall photo of the Stockyard, though I found some closeups of Texas steers taken there, including some Longhorns. Critter-bash some commercial cattle figures into Longhorns to get that real Texas flavor for this scene.
And there you have it...an HO single-car-garage size representation of 1950s San Antonio MoPac with a few freight trains running through, a passenger train to switch and 20 more-or-less-real industry spots to switch.
leighant This plan based on the 1950s Missouri Pacific in San Antonio, Texas concentrates on local switching between Cementville, the downtown depot area and the Union Stockyards. The yard near the downtown depot is NOT intended as a main switching yard. The main Missouri Pacific yard for San Antonio in the 1950s was South San Antonio. The depot area yard is only for sorting local pickups and deliveries, with transfer runs between that yard and South San Antonio (SOSAN) for connection with mainline trains. It is therefore a minimal yard, and fitting all the desired passenger, industry switching and minor yard switching into some dozen feet of length took away from room for off-main switch leads and other niceties.
First of all, you did a very nice job on this. Please consider all comments as purely constructive and/or personal taste. I will start with some initial observations as I have not studied the ramifications of the track layout in detail. Starting with cementville and working our way around clockwise...
I can add a little bit of information regarding Alamo Cement, and I can already tell that some liberties will be needed. I have a basic drawing of the tracks at the plant. The facing points are on the north side of the plant (bottom of this plan) and they spread into 4 spur tracks. The 2 closest to the main line [west side of plant] run along some concrete bulk loading silos. The other 2 go amongst the plant buldings to concrete loading docks. I had envisioned the plant cocked a little to the left (as opposed to cocked to the right in this plan) and the clinker shed [the long rectangular building that is now a movie theatre] as extending into the backdrop with the quarry behind it [on the backdrop]. If I can find some decent pictures of the Alamo Cement plant, I would really like to make it a focal point on the layout.
The residential area is a nice touch that provides a transition into downtown. In N scale it might be possible to chop off part of the neighborhood to make the lumberyard spur a little less awkward, but then again, most lumbyard spurs are wedged-in wherever they fit.
I like the way downtown and the I&GN station form a focal point in the middle of the right side of the layout. The Scobey Fireproof storage building is a must have as it appears in almost every picture of the I&GN station adjacent to it.
I consider the limited yard area to be a plus so in this case the prototype works in our favor.
leighant In the case of a short ground-row background, a scene of sky and more distant objects, etc. would be behind the staging. (I used a six inch tall ground row of pine trees to hide the staging on my East Texas layout, in this old shot I have posted repeatedly:
Very well done.
leighant The visible mainline runs once around the 9 by 18 foot space. Clockwise represents southerly direction and counterclockwise is north. This puts Cementville, the IGN passenger depot, and the Union Stockyards. east of the tracks on the prototype, on the BACK side of the round-the-room line, where the viewer-operators faces them.
I had originally envisioned [talking N scale 10x12 here] a pure point to point with cementville on one side of the door and the stockyards on the other with I&GN station on the wall opposite the door; but I like the hidden staging and continuous running of this plan better. The only drawback being a duckunder is required.
leighant I laid out Cementville on a slight diagonal. I thought it just NEEDED to be on a long tangent of track-- I’ve always seen it that way when driving past. A period aerial from Trinity University shows the track as a long straight line across the picture.
I remember Alamo Cement being on a tangent as well. It might be an optical illusion because US 281 runs at an angle to the MoPac main and the original course of Jones Maltsberger Rd. Jones maltsberger used to run parallel to the plant in between the plant and the MoPac mainline. That photo shows the original course of JM Rd and is almost certainly pre-US281 as well
leighant I placed the passing siding on the east/ outer side of the mainline to be on the same side as the Cementville business track. I have NOT found track diagrams for the area. It seems to be outside the city area covered by the Sanborn’s maps. I made the Cementville industry spur double-ended to give it a difference of scale from the one-two- and -three-car spaces of the smaller industries. I don‘t know actual track arrangements into the plant or what the loading facilities were like. In mid-1950s, dry cement was probably shipped in bulk in 2-bay covered hoppers and smaller amounts bagged in boxcars.
See my comments in the Alamo Cement section. Facing points to the north present a slight design challenge and might need to be fudged a bit. My research shows the plant received hoppers of coal for the kilns. Cement was shipped both bagged and in bulk [presumably in covered hoppers as you stated].
Other inbound loads might have included hoppers of slag and different materials to be mixed with the limestone to create specialized cement mixtures.
leighantAlamo Cement’s signature smokestacks have been preserved as part of the Quarry Market shopping compex. They are of course a got-to, got-to, got-to have it.
ABSOLUTELY!
It's getting late so I will continue with more another day.
I think a duckunder can be avoided on an N scale version incorporating similar elements because N scale curves for mainline turnbacks do not need to be such big blobs. A turnback curve for HO, with 24 inch radius makes a minimum 4 1/2 foot BLOB. In a 9 foot wide garage stall, that would be just about impossible. (Well, possible with a 2 foot shelf on the opposite wall and a 2 foot squeeze-through for operators. Possible, but oooooh, yuck!)
If the north end of the layout ended with a turnback curve and staging on the back side of the turnback, the tangent alongside Cementville could run on a diagonal so it would be "fat" on the north end and svelt and "shelfy" on the town end. That could provide more room, and an easier direction/ alignment, for facing spurs at the north end of the complex.
A similar turnback lobe at the south end of the layout could contain the Stockyards and make them a deep and sprawling scene. In N scale, it might even be possible to make some of the SP crossings and/or interchanges be operating.
Maybe I can work later on the angles and details. Fun working on this...
I notice both from the present appearance and from the period photos that the big stacks at Alamo Cement comprised three evenly spaced stacks and one stack a little farther distance from the three, and the odd one is subtly fatter.
I wonder if there is any particular reason, either historical- in the timing of construction of the plant in phases, or technological- some stacks foir one purposes and the odd one for a different process or purpose. Does the variation tell a "story" ? If so, it would be fun modeling it--- and having the story ready when somebody asks "why couldn't you get it all even and same?"
Happy railroading.
leighant I notice both from the present appearance and from the period photos that the big stacks at Alamo Cement comprised three evenly spaced stacks and one stack a little farther distance from the three, and the odd one is subtly fatter. I wonder if there is any particular reason, either historical- in the timing of construction of the plant in phases, or technological- some stacks foir one purposes and the odd one for a different process or purpose. Does the variation tell a "story" ? If so, it would be fun modeling it--- and having the story ready when somebody asks "why couldn't you get it all even and same?"
That fourth, fatter stack, was for the electrostatic precipitator which is a polution control device. It cuts down on particulate pollution from the manufacturing process and was added in the 60's or 70's, The other three stacks are chimneys for venting the kilns and are original to the plant. The kilns are giant tubes, several hundred feet long that are used to bake the raw limestone into clinker (baked rock). The clinker can then be ground up and mixed with other materials to produce different types of cement. The plant grew over time with new buildings added to accommodate new technology and add additional capacity. The plant was in service from ~1908 - 1983.
quote from MJ4562 “The kilns are giant tubes, several hundred feet long that are used to bake the raw limestone into clinker (baked rock).”
1950s San Antonio MoPac -N scale- "Room #1"
A week or so ago, I posted a plan for a layout representing the Missouri Pacific in San Antonio in the 1950s. I didn’t know the scale or layout size needs of MJ4562 who asked about the prototype railroads with a view for modeling, so I made up a layout plan for the commonly bused HO and a common layout size, a one-car bay of a garage. MJ4562 since said he was thinking about N scale in a spare room about 10 x 12.
That is a smaller square footage space, and 10 feet is only slightly wider than the 9 foot garage space. For 10 feet for N is MUCH wider than 9 for HO. What becomes critical is the width taken by a turnback curve, which allows a walk-in layout instead of the duck-under/ crawl-under I laid out for HO. A fairly generous radius for N scale is 18”. Add 2 inches in front and back for the distance to wall and distance to table edge, and a “blob” takes a minimum 40.” Two can fit in a 10 foot wide space (120 inches), with at least a yard of room for a walk-in aisle.
I figured an “it’ll-have-to-do” 24 inch radius for the HO design- a bit marginal for passenger cars, but It’ll Have to Do. A turnback curve and 3 inches front and back make a 54 inch blob. Two blobs and a 30 inch aisle would require 138 inches, a little over 11 feet.
For a 10 x 12 spare bedroom space, door location becomes important if
· we want a walk-in, and
· we want layout elements arranged in a reasonable and/or recognizable verson of the prototype.
Here is one orientation of a 10x12 room, drawn with the long room walls horizontal to fit the screen shape. I will call this “Room #1.” The door is in the bottom left corner in this view, a 32 inch door about a foot from the corner. I drew doors on both the 10 foot and 12 foot wall because it makes little difference. EITHER location would required about the same entry space which would have to be kept open of layout. (If the doors had been in the top right, we could just rotate the drawing of the plan. If it were a mirror image, with the doors at top left or bottom right, that would GREATLY change the ability to get a walk-in and out layout elements in order.)
This door arrangement and a turnback curve at the top left allow a long tangent on the “north” (courterclosewise) end of the layout where Cementville could be located. MJ45621 said he found a track schematic that showed facing point turnouts giving access to the plant from the north end. That would put our Cementville in the location shown as “Cement A” on the plan, which would not allow much for “other” industries and scenes between Cementville and the upper right corner of the plan. This would also leave the large area at the upper left corner without much appropriate industry or scene.
An alternative that twists the prototype a little would be to locate Cementville toward the upper left end, going into the end loop somewhat, with a south end facing point turnout access. This would leave room along the middle of the wall for a bit of quarry scene and a sense of a little open space between Cementville and the scenes and/or industries in the upper right corner. All the scene elements would be in prototype orientation and arrangement EXCEPT that spur directions would be a mirror-image of the prototype.
A third alternative is an even greater twist of the prototype, but it is the most efficient cramming of operation and scenes into the space. Alternative “Cement C” envisions the mainline going around a curve to the back at the upper left corner, with Cementville located outside and in front of the mainline in the space between the turnback curve and the door. This puts the plant on the west side of the line, where it really went on he east, and it takes away the familiar view of the plant as seen from the Expressway, across the tracks. The space inside the upper left turnback loop could be used to model a bit of Olmos Basin park. This would create a scene almost as if the track, plant and the open area across from the plant had been cut out of reality, picked up and rotated 180 degrees. A bit disorienting but very space saving. And it leaves room for some “open space” between Cementville, a block or two of the residential area in the Olmos Park subdivision, and a little industry north of the upper right corner curve.
Decisions- decisions- decisions. You takes your choices and you spends your money. Or in this case, your space.
How much if anything would it add to the layout if the end curve at the north/ counterclockwise end were located as close as possible to the entry door area rather than in the corner. This would seem to make more use of more of the room space. (This is the alignment shown in ORANGE.) It would leave more space in the middle and back of a blob fairly inaccessible. Perhaps CEMENTVILLE could be located towards the upper-left corner with facing-point access from its north end and fairly short spurs. Or the access could be from the south end, just south (right) of the inside curve with spurs curving to parallel the front of the “blob” and a fairly long Cementville plant in the blob.
More decisions!
The downtown station along the right side could be pretty much like the HO version. A 16 inch shelf in N could hold more depth than a 2 foot shelf in HO. The station could probably be modeled in full depth.
I forgot to draw in the SP Kerrville sub crossing a few blocks south of the station which was only “suggested” on the HO plan. Maybe it will fit here...
On the N version (and this is not a real "Plan", just a decision-weighing sketch) the Union Stockyard go inside the turnback lobe at the bottom. On the prototype, the MP tracks run along the entire west side of the stockyards and there is a spur to back in from past the stockyards. This plan uses the turnback curve to simulate that run alongside the stockyards with the access spur or spurs from the back. All the mainline is 18 inch radius to accommodate passenger cars but the spur into the stockyard could be 12 inch radius, as could be all the industry spurs, including Cementville. The plan assumes at least a two-track layover around the back with crossovers to allow staging several trains. The turnout at the beginning of the staging track might be left in the open behind the Stockyards scene to simulate/ suggest the edge of the small transfer yard that is just south of the Stockyards on the prototype.
Entry door to the this room at a different location would probably involve a different “calculus” of the layout elements to juggle them in...
With the 10 x 12 room’s door at the left end of the 12 foot wall or the right end of the 10 foot wall (as seen from the inside), the space for Cementville between the north end turnback curve and the upper-right corner curve is shortened considerably. A fair size cement plant is pretty much forced into the end lobe, with spur access from the south end off the 3 foot or so of tangent on the outer side of the blob. There is hardly room for any industry except the cement plant along the top portion of the plan.
The double track around the outside is staging, mostly hidden behind a reach-over ground and building row, with crossovers to allow it to hold several trains. All the staging and all the mainline (used by passenger trains) is laid out at 18 inch radius. Industry spurs can be sharper- 12 inch or even 9 ¾ inch radius. The red “lens” shape between the end blobs marks the limits of
a 30 inch space reserved out from the edge of the blobs to allow a passageway or aisle.
We want a little industry between Cementville and the downtown station area. A medium length of tangent along the right side of then plan allows a place to cut in several spurs. The shelf here can be 12 to 16 inches wide. Industries along the back will have to be mostly flats to hide the staging tracks. As with the HO plan, industries on the inside of the layout here can be largely open outside space businesses such as lumberyards, pipeyards, brickyards with the suggestion that the space extends into/ past the front of the layout.
Having the line through downtown station area run at an angle rather than hugging the back of the space can add a tiny bit to its length- less than a foot. But it allows for some industry in the space between the station and the background. In the prototype, most industry spurs in the 2 miles north of the station were right against the mainline or angling out a bit into the half block against the main. But in the 3 or 4 blocks along the downtown station tracks, spurs more or less paralleling the main ran back a block to a block and a half away. We can model some of these, get the feel of the congested near-downtown warehouse district, and make up for some of the lack of length.
The outline of the IGN downtown station is shown in scale here, 111 N scale feet square. (By the way, the scale of my original digital drawing is 4 pixels = 1 inch. It may be changed somewhat by the sites involved in uploading, server hosting, posting and by the display on your own computer.)
The tangent along the downtown area seems a bit short for a full-length passenger train like the Texas Eagle., so I accommodate passenger trains with a double track that extends around the 45 degree curve at the north end of the station area.
There is still not much space in the depot area to have an SP interchange track that comes off south of the depot and parallels the east side of the SP Kerrville Sub line with enough length to handle half a dozen cars. That would be a spur that have to diverge southward, somewhere south of the station to seem to connect. Spurs diverging northward to reach warehouses behind the depot would not be much of problem.
It might be possible to lay an SP interchange track south of and parallel to the SP Sunset line and connecting the to MP just south of the SP Sunset crossing. This is an area where there were several tracks between the SP and MoPac.
San Antonio MoPac prototype schematic ca. 1950s
Also, there was a transfer yard just south of the Stockyards. Perhaps a bit of the entry into staging could be left open to simulate the appearance of “South Transfer.” One, possibly stub-end spur, could be added alongside the entry to staging to be used to trade cars between SP and MoPac.
The MoPac entry to the stockyard is once more from the “back” side of the south end blob. The short bit of tangent here does not allow much length for a spur that goes straight into the blob, but a sub-mainline radius allows curving the spur. Filling the front two-thirds of the end “blob” with cattle pens would give the impression of a really sprawling stockyard.
If the door is located in the middle of the 10 foot wall, there is space for a turnback lobe on each side of the door, and the layout can run the full length of the room on both sides.
However the 10 foot room width at the end opposite the door, the most appropriate location for the passenger depot area is left a bit short for a full-length passenger train like the Texas Eagle once that width is reduced by 2 staging tracks and clearance on each side, view block background rows or building flats, the reasonable distance of the line along the sides fro the background, and the 18” radius corner curves, and a #6 turnout to take the passenger platform track off the through main line. We'll be lucky if left with 5 feet of passenger track length between clearance points.
To add a little passenger train length, I extended the traqcks around the lower right corner. They ought to be straight but one can’t always get what one oughta in a limited space.
In this arrangement though, there is length along the bottom of the plan for that length, for the SP Kerrville line crossing and an SP transfer track. A lead can come off the bottom to run around outside the lower right mainline curve to get to some industries on the south end of the depot area.
It seems each change of door location in a room changes the balance and juggling of layout elements.
RE: Alamo Cement plant
correction to my earlier statement regarding the fourth stack. I don't know why that fourth stack is out of alignment with the other three. The electrostatic precipitator stack was a fifth stack cut off in that photo. It is noticably wider and slightly shorter than the other four.
leighant My Sanborn’s map (“base 1912 map updated to 1951”) showed a roundhouse and turntable just across from the depot. I have not found them in any photos of the depot area, and I don’t know if they were still there. But if you WANT to have a turntable and roundhouse in the area represented by this layout, this would be the spot. I found a 1960-something union work rules agreement that says Missouri Pacific engine crews report for duty at the roundhouse at South San Antonio.
Historicaerials.com offers aerial photographs of this area in 1955-1973-1986-2004. The turntable and roundhouse were still there in the 1955 image. They were completely gone in 1973, the area having been turned into a concrete apron used for parking and storage. By 1986 an office building of some sort had been built on the location. I also found a website that has "balloons eye" historical drawings of Texas cities. The one for San Antonio dated 1886 shows a roundhouse and turntable across from the I&GN depot. Interesting because I had no idea they every existed. There is no trace of it today and they dont show up on any recent maps.
leighantBut this little creek is like a smaller version of a similar scene. I believe there were a number of small substandard houses in the brushy area near the tracks and creeks. Modeling some would give the layout a small sense of “social commentary.” My impression was that this area had some houses similar to these which succumbed to the Urban Renewal effort for San Antonio’s 1967 HemisFair exposition. I'm amazed at the number of little creeks running through downtown San Antonio.
leighantBut this little creek is like a smaller version of a similar scene. I believe there were a number of small substandard houses in the brushy area near the tracks and creeks. Modeling some would give the layout a small sense of “social commentary.” My impression was that this area had some houses similar to these which succumbed to the Urban Renewal effort for San Antonio’s 1967 HemisFair exposition.
leighantThe Stockyards were just to the left of that curve. There seems to be no trace of facility (except possibly the kind of “trace” the water quality people worry about.) Tracks from both the MoPac and SP had access and a Swift meat packing plant occupied a spur on the south side of the stockyards.
The closing of the Union Stockyards made national news. I found coverage of the closure in a number of different newspapers from around the country. Interesting stuff.
leighant It seems each change of door location in a room changes the balance and juggling of layout elements.
Layout Room #1 Door A best describes my space. The cementville location poses some challenges....decisions decisions....
I just got MJ4562's response: (quote) "Layout Room #1 Door A best describes my space."
Tried juggling these elements every which way, since they make an interest exercise in how room orientation affects layout planning. I have "Room #4" drawn and written up so I will go ahead and present it...
N Layout “Room #4”
If our 10 x 12 room has its entry doors next to any corner, that orientation is covered in the drawings labeled Room #1 and Room #2. If the door is closer to the middle of the long 12 foot wall however, that allows a turnback lobe on each side of that long wall and room for a long tangent on the opposite 12 foot wall, which seems an ideal place for the downtown depot area with its small freight yard. (NOT a freight yard for classifying full-length through trains but a downtown yard for sorting local cars for pickup and delivery in the nearby area. Through trains are supposedly yarded in the SoSan Yard represented by staging at the south end of the layout, around the corner from Stockyards. Transfer runs may carry cuts of local cars between Sosan and the downtown yard. They would actually be made up BETWEEN operating sessions and stowed in staging.)
In this orientation, a platform track long enough for a long passenger train can be located entirely along the long 12 foot wall opposite the entry, between the corner curves. However, there is STILL not enough room left to have spurs that connect to the mainline between the platform track entry turnouts and the end curves. So the access to industry switching sites behind the passenger train comes from leads that take off BEYOND the corner curves and parallel the mainline outside those curves.
In the prototype, there were some spurs a block off and parallel to the mainline in the station vicinity. On this plan, one such spur is simulated with a track that runs BEHIND the freight house. I show 2 industries on the end of that spur. Single spurs sometimes have several industries located along their length. It would have been clumsy trying to squeeze in more industry spot way on the back side of that curve. But keeping that portion of the spur clear allows it to be used as a lead for a switchback to a spot that serves two more industries along the right side of the plan.
Nothing new has been added to the Stockyards plan, but I found a photo to depict the sprawl of pens that the scene should suggest. I could not find a photo with a general view of the San Antonio stockyard, but here is one of Fort Worth, taken in 1994 when it had begun to herd more tourists than cows.
On the Cementville lobe, I drew a passing siding that represents Adams Siding of the prototype and allows a little more operation-- a meet of through trains or a through train and a local, and it allows a runaround of the local for switching Cementville. I drew spurs into Cementville in red with question marks. The one that diverges to the north allows Cementville to occupy mainly the turnback lobe and leaves some clear space between Cementville and the rest of the layout. The spur that diverges to the south would more closely resemble the direction of the prototype according to information from MJ4562 but used space less efficiently for representing the maximum of the San Antonio scene. Decisions-------
Adams Siding is shown joining the mainline on the back side of the lobe, and just past it, the “outside staging” goes to double track. At the Stockyards end of the layout, the turnout to double track staging might be left open to suggest South Transfer Yard. Notice that the crossovers on the double track do NOT go the same direction, right-hand to left-hand running for instance. One is right-hand and the other left-hand. This allows THREE trains to be staged and still allow a additional train to run through, or any of the three staged trains to depart and run with some clear route. To do this though, through trains must take the crossover route each time they come to one. If all crossovers ran the same direction, the same number of trains could be staged, but there would be some restriction in the ORDER they could run in and out.
I find it interesting to design layouts to fit specific prototypes. I did 1950s Missouri Pacific in Austin for an Austin teenagers, and I have done the Texas American at the Laredo border for my own amusement. My own layout under construction is based on Galveston. I did a long drawn-out discussion of the planning here:
(EDIT- Oops, link doesnot work... Anyway, here are a schematic of my Galveston prototype and my layout "Plan D" for anyone who hasn't seen them... )
http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/552/galv_isl.jpg
http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/552/KKplanD.JPG
CARS FOR THE SAN ANTONIO STOCKYARD
The closest model I can find to a Missouri Pacific stockcar suitable for San Antonio in the 1950s is a “moldy oldie,” one from the early days of N scale.
Atlas stockcar catalogue #2414, MP #53098
shown in Irwin’s Journal “Atlas 1st Generation“ as marketed in late 1960s:
The car has molded-on ladder and grabirons. It is not as “fine” as much of today’s N scale. However, it is closer to the prototype than anything being made today, as far as I can find.
I checked “that” auction site and found this car available at a range of prices, most very reasonable. If I were building the San Antonio layout, I would get several and since I would need to change the reporting marks on some to avoid duplicates, I would go ahead and represent the MoPac subsidiaries.
Reporting marks as of 1954 Register:
MP 52000-53214 single deck
MP 53500-53599 double deck
IGN 53850-54099 single deck
NOT&M 54100-54199 single deck
Back into the 1940s, bulk cement was usually transported in 2-bay covered hopper cars.
Here are some similar covered hoppers that show the evolution.
Almost the same except they haven't cut out triangular openings at the center of the car.
The pipe just below the side sill is the brake air line mentioned earlier.
My notes show that the Kato 2-bay covered hopper is a match. The car is ABOUT the same as the known MP2000-2149 series, and may be identical to another series, but as I said, I don’t have photos or scale drawings of those so I known only the general characteristics.
Another covered hopper appears identical, the Santa Fe class GA-65.
ATSF GA-65 #181688 at Glen Flora,TX 1981
On this one, you can see the brake air line and it is easy to see the brake air reservoir on the “porch” at the left end of the car.
And another variation. This is the same Santa Fe class GA-65, seen at Midlothian, Texas among a long string of covered hoppers. This one has ROUND hatches which I suspect were retrofitted.
Put in during a modification/ rebuilding.)
At a time when there were NO N-scale 2-bay hoppers produced, I started kitbashing one by cutting down an Atlas #2313 (1970-era production 3 bay covered hopper.
As shown on Irwin’s Journal: http://www.irwinsjournal.com/a1g/a1g_2313.jpg
Did the Alamo Cement/ Cementville have its OWN fleet of covered hoppers? The only privately-owned 2-bay cement hoppers I could find in the 12q954 Equipment Register were owned by these filrms:
MP series #120951-121304, example MP #121175 as shown the webpage of the Missouri Pacific Historical Society
http://mopac.org/series_120951-121304.asp
The web page shows this as a 40’6” interior length car, but my 1954 Equipment Register shows this number in a series with 36 foot inside/ 38 foot external length cars. The photo shows 10 panel sides, 8-7 ends and that distinctive channel above the side sill, with the “jutting” sides. The jutting of the sides is most visible in this picture at the white-painted portion, on the left end of the car side. However, these cars seems to have a straight center sill, not the fishbelly USRA style underframe. This series was in the process of being built during the April 1954 date of my Equipment Register and the number series may have ended up breaking at a different point than indicated... Or cars with different features due to their heritage, but with the same dimensions, may have been placed in the same number series.
For instance, here is MP #121711 in a shot from TrainWeb.
http://www.trainweb.org/mopac/mp121711-KC-MO-1951.jpg
According to the series in the 1954 Register, it should belong in the 121150-121749 series with 121175 above. But some differences are clear. It has 4-3 reversed Dreadnaught ends and the fishbelly underframe. With then other cars, it shares 10 panel sides and the offset at the side sill.
The Equipment Register lists it as a 36 foot IL, 38 foot ext length car.
Here is a car from subsidiary International and Great Northern with the same 4-3 reversed Dreadnaught ends, but without the fishbelly USRA style underframe.
This is I-GN #9817 on the website of the Missouri Pacific Historical Society
http://mopac.org/photos_cars/ign009817_250.SBartlett.jpg
Again, it has 10-panel sides.
The April 1954 lists I-GN series 9401-9900 as longer cars-- 40 feet 6 inch IL, 42 feet 3 inch external.
Now one more. This shot from “Boxcars & Freight Cars of North America” website does not show a car painted for Eagle Merchandise Service...
http://www.boxcars.us/Boxcars_M_Z/M/pages/image017.html
But the photo taken in the 1960s is of MP #48367 which in the 1950s was part of series 46000-48749 42’3” XL, Stenciled “for merchandise loading only on MP Lines.”
10-panel sides, 8-7 ends, straight center sill (non-USRA), channel side sill.
NOW FOR THE MODELS
The most authentic model to represent one of these MP Eagle Merchandise Service boxcars is the Atlas USRA rebuild. In their May 2008 release, Atlas offered the cars decorated as
Eagle Merchandise Service #46960, 46969
Atlas picture:
Atlas #45834 is MP #46960. Atlas #45835 is MP #46969.
Like the photo of prototype MP #48367, the Atlas car is a nominal 40 foot length, has the 8-7 ends, the distinctive channel side sill. However it has 8-panel sides where all the prototypes I have located of the Eagle Merchandise Service cars had 10-panel sides. One cannot tell from the Atlas photo whether the model has the fishbelly or standard center-sill. Atlas produced the USRA rebuilds with both. (Some USRA-appearance cars were copies of the USRA design but with the standard centersill...) Atlas also offers the car in a choice of 5-5-5 or 8-7 ends. Prototype USRA cars and copies came with both. But only the 8-7 ends would match any of the MoPac cars.
If you have or get both Atlas MoPac cars and want another one, OR if you can’t get a model decorated for the Eagle Merchandise Service, OR if you want to model an I-GN car just to have something different, you could buy (assuming you can find it) the Atlas #45804 with standard underframe and 8-7 ends and decal it for the I-GN version (assuming you could find the decals.)
I claim the Atlas car as the most authentic representation.
MicroTrainsLine 2000806 is also decorated for Missouri pacific Eagle Merchandise Service, SAME NUMBER as one of the Atlas models!
Photo at Walthers.com
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/489-2000806
The body style however appears to be a PS-1 design. No 8-7 ends. No channel side sill. It is beautifully decorated.
The Eagle Merchandise Service car I own was made a jillion years ago (in N scale years),
Life Like MP #121022. I checked “that auction site” and see there is one or two occasionally available.
Neither the modeling, nor the paint and lettering are up to modern standards. It does happen to have 10-panel sides which the recent Atlas car does not. If I were modeling MoPac in the 1950s and could not get the Atlas or the MicroTrains car, and could not get any decal to make a car, I would rather have this than run my LCL service with plain boxcars. But that is just my take. I would rather have something that at least vaguely resembles the prototype. Other would rather have a high-quality modern model regardless of that general resemblance.
4merroad4manThe ex SP yard is Yoakum Bend. For excellent reference views of the entire area go to: www.historicaerials.com You can find aerial photos dating back into the 50's up to present.
The ex SP yard is Yoakum Bend.
For excellent reference views of the entire area go to:
www.historicaerials.com
You can find aerial photos dating back into the 50's up to present.
Wow... that's exactly what I needed for my question about Milwaukee then vs. now. Very interesting thread--I should have read this one before posting my Milwaukee question.
Thanks--
Dean
bulldog_fan 4merroad4man The ex SP yard is Yoakum Bend. For excellent reference views of the entire area go to: www.historicaerials.com You can find aerial photos dating back into the 50's up to present. Wow... that's exactly what I needed for my question about Milwaukee then vs. now. Very interesting thread--I should have read this one before posting my Milwaukee question. Thanks-- Dean
4merroad4man The ex SP yard is Yoakum Bend. For excellent reference views of the entire area go to: www.historicaerials.com You can find aerial photos dating back into the 50's up to present.
That website is a great resource for modelers. I have also found USGS topographic maps and Army Corps of Engineers aerial survey maps to be very helpful. I initially discounted them but later found they include considerable detail on ROWs and industry spurs as various points in time.
Many thanks to all that have posted. I am working on my own N scale track plan using leighant's plans as a starting point. I'm also continuing to accumulate protoype information on south and central Texas railroads.
Since a big Swift processing plant was located adjacent to the San Antonio stockyards, a layout of the scene in the 1950s could use a few Swift reefers. The most commonly seen Swift reefers in the 1950s would be wood-sided cars, 36 to 38 feet long, with hinged doors, steel underframe- either straight or occasionally fishbelly. There would even be an occasionally wood underframe car with truss rods. These would contrast, say, the typical Santa Fe refrigerator cars of the middle 1950s, when all the cars under 40 feet were gone from revenue service and all the wood bodied cars had been rebuilt as all-steel.
The Fine-N-Scale resin kit for a 36 foot wood truss-rod car could work for either a truss rod car, or with a replacement straight steel underframe. I am not sure where to find Swift decals.
I believe Concor once had a 57 foot N scale car- a 60s design and paint.
Roundhouse has a model of the pre-1948 yellow wood version.
For my layout, I have an Arnold Rapido car, manufactured about 1990, with an underframe and trucks @#$%&*-ishly difficult to convert to MTL trucks and couplers. So I used a replacement underframe. Also painted the top fascia board white, weathered the wood roof and weathered the running board to resemble weathered wood rather than the jet black way it came.
Ok... while somewhat on the same subject, but a different location, anyone have any idea where I could get a mid/late 1980's and a 1990's era city maps of Syracuse NY?
Thanks!
//signed// John Powell President / CEO CNY Transportation Corp (fictional)
http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s303/nuts4sports34/
Hunter - When we met in January of 2000, you were just a 6 week old pup who walked his way into this heart of mine as the only runt in the litter who would come over to me. And today, I sit here and tell you I am sorry we had to put you down. It was the best thing for you and also the right thing to do. May you now rest in peace and comfort. Love, Dad. 8 June 2010
I love you and miss you Mom. Say hi to everyone up there for me. Rest in peace and comfort. Love, John. 29 March 2017
I haven't been in Syracuse since 1971. Is there a big downtown public library with a local history room? Or does the University have a regional history archive or research collection? That's where I would start.
JPowell...anyone have any idea where I could get a mid/late 1980's and a 1990's era city maps of Syracuse NY?
I don't know if they'd be detailed enough for what you want, but the US Geological Survey Store website at http://store.usgs.gov/ has older topo maps available for free download. Click on "Map Locator" and search for Syracuse NY and it'll show you whatever selection they have available.
Hope that's of some use--
bulldog_fan JPowell...anyone have any idea where I could get a mid/late 1980's and a 1990's era city maps of Syracuse NY? I don't know if they'd be detailed enough for what you want, but the US Geological Survey Store website at http://store.usgs.gov/ has older topo maps available for free download. Click on "Map Locator" and search for Syracuse NY and it'll show you whatever selection they have available. Hope that's of some use-- Dean
Dean -
Thanks for the info. I was on their site last night looking. The maps they offer werre 1978 and 2010. The 1978 one's cost $8 each.
leighant I haven't been in Syracuse since 1971. Is there a big downtown public library with a local history room? Or does the University have a regional history archive or research collection? That's where I would start.
The library is one place I never thought of. Probably because it is downtown and parking is a bear and expensive too.... But that doesn't mean I won't check it out.
There would not have been reefers with wood underframes in use in the 1950s. In 1935 cars with all wood underframes were efectively prohibited in interchange in that no railroad was required to accept such cars. Also, the billboard ban came into effect in 1938, not 1935.
I have original IGN profile maps from 1942, from Palestine to Laredo.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Back in the 1940's a lot of cement would have been shipped in boxcars too. I would not be suprised if the covered hoppers went to the cement business in kansas City since that would have been the growth area for the MP, the Gulf Coast hadn't started booming yet.
Mexico was recieving grain in boxcars up until the early 1980's (the elevators and mills in Mexico weren't set up to unload covered hoppers). One of the first derailments i were to was a carload of corn for Mexico in a nasty "Route of the Eagles" boxcar south of Durand, KS in Dec. 1980. There were also 40 ft Route of the Eagles boxcars in sugar service hauling bulk sugar from Galveston to Sugarland, TX up until the mid 1980's.
The MP also rebuilt some steel reefers into boxcars, there was an article on them in MR decades ago.
Wayne Cline wrote a book "The Texas Railroad" subtitled "The Scandalous and Violent History of the International Great Northern Railroad, 1866-1925". I haven't read all of it but the IGN was heavily involved in financial shenanigans.
While I'm sure Swift reefers were around, the majority of the reefers you would have seen in San Antonio were ART cars carrying produce out of the Rio Grande Valley and from the Sausage. Cyrstal City was HUGE produce center.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/haminahbob/Documents/IMG_20160519_0001_zps8xjhf3dr.jpg
Note 90# rail and I will have to look at the key to see what type of ballast they used. Note two main tracks San Antonio to SoSan.
Yard limits are marked on the map. Bridges/overpasses are on the top/left side. The engine facilities at San Antonio had an oil column (note icon next to the water tank icon.)
The siding was Adams, the spur was Cementville, but the depot was at Monte Vista and was listed as a "suburban depot". San Antonio had a agent, operator and dispatcher, plus a section quarters.
Trains to Corpus Christi would come through San Antonio and turn the corner onto the Sausage (and return).