cuyama If you are simply going to do whatever you want anyway, it seems odd to keep asking questions to try to justify the unjustifiable. Just do it and have fun in the way you like.
If you are simply going to do whatever you want anyway, it seems odd to keep asking questions to try to justify the unjustifiable. Just do it and have fun in the way you like.
Cuyama, I keep posting such 'inquiries' for several reasons.
First off I'm trying to convince MYSELF that this might be the way I want to proceed. Sometimes I have to sit on my initial ideas for a few days or a week to see if I like it, or want to change it. I feel the need to post some images and get reactions from other members.
Very often I get a number of negative comments about it not being prototypical. That often sends me out on a mission to see if anything like this existed in reality. A prime example of this is my latest 'port scene', When I went looking for 'reality' I discovered hundreds of different configurations, (and thus far only a few that had the carfloat 'out back' of a pier terminal).
Often what I am really looking for is how to make the scene I have created,.. a viable model train switching operation (a subject I know very little about), Very few folks offer that specific info, rather they want to count rivits and tell me how impossible my scene creation is.
Like many of us MODEL railroaders we are constrained with our real estate. Thats why I needed to put that carfloat track thru the middle of my terminal building. I just didn't have enough room to put it down the side. Likewise I left a portion of that bldg sit over a portion of that small Y turnout. Otherwise I would have to move the building forward about 5" eating up a lot of other valuable real estate out front.
Its true I may ultimately ignore a lot of the comments offered, but I do listen to them all, and try to give them some consideration. Like one person offered recently I am perhaps old school model railroader who likes to put a LOT of things on my layout rather than trying to recreate prototype. I very much appreciate the hard work of those other efforts, its just not me.
Brian
My Layout Plan
Interesting new Plan Consideration
Justifying Carfloat Loading Track thru my Pier Terminal (Part 2)
I needed to see IF I could share that real estate on that central peninsula,..share between a) the container terminal, b) a carfloat operation c) a pier terminal building
My container terminal came first, and it took up a little less than half the width of the peninsula. A carfloat operation could easily fit at the tip of the other half of the peninsula. But then I would have NO room for the pier terminal bldg, NOR the dockside crane(s) that I so ADMIRED, and were documented on that other forum site I quoted in Part 1.
There was no way I could find ANY dockspace (for a ship, nor a carfloat) ALONGSIDE that Pier Terminal bldg I proposed for my peninsula. My only option at that point was to locate the docking space for the car-float, or small freighter, or other type bulk material barges, out back of the terminal building. This of course is HIGHLY unusual as most carfloats and ship slips were always along side those pier terminal buildings.
In order to reach my 'out back' carfloat I was going to have to extend that track (that brought break-bulk into the terminal building) right on out the back to the carfloat dock. Could this be justified, even while not being prototypical ?? After all there are hundreds of different arrangements that the real railroads utilized,... depending on the geography and real estate available at each of their waterfront sites.
So here is how my waterfront pier terminal building works. I have a track along one whole edge of the terminal building. This track can operate as a holding track for some of the cars waiting to be loaded onto the carfloat. It is also setting next to a concrete ramp running along that whole edge of the bldg that allows break-bulk loading/unloading via forklifts,....like this...
...and/or hand carts like this...
Selective break-bulk items can be placed inside the terminal bldg, stacked on the floor on either side of the track running down the center. Mostly multiple forklifts operate inside here. That terminal building is a 2 story high building that might have a small portion at the front devoted to office space, and the remainder out back to more break-bulk storage/staging. On the opposite side of that bldg, there is another row of doors, and a long concrete dock that accepts multiple truck loads of break-bulk. But that side of the bldg faces the aisleway of my layout so it has to be 'imagined'. (If I include the concrete dock that is supplied with the bldg, then the structure protrudes out into the aisle by 1.5”. If I were to leave that dock off of that side it would only be about 7/8”,...both acceptable).
Certain cars and their particular cargo would require no 'break-bulking' and would be streamlined thru the loading process. Certain types of cars might be halted inside the building to be 'resorted' as to items staying and items going. The building is long enough to handle two cars at a time, with forklifts working on both sides of the cars,...then subsequently loaded on the carfloat. Some unloaded flat cars might be placed on the carfloat to be subsequently loaded with beams, pipes etc by that big dockside crane.
There are hopefully a few other sidings out in front of the terminal building that might also be utilized to stage cars waiting for carfloat loading. All in all this could be a very busy switching/operation area unto itself. Then add in that container terminal and getting those empties back over to the freight yard, and/or dividing out the non-container cars (breaking down an incoming mainline freight train) , and getting them over to the freight yard or steel mill,....it gets to be a real busy scene. (enough to keep me busy).
Do whatever you like for your own layout, of course.
railandsail(and thus far only a few that had the carfloat 'out back' of a pier terminal).
This is a misleading statement that might confuse others reading this thread. I have looked at car float operations throughout North America for various client projects, and there are none with the car float switched through a pier terminal warehouse.
But I'm always open to learning new things. Please post the specific real-life locations where you have found this arrangement of a car float or ferry being switched through a terminal warehouse.
As in every other field, objective truth exists in real-life railroading. We can always choose to ignore it in modeling, but that doesn't change the facts.
Good luck with your layout.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
railandsail cuyama If you are simply going to do whatever you want anyway, it seems odd to keep asking questions to try to justify the unjustifiable. Just do it and have fun in the way you like. Cuyama, I keep posting such 'inquiries' for several reasons. First off I'm trying to convince MYSELF that this might be the way I want to proceed. Sometimes I have to sit on my initial ideas for a few days or a week to see if I like it, or want to change it. I feel the need to post some images and get reactions from other members. Very often I get a number of negative comments about it not being prototypical. That often sends me out on a mission to see if anything like this existed in reality. A prime example of this is my latest 'port scene', When I went looking for 'reality' I discovered hundreds of different configurations, (and thus far only a few that had the carfloat 'out back' of a pier terminal). Often what I am really looking for is how to make the scene I have created,.. a viable model train switching operation (a subject I know very little about), Very few folks offer that specific info, rather they want to count rivits and tell me how impossible my scene creation is. Like many of us MODEL railroaders we are constrained with our real estate. Thats why I needed to put that carfloat track thru the middle of my terminal building. I just didn't have enough room to put it down the side. Likewise I left a portion of that bldg sit over a portion of that small Y turnout. Otherwise I would have to move the building forward about 5" eating up a lot of other valuable real estate out front. Its true I may ultimately ignore a lot of the comments offered, but I do listen to them all, and try to give them some consideration. Like one person offered recently I am perhaps old school model railroader who likes to put a LOT of things on my layout rather than trying to recreate prototype. I very much appreciate the hard work of those other efforts, its just not me.
Brian, let me explain it from what I think might be shared by many.
Before that, my personal view supports what you are trying to do. You are essentially creating a collection of scenes from Baltimore to the west coast covering the steam era to the modern intermodal era over two decks in a 10 x 14 shed.
You want to make each scene realistic, but not so much prototypically accurate as much as plausible. That is the basis for your questions about realism, and you look for some sort of prototypical guideance to build your plausibility from.
So each scene is trying to be realistic.
The problem for most of us is that each scene covers such a small portion of the real estate that two or three scenes sort of blend together to form one scene, and that throws the realism off. If you are able to truly make that distinction between scenes, you're probably one of the few who see this forum who can do that.
This peninsula is a good example. You have an intermodal container yard right next to where a mid-century pier/wharf will be. In fact, the 1950s building looks like it would encroach onto the 2010 crane space.
I for one, can't think of that as anyway realistic. You may be able to, but I would say the rest of us, in order to offer good advice, need help to see the distinction.
Help comes in the form of a backdrop down the middle of the peninsula. My eye can then comprehend two distinct scenes.
As for the rest of the layout, I get that they are a collection of modules. But since each module scene is small by itself, the collection sort of blends into one large scene where each scene sort of detracts from the other because of the differing themes.
There have been articles in the past about "shoebox" model railroads. A collection of scenes that are built in sort of three sided boxes. Think of a shoe box where the open side is facing you. The track would have to punch through a series of physical barriers to be able to run trains, but scenically, our eyes are helped by the physical barriers between the scenes.
In fact, you could have a snowy winter 1940's New England scene right next to a summer 2010 Florida beach scene, and the eye would not be confused because of the barrier between them.
Its your layout. I'm merely explaining what I think is at the root of some of the advice you're getting. If each scene was thought of as being a scene totally distinct from another, I think you would get more helpful advice on how to make any small scene you're asking about more realistically plausible.
- Douglas
railandsailOften what I am really looking for is how to make the scene I have created,.. a viable model train switching operation (a subject I know very little about), Very few folks offer that specific info, rather they want to count rivits and tell me how impossible my scene creation is.
And many times what we have told you is how to make it a viable train switching operation. You (and others) just see the advice as "rivet counting"). A design that will be hard to switch will be a design that is hard to switch. Doesn't matter whether you are being "prototypical" or not.
A car is a car, prototype or model and if you want to go from A to C and there is a car spotted at B you need to know:
That's not rivet counting, that purely moving cars around. If you make it too complicated it can become tedious.
Another thing you have to think about as far as switching things is how does it fit into the whole railroad or at least the area adjacent to your layout. Without a view of the overall plan we don't know how the various pieces fit in. If you want to use a docksider, but because of the way you have arranged the tracks outside the dock, you have to hang onto 15 cars to make you moves, you might not even be able to move the cut with an 0-4-0T.
You aren't looking at prototype photos for new ideas, you are just looking at prototype phots to confirm what you are already doing. If you were open to new ideas, the solution to your problem that solves all three things and makes them all fit is in the plan of the original BEDT Pier that was rebuilt in 1912.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Well, I am not certain that our advice will change anyone's mind, but I am pretty sure that his plan to repurpose the Walthers pier warehosue looks very odd in its proposed site, with regard to a modern container port.This google street link to Export St. in Port Newark c2017, however, does provide a workable example of a prototype transfer warehouse within a modern era* container port (rotate the image Southward to see the container cranes, Northwest to see container mountains). Yes, a rather pedestrian corrugated low-rise building with a number of loading doors, but still serves...er served...its purpose well. Scratchbuild or bash from Pikestuff, have several open loading doors with shadowbox interior scenes, heck model it axially bisected with the open side on the aisle so you can add a detailed interior that way as well.Save the rather ornate pier warehouse for a 1940s dockside free-mo module...*Well, recent past - the several warehouses around Export street were torn down a year or so ago, to be replaced by yet more container mountains in CSAO's and PANYNJ's quest to eliminate actual rail freight from the Tri-State area.
cuyama railandsail (and thus far only a few that had the carfloat 'out back' of a pier terminal). This is a misleading statement that might confuse others reading this thread. I have looked at car float operations throughout North America for various client projects, and there are none with the car float switched through a pier terminal warehouse. But I'm always open to learning new things. Please post the specific real-life locations where you have found this arrangement of a car float or ferry being switched through a terminal warehouse. Byron
railandsail (and thus far only a few that had the carfloat 'out back' of a pier terminal).
Sorry for the misleading way I worded that. I looked thru quite a number of images the other day, and I DID NOT see one example of the carfloat tracks THRU the terminal.
One I did see was I believe the Bush terminal in NY where one of the piers had the tracks right along side the warehouse, then curved in to the carfloat that was 'out back'. I believe they also said that was modified at a later date. I looked thru so many images I don't know that I could find it again.
BTW I worked in the boat business for a number of years, and also ran some big boats. I also worked with some oil rig barges over in Asia. Believe me there are ways to tie small ships and barges in the same slip as long as the slips are not too small for one or the other. And those slips can be simply side-to slips,...even the barge ones,...and even the carfloat ones.
Don't take this offensively, I really appreciate your knowledge about model train layouts, and your contributions. I guess I'm just old school, wanting to put too many structures onboard.
Interesting dock image I ran across the other day, modeled by a gentleman from the UK,...
Bush Terminalhttp://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/bt.html
PHOTOS courtesy of this site above by Mr Goldstein
Bush Terminal as originally constructed, was equipped with a single float bridge. This float bridge was of wooden Howe Truss design, common to that era.
Thanks to research by Tom Flagg, previously published in Transfer Issue #37; this float bridge was located at the end of Bush Terminal Pier 6 and this float bridge was at this location from circa 1900 through 1912.
This is an unusual location, as to current knowledge every other float bridge in use around New York Harbor was mounted along the bulkhead.
An aerial photo (taken tethered hot air balloon and seen at right).
Around 1912, when the present location of the current float bridges was selected at the foot of 50th Street, and those float bridges constructed, Pier 6 would be reconstructed into a closed piershed with internal trackage, but without a float bridge:
While looking thru that material the other day I also saw a number of photos with locos on the carfloats,...ie
PHOTOS courtesy of the site I referenced above by owner Mr Goldstein
Doughless This peninsula is a good example. You have an intermodal container yard right next to where a mid-century pier/wharf will be. In fact, the 1950s building looks like it would encroach onto the 2010 crane space. I for one, can't think of that as anyway realistic. You may be able to, but I would say the rest of us, in order to offer good advice, need help to see the distinction. Help comes in the form of a backdrop down the middle of the peninsula. My eye can then comprehend two distinct scenes.
I though about a view blocker down the middle of the peninsula but it was so narrow I didn't think it would work well. Plus I thought it might make my small shed a bit claustrophobic,..with all the stuff i'm going to have in there as it is.
Pier Terminal, Carfloat, and Intermodal in one scene that looks pretty nice.
railandsailPier Terminal, Carfloat, and Intermodal in one scene that looks pretty nice.
Except that scene is what? 3 times or more the width of yours?
I don't know why you keep seeking approval of your scenes, and you don't just build it? Don't you get tired of this back and forth with dozens of threads and pictures and discussions ? looking for justification? or do you thrive on this?
Build it, and run trains.
Mike.
My You Tube
Brian, it looks like those photos were lifted from Philip Goldstein's site which you referenced with the link. Phil is very concerned about unauthorized use of his research. You'll note this on each of his pages:
http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/bedt/copyrightredwhitesafetystripe.bmp
I believe you should start crediting the source of any image that you use directly from another site. Links are OK because they direct the viewer to the source site. Inserting the image without credit is not proper. Note how Ed (gmpullman) always credits each photo he posts.
Ray
We've been down this road before, Brian. Please contact Steve Otte if you want to credit any and all unauthorized posted photos so that the thread can be unlocked...
Tom
[Update: Brian has written permission from Philip Goldstein to use his photos for discussion purposes so I am unlocking the thread. Brian, please honor Philip's request to "kindly mention that my website was used for reference" - Thanks.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Colorado Ray I believe you should start crediting the source of any image that you use directly from another site. Links are OK because they direct the viewer to the source site. Inserting the image without credit is not proper. Note how Ed (gmpullman) always credits each photo he posts. Ray
Had you right clicked on those photos to view their source, you would have found they referred you directly to Mr Goldsteins site.
Before I used them I contacted him directly via email to ask his permission. (I have a copy of his reply saved in my files)
New Solution
I believe I have arrived at a good solution to my problem with this area,...ELIMINATE the pier terminal bldg,...while leaving my track plan basically as it was with the bldg there.
I went back and attempted to shuffle things around similar to what Dave had offered recently. Here are a couple of photos of that 'shuffle game'...
I had a few more attempts I did not photograph. The basic problems I was running into was a) progressively more encroachment on that aisle space to put a track on that aisle side of the bldg, b) trying to include an imaginary ship docking on that side, c) trying to include a dockside crane that made any sense, etc.
I finally went back to that original carfloat plan I had. I picked up the pier terminal bldg and sat if off to the side,...ELIMINATED. Now I have a nice clear run to the carpfloat that I could place some other structures along side that approach track, or just leave it open.
This configuration also works extremely well with my thoughts that the dock slip there can be utilized for several other 'ships',....other barges such as sand, coal, etc
...or even a small cargo freighter
What to do with that great Pier Terminal bldg? I'm going to keep it handy for 'guest appearances' . I will make it a readily removable structure that can be used on some occasions, or not on others.
railandsail Colorado Ray I believe you should start crediting the source of any image that you use directly from another site. Links are OK because they direct the viewer to the source site. Inserting the image without credit is not proper. Note how Ed (gmpullman) always credits each photo he posts. Ray Had you right clicked on those photos to view their source, you would have found they referred you directly to Mr Goldsteins site. Before I used them I contacted him directly via email to ask his permission. (I have a copy of his reply saved in my files)
Incidentally, right clicking on the photos does not direct the reader to the author's website, and even if it does, who right clicks on photos to view the source? Even if right clicking on a photo takes the reader to the source, it does not indicate that you have the author's permission to use the photo. Without proper credit to your source, you give every appearance that the photo is your own.
Rich
Alton Junction
I do think that the design without the port building looks less cluttered.
By the way, I use a tablet most of the time , and since it has no mouse, a right click can't be done.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Just wondering how the containers would be loaded or unloaded from a ship. The docks I've been on have "Quay Cranes" or QC's. Very tall cranes with a long boom that reach the far edge of the hold, would be needed along with a traveling control cab so the QC operator can see directly where his container is going or where the next pick-up is located. The QC's are usually mutiple setups to facilitate speedy loading or unloading. The yellow crane in the picture is usually reserved for transfering a container from a railcar to the trailer chassis or vice versa. Waterfront property is very expensive and most railroads have transfer yards inland where the cost of the large amounts of land needed would be much less expensive. Large areas are needed for storage of empty and loaded containers waiting for their ship to come in or loaded on a chassis for final delivery to the customer.
If you are following protypical operation, I can't see where the arrangement you presently have would work.
Just my thoughts, others will vary.
Mark B.
Mark B,
hose yellow cranes in the photos ARE container cranes, not bulk frieght ship loading cranes. Perhaps I used the wrong wording when I referred to the other ship/barge loading cranes as 'dockside cranes'. I think I used that wording as thats what Walthers referred to them. Your wording 'quay cranes' is likely a better word. ...like these
[Photos deleted by moderator. OP can provide direct URLs to photos from the Imgbb website as an alternative.]
railandsail Doughless This peninsula is a good example. You have an intermodal container yard right next to where a mid-century pier/wharf will be. In fact, the 1950s building looks like it would encroach onto the 2010 crane space. I for one, can't think of that as anyway realistic. You may be able to, but I would say the rest of us, in order to offer good advice, need help to see the distinction. Help comes in the form of a backdrop down the middle of the peninsula. My eye can then comprehend two distinct scenes. I though about a view blocker down the middle of the peninsula but it was so narrow I didn't think it would work well. Plus I thought it might make my small shed a bit claustrophobic,..with all the stuff i'm going to have in there as it is.
At this time, since you've moved the goal posts and have eliminated the obvioulsy too big building, splitting the scenes and eras with a center backdrop is less valuable. Changing the scene to exclude the building changes my advice.
Please note that the "loco on float" pic, the float is not being used as a switching platform, but to carry an entire cut, plus the loco, to some destination. Not sure that simply because there is a pic of a loco on a float means that it is similar to what you've (currently) explained what you're trying to do.
Also, the "pier building next to intermodal" pic is not close to being the same situation to what you're asking about. Its wider and the same era.
But if you like that scene, why not just build it?
You seem to have a lot of access to pics of other layouts and prototypes, which again begs the question, why not just build one of the scenes you like? There seems to be enough justification of plausibility in the pics you already know about.
The 'loco on a carfloat' was just an aside response to a number of folks that had said locos were never on carfloats.
I've since found a good number of photos where locos were on those barges. Of course I'm sure they had to be careful about the weight of the loco, and its placement.
https://youtu.be/wKCbkrTkkPo
(Sorry for multiple links to that video, but I was unsure as to how to make them differently)
railandsail The 'loco on a carfloat' was just an aside response to a number of folks that had said locos were never on carfloats. I've since found a good number of photos where locos were on those barges. Of course I'm sure they had to be careful about the weight of the loco, and its placement. https://youtu.be/wKCbkrTkkPo (Sorry for multiple links to that video, but I was unsure as to how to make them differently)
Brian. Your threads sometimes take on the appearence of a debate rather than an advice seeking session.
If the pics you show aren't of somehting you're planning to do, then why bother to display it at all other than to prove someone else's statement that "locos are never on car floats" to be technically incorrect.
And the last video still doesn't show anything in the real world that supports what you want to do. Its a video of another layout.
If you want to have a heavy Mike go onto a float to move and switch cars, or run it through a pier building first, just do it.
But if you have to ask the forum: "Does this look real?"
The answer is: No.
And that doesn't mean that it didn't happen in some eddy of the railroading world over the past 100 years.
railandsail...Your wording 'quay cranes' is likely a better word. ...like these
Brian, I think that you should have provided a link to the photos in that post, rather than the photos themselves.
Wayne
doctorwayne railandsail ...Your wording 'quay cranes' is likely a better word. ...like these Brian, I think that you should have provided a link to the photos in that post, rather than the photos themselves. Wayne
railandsail ...Your wording 'quay cranes' is likely a better word. ...like these
The problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites,...and linking to those is a no-no on this site.
The very old railroad on Martha's Vineyard, an island some distance from the mainland, had to have its locomotive delivered by carfloat.
The engine ended up in the water. There are reasons locomotives typically don't go for boat rides.
Doughless If the pics you show aren't of somehting you're planning to do, then why bother to display it at all other than to prove someone else's statement that "locos are never on car floats" to be technically incorrect.
Actually since my carfloat has metal rails (unlike the Walthers one), I might be able to load my carfloat with a locomotive,...during my operating sessons,..limited though they might be...ha..ha
When I first saw a few comments about locos not allowed on to carfloats, I thought that must be correct. But as it went along I discovered more photos that put locos on carfloats. Today I was going back to this website of Mr Goldsteins and reading more,...
http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/developmenttransferbridge.html#Development
...what a fantastic site for info and images,...almost unbelieable.
What did he have to say on this subject of locos on carfloats?
A Popular Misconception The following statement is repetitiously heard in both prototype railfan and scale modelling circles: "the locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat"""The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".Generally speaking, this statement quite simply is incorrect. Furthermore it is doubted that this practice in general was ever "prohibited" by an actual rule as dictated by a railroad. Research of various Employee Time Tables, locomotive operating manuals, general operations manuals, and/or Marine Rule Books for those Class 1 Railroads having carfloat operations in New York Harbor have failed to show this rule. Naturally, if anyone can find this rule listed in any New York Area railroad's rule book pertaining to float bridge operation, you are more than welcome to present it and invited to share it here. In the photo below, you will see numerous hoppers full of coal, weighting in at 80-100 tons per car. The lightest thing on the carfloat (besides the empty flat car) was the locomotive! Quite frankly, this misstatement of "locomotives not entering upon on a float bridge" is one of, if not the most prevalent misstatements regarding float bridge operations.
A Popular Misconception
The following statement is repetitiously heard in both prototype railfan and scale modelling circles: "the locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat"""The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".Generally speaking, this statement quite simply is incorrect.
Furthermore it is doubted that this practice in general was ever "prohibited" by an actual rule as dictated by a railroad. Research of various Employee Time Tables, locomotive operating manuals, general operations manuals, and/or Marine Rule Books for those Class 1 Railroads having carfloat operations in New York Harbor have failed to show this rule. Naturally, if anyone can find this rule listed in any New York Area railroad's rule book pertaining to float bridge operation, you are more than welcome to present it and invited to share it here. In the photo below, you will see numerous hoppers full of coal, weighting in at 80-100 tons per car. The lightest thing on the carfloat (besides the empty flat car) was the locomotive! Quite frankly, this misstatement of "locomotives not entering upon on a float bridge" is one of, if not the most prevalent misstatements regarding float bridge operations.
(PS: about 1/8 of the way down that page. Sorry I did not know how to link to subsections within that page?)
railandsail doctorwayne Brian, I think that you should have provided a link to the photos in that post, rather than the photos themselves. Wayne The problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites...
doctorwayne Brian, I think that you should have provided a link to the photos in that post, rather than the photos themselves. Wayne
The problem in that case is that those photos of the GREAT waterfront scene were posted on 2 other model rr forum sites...
That may be, Brian. However, the URLs for those four photos state that they came directly from Imgbb, a photohosting site. So, you are again posting photos on this forum of other people's work. Did you get their permission to do this?
Please remove those four images and provide the direct links instead - Thanks.
[UPDATE: Photos removed by moderator. You can provide the direct links to the Imgbb website as an alternative. This is the acceptable way to post someone else's work that is not your own, that you do not have permission from to use AND has no direct connection to another forum.]
railandsail Doughless If the pics you show aren't of somehting you're planning to do, then why bother to display it at all other than to prove someone else's statement that "locos are never on car floats" to be technically incorrect. Actually since my carfloat has metal rails (unlike the Walthers one), I might be able to load my carfloat with a locomotive,...during my operating sessons,..limited though they might be...ha..ha When I first saw a few comments about locos not allowed on to carfloats, I thought that must be correct. But as it went along I discovered more photos that put locos on carfloats. Today I was going back to this website of Mr Goldsteins and reading more,... http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/developmenttransferbridge.html#Development ...what a fantastic site for info and images,...almost unbelieable. What did he have to say on this subject of locos on carfloats? A Popular Misconception The following statement is repetitiously heard in both prototype railfan and scale modelling circles: "the locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat"""The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".The locomotive is never placed on the float bridge or carfloat".Generally speaking, this statement quite simply is incorrect. Furthermore it is doubted that this practice in general was ever "prohibited" by an actual rule as dictated by a railroad. Research of various Employee Time Tables, locomotive operating manuals, general operations manuals, and/or Marine Rule Books for those Class 1 Railroads having carfloat operations in New York Harbor have failed to show this rule. Naturally, if anyone can find this rule listed in any New York Area railroad's rule book pertaining to float bridge operation, you are more than welcome to present it and invited to share it here. In the photo below, you will see numerous hoppers full of coal, weighting in at 80-100 tons per car. The lightest thing on the carfloat (besides the empty flat car) was the locomotive! Quite frankly, this misstatement of "locomotives not entering upon on a float bridge" is one of, if not the most prevalent misstatements regarding float bridge operations. http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/developmenttransferbridge.html#Development (PS: about 1/8 of the way down that page. Sorry I did not know how to link to subsections within that page?)
I don't care about carfloats, and never made any comment.
But this is further evidence that you seem to enjoy having a debate over what could or could not be plausible, apparently energized to do research about carfloats to prove someone else wrong rather than do it before you build your layout or ask for opinions.
Trying to be respectful, but the tone of several threads come out like this:
Brian: Hey guys, can I do this, what do you think?
Forum: No, that wouldn't work.
Brian: Well, here are a dozen pictures on the internet and a bunch of comments from three other websites and four forums that supports it.
Yes, for the captive terminals around NYC, there was no choice BUT to put the loco on the float to move it back to the mainland side for major inspections - plus the loco had to get there to begin with. But notice the loco - it's a small industrial type. Or something like the CNJ Bronx Terminal - that small AGEIR boxcab would have to occasionally take a trip back, but those were small locos. 60 tons. A USRA Light Mike ran around 142 tons. HUGE difference.
And it was as much the carrying capacity of the bridge as it was any issue with the float itself. I believe there was mention on Tim Warris' site on his Bronx Terminal layout that they added supports or something when needing to transfer the loco to the float. Or maybe I'm thinking of something else.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.