My layout idea....whattdoyall think?

[Anonymous]

Thanks, Jarrell. I thought it turned out good, too. It's really a very easy install. I'd do um all day long for 15 bucks a piece.

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

I got the Shay off Ebay, too. I kinda got caught up in bidding and ended up paying 131 bucks for it. I really don't feel bad though. I've seen some for less, but I've seen a lot for a bunch more. I also wanted the undecorated, which I got, and you don't see them all the time on Ebay.

Having a derailment in a spot I can't get to has been a concern that I am going to design out of my layout. Especially since my layout is going to be against the wall on two sides, I need to make sure I can reach the track all the way to the wall.

Sounds like a good price to me, Rob. I've found a 3 truck 80 ton bachmann dcc lights and sound for $322... so with the price of yours and the decoder you saved a lot.
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

I got the Shay off Ebay, too. I kinda got caught up in bidding and ended up paying 131 bucks for it. I really don't feel bad though. I've seen some for less, but I've seen a lot for a bunch more. I also wanted the undecorated, which I got, and you don't see them all the time on Ebay.

Having a derailment in a spot I can't get to has been a concern that I am going to design out of my layout. Especially since my layout is going to be against the wall on two sides, I need to make sure I can reach the track all the way to the wall.

Sounds like a good price to me, Rob. I've found a 3 truck 80 ton bachmann dcc lights and sound for $322... so with the price of yours and the decoder you saved a lot.
Jarrell

[leighant]

The SHAY MOUNTAIN RAILROAD and GENERIC PACIFIC (A Layout Plan in Words) Continued
Whereas the Generic Pacific would be a continuous (“roundy-round”) loop that represents a through long distance mainline railroad with generous curve and grade standards to accommodate mainline equipment, the Shay Mountain railroad would be a mountainside climbing line, probably point-to-point (or point to reverse loop?) with short cars, small tough locomotives, sharp curves, steep grades and perhaps a deliberate obstacle or two. The model might represent cheap make-due construction, which would actually mean long hours of scratchbuilding with crude materials, whereas the Generic Pacific would represent expensive professional class-one civil engineering, which would be modeled by inexpensive off-the-shelf plastic models of steel bridges, etc.

Curves: While the Generic Pacific needs generous curves, the Shay Mountain line can get away with sharper 18” radius curves, and it fact it NEEDS sharper curves to get the feel of the short line railroad. (You might “get away” with 15” radius, but that might require a fair amount of tinkering, adjusting of models, testing, etc. 18” would probably be “safe”.)
This means that an end-of-the-layout turnback curve of the Shay Mtn line can fit INSIDE the turnback curve of the GP mainline. (A Shay Mtn 18” radius, 36” diameter to track center lines*, inside the mainline curve of 22” radius back, 28” radius front, diameter 50” (track
centers).

*NOTE: Remember that the “nominal” radius of a track curve is the radius to the imaginary line down the center line of the track, as if you drew its path with a single line. The width of the track takes up space both inside and outside that line.

We said earlier that the Generic Pacific loop might have a reverse loop at one end. The smaller radius Shay Mtn curve would fit inside the end curve but there would be a problem if the two lines were at the same or almost the same elevation. The Shay Mtn line would have to cross the reverse loop cutoff with crossings that might be hard to fit-- unusual angles, etc. and would force the two lines to be at EXACTLY the same level at the crossing points. Therefore, it would be advisable to locate the first turnback curve on the Shay Mtn line inside the end turnback curve of the Generic Pacific that does NOT have the reverse loop. Needing no level crossing, the Shay Mountain can be starting its climb. It can be half an inch to an inch and a half above the GP line. That would add to the feeling that although the two tracks are roughly parallel, it is not double track of the same line. Different ballasting and roadbed etc between the two lines would also help…. Even solid roadbed, carefully-groomed ballast, concrete or stone retaining walls on the GP, Shay Mtn roadbed held up with crude timber cribbing retaining walls and little ballast.
By the time the Shay Mtn RR got to other end of the layout, it should be high enough to cross the reverse loop cutoff easily, possibly on a timber trestle or timber truss bridge. Although the Shay Mtn line could probably easily inside the end loop at that point, it might be visually better not to repeat a mirror image of the same orientation, etc as the other end. The Shay Mtn end turnback curve could be located so one side of the curve is directly over the curve of the lower track, and the opposite side of the same curve is well back from the lower curve. It might be well to put set the Shay Mtn track back from the front edge of the layout so the curve is over over the mainline curve at the back, and the mainline track is in a tunnel at the back. That would make the Generic Pacific out in the open at the front where it is going the “right” direction, that it, the direction a viewer perceives as its main overall apparent direction of travel, while being less conspicuous at the back where the reverse of direction gives away that is going roundy-round instead of from Point A to Point B.
In general, a mainline railroad tends to go as straight as possible from A to B, and we want our models of mainlines to convey this sense as much as possible in limited space. On the other hand, the logging or mining short line may meander back and forth to find the easiest cheapest way to get someplace, and then may change its direction when new mines or new logging areas open, and it may use the old route as part of a way to get to the new destination, albeit zig-zagging. So a short line that goes back and forth climbing the mountainside (and crossing the same general layout space two or three times) visually goes along with that sense of a meandering line.
Also, if any tunnels are needed to shoehorn things into a layout, the tunnels are more appropriate on the mainline which had more money to spend. (Real life tunnels are $$$$$.) Putting the short line OVER mainline tunnels and having NO TUNNELS AT ALL on the short line but cheap fills, timber trestles and timber cribbing is more in the nature of the shortline. (I read once that the entire Denver and Rio Grande narrow gauge system, hundreds of miles long, had only two short tunnels.)
Grades: The grades for the Shay Mtn line should be visibly steeper than the gentle mainline grades. You might want to test your locomotives and see what grades they will handle on a length of track attached to a board you can elevate to various angles. I have heard arguments that 4% is a stiff grade for models, doable but a strain. You WANT your Shay line to be a little bit of a strain. Whatever grade you decide is acceptable by the “board line” test method, remember that it is a little more difficult pulling that same grade on a sharp curve. If you find a train can barely make it up a 5% grade on straight track and can pull 4% in a workmanlike manner, you might want to make a grade that averages 3 ½ percent that continues through the sharp curves.
On the other hand, it might be interesting to include one short stretch of steeper grade, less than a train length long, that a train can barely make it up. That would be visually interesting and be an interesting operating challenger, perhaps requiring “doubling the hill”. That means leaving part of a train on the line just below the steep place (with brakes set!), pulling half the train up and setting cars out on a spur, then backing down over the steep segment to pickup the rest of the train and put it together to go the rest of the way to the summit. Not all trains would have to do this, just ones with over a certain numbers of cars or a certain tonnage. Or locos with less pulling oomph.
Let’s plot a guesstimate of the line length and elevation. Suppose the Shay Mtn RR connects with the Generic Pacific at approximately the middle of the length of the layout, runs to one end (1/2 layout length) and turns around, runs back to the other end of the layout (1 more layout length) turns around and runs one more length of the layout before reaching the summit and the mine or log loading area(1 more layout length). That is a run of 2 ½ layout lengths x 28 feet/ layout length = 70 feet. That is 840 inches. At a nominal grade of 3.5 percent, the line could climb 29.4 inches. Wow! The line won’t be climbing the entire distance because it will probably level it off for the length of the loading tracks, etc at the summit. We might back off the guesstimate to 24 inches elevation change. If that is more than we want, we might consider having the grade level off in places, so it is not uniform, has some spots steeper and others less so. Might look and run more interestingly.
One more little thing to throw in. How about a switchback? Occasionally used in mountain climbing railroads, ESPECIALLY cheaply built logging and mining short lines. We don’t really need the switchback to gain altitude with 2 turnback curves, but it still adds running length. With all this added length of run, we don’t really have so much need to locate our summit terminal directly over one of the end turnback curves.
What else to add to the line? We might want to be able to run two trains at once, one uphill and one downhill and they would need a place to meet. A double-ended passing siding is typical of mainlines, where neither train needs to back. On the cheaply built short line, a stub-end back-in siding might be more appropriate. On a logging railroad, it might be built to look like the stub of a spur built to serve a former logging area that is logged out. The same spur might be used to hold cars for a train that is “doubling the hill”, preferable ABOVE the steep grade. A loco might conceivably leave half of train on line on lower part of grade, but when he takes the first half up the hill, he would have to set them out and get around them to go back down the hill to get the second part of the train.
What would be at the summit? Some people would have a reverse loop so the uphill train can continue forward while turning around to go down the hill. I would avoid this because it would almost have to be put on top of one of the end turnback curves, making a mountain that is almost a straight up and down cylinder, unnatural looking. I would prefer a runaround track and at least one switching spur where a loco can runaround to go out from in front of its uphill cars, leave the empty cars at the summit mine or log loader, and pick up loaded cars to take down the hill. More back and forth and switching movement rather than continually running forward. If you want to turn the locomotive, a small turntable would be appropriate. So would a wye but it would stick out over the lower part of the layout too much, probably even into the aisle.
I haven’t gone into the trackage for the interchange at the bottom. Some questions to think about? If it is a logging railroad, does the logger railroad carry loaded log cars to interchange to the GP trunkline, or is there a sawmill at the interchange town where log cars are dumped and loaded lumber cars are interchanged out to the trunkline railroad. Similarly, if your short line serves mines, does it load ore cars which are interchanged out to the trunkline railroad, or does it carry ore to a concentrater or smelter of some kind, which ships different cars out on the trunkline railroad?
Some other considerations… I did not think about which side of your L-shaped space was the 12 foot long side and which the 16 foot side. Do you want to locate the Generic Pacific reverse loop on the 12 foot or 16 foot side? (It doesn’t really make any difference to me which is the right or left side of the L. One could mirror-flip one track plan into the other…) You might want to draw it both ways, and draw in the end curves and upper portion of the Shay Mountain line and then see what kind of space is left at the bottom for the interchange between lines and some industry tracks there. That might make a difference how things fit. If you are going to have a grade on your Generic Pacific, which should be the higher and which the lower end. I would think the making the end which does NOT have the reverse loop be the lower end would increase the difference in elevation between the GP and the Shay Mtn, adding to the effect of Shay Mtn being different, more rugged etc.
I hope this exercise left you with some interesting things to think about. I had fun thinking it over. Fitting the desired features into a limited space is a lot like doing a simple multiple-variable algebra or calculus problem. Sometimes gives me ideas I can used on my own layout.
Happy railroading.

[Anonymous]

I got the Shay off Ebay, too. I kinda got caught up in bidding and ended up paying 131 bucks for it. I really don't feel bad though. I've seen some for less, but I've seen a lot for a bunch more. I also wanted the undecorated, which I got, and you don't see them all the time on Ebay.

Having a derailment in a spot I can't get to has been a concern that I am going to design out of my layout. Especially since my layout is going to be against the wall on two sides, I need to make sure I can reach the track all the way to the wall.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oleirish

You guys be vary carefull with "hidden stageing "on the back half of the lay out,If you can't reach it and have an de-railment??????????

Sounds like a perfect excuse to start building appropriately scaled skycrane helicopters to go in and lift them out. [:D]

[oleirish]

You guys be vary carefull with "hidden stageing "on the back half of the lay out,If you can't reach it and have an de-railment??????????

JIM

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

Well, I'm on a fixed income, so necessity dictates that I find the lowest prices I can or don't do the hobby. There might have been cheaper prices out there for what I did, but I haven't found them yet. Like you, I want to support my LHS, but they are a bunch of a$$holes. It's a major though, so I don't feel bad for not patronizing them. If they can't hire good people, then to hell with them.

QUOTE: Originally posted by ereimer

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob
As you can see, they want 116 bucks for the same decoder most want 149

Rob, where did you get your Shay?
Thanks,
Jarrell

ouch , that's a lot less than what i'm paying for the one on order at my LHS . sometimes living in canada and supporting my LHS hurts . especially in the wallet

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by leighant

jacon12 wrote "I don't understand the 'back half' part." in connection with
"Schematic of the Generic Pacific: continuous oval with hidden staging on back half, interchange with Shay Mountain Railroad on front half.
Imagine an oval of track on a long layout that is set against a wall, viewed and operated from the open middle of the room. When I say "the back half", I refer to the half of the oval that is up against the wall and "back" away from the viewer. The "front half" refers to the part of the oval that is towards the front edge of the layout, near the aisle, viewer and operator.
It might half been confusing because we are talking about an L-shaped layout but I am just thinking of it as a long narrow layout that is bent somewhere close to the middle.

I am going to be posting more, probably tomorrow, about the steep mountain branch line that would fit inside and over the mainline "Generic Pacific" loop I described earlier.

Ok, I understand now.
Thanks,
Jarrell

[Anonymous]

Well, I'm on a fixed income, so necessity dictates that I find the lowest prices I can or don't do the hobby. There might have been cheaper prices out there for what I did, but I haven't found them yet. Like you, I want to support my LHS, but they are a bunch of a$$holes. It's a major though, so I don't feel bad for not patronizing them. If they can't hire good people, then to hell with them.

QUOTE: Originally posted by ereimer

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob
As you can see, they want 116 bucks for the same decoder most want 149

ouch , that's a lot less than what i'm paying for the one on order at my LHS . sometimes living in canada and supporting my LHS hurts . especially in the wallet

[ereimer]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob
As you can see, they want 116 bucks for the same decoder most want 149

ouch , that's a lot less than what i'm paying for the one on order at my LHS . sometimes living in canada and supporting my LHS hurts . especially in the wallet

[leighant]

jacon12 wrote "I don't understand the 'back half' part." in connection with
"Schematic of the Generic Pacific: continuous oval with hidden staging on back half, interchange with Shay Mountain Railroad on front half.
Imagine an oval of track on a long layout that is set against a wall, viewed and operated from the open middle of the room. When I say "the back half", I refer to the half of the oval that is up against the wall and "back" away from the viewer. The "front half" refers to the part of the oval that is towards the front edge of the layout, near the aisle, viewer and operator.
It might half been confusing because we are talking about an L-shaped layout but I am just thinking of it as a long narrow layout that is bent somewhere close to the middle.

I am going to be posting more, probably tomorrow, about the steep mountain branch line that would fit inside and over the mainline "Generic Pacific" loop I described earlier.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand any of it, but I'm tryin real hard. If it ain't in picture form, I'm just a dumbass.

I got the decoder from here: http://www.acculites.com/SOUNDTRAXX_pp.html

REAL nice people. FAST as HELL shipping. As you can see, they want 116 bucks for the same decoder most want 149 for. I got the Zephyr from Ebay. Here's the link to the seller I bought from: http://motors.search.ebay.com/_W0QQfgtpZ1QQfrppZ25QQsassZbrillianthobby

Brilliant Hobby is the business name. The man's name is David Brilliant, and quite frankly, he is. He's very nice and helpful. He also sold me the Zephyr for 149 bucks. I watch very closely who I do business with on Ebay. Look at his feedback. He has 943 comments, no neutrals, and one negative. You can reach him directly at 949 306 8627. Hope that helps.

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12



Kenneth, I'm following this with great interest also. Would you mind elaborating on this part?
"Schematic of the Generic Pacific: continuous oval with hidden staging on back half, interchange with Shay Mountain Railroad on front half."

I don't understand the 'back half' part.
Thanks,
Jarrell

[jacon12]

Kenneth, I'm following this with great interest also. Would you mind elaborating on this part?
"Schematic of the Generic Pacific: continuous oval with hidden staging on back half, interchange with Shay Mountain Railroad on front half."

I don't understand the 'back half' part.
Thanks,
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

As much as I do AND don't want to, mine is probably going to end up with two larger tables at the loop ends than I started out with. I got my Spectrum Shay and the Digitrax Zephyr today. I put the decoder in the locomotive in about 30 minutes. This thing sounds so real it ain't funny.

Rob, if you don't mind my asking, where did you get your Shay and decoder? I'm looking for the same thing.
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oleirish

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you're thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide 'shelf' running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture..

and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture..

and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little 'hill' beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum.
I agree with Expalacedog in that you're eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space... i.e. turnouts, business', yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT... I've come to a halt with mine and I'm rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I'll probably go ahead with it in the end. I'm in no hurry.. :)
I've been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn't uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines.. well... theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you're going to do the hills and valleys that run beside the track also.
Personally, I think it is an interesting aspect of railroading. I've seen it done by experts in On3 and it was a thing of beauty.
But, as most of the guys here can tell you.. I'm no expert and I'm just getting started in the hobby. So take their advice and try to develop a plan to go by. It'll save you a lot of grief down the road.
Jarrell

Well hello Jarrell[:D]
Nice pictures,when are we going to see more of your lay out,the grade looks good!!
my rule of the thumb is rase 2.5 inches in six feet , or just higher than your tallest peace of rolling stock.[^][2c]
JIM

Jim, I've been taking a little time off for work around the yard and house but I hope to be back at it soon!
Jarrell

[Anonymous]

As much as I do AND don't want to, mine is probably going to end up with two larger tables at the loop ends than I started out with. I got my Spectrum Shay and the Digitrax Zephyr today. I put the decoder in the locomotive in about 30 minutes. This thing sounds so real it ain't funny.

[oleirish]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

Rob, these fellas have been helping me on a layout that sounds pretty much like what you're thinking of doing. Mine consists of two 4x4 foot tables connected by a 2 foot wide 'shelf' running 12 feet and then another 8 feet at 90 degrees. I have a logging line that is a 4% grade, seen in this picture..

and I have no problem getting trains up it. It goes to an area that will be the logging camp and it will be where the yellow loco is parked in the lower picture..

and that is 6 inches high (from the base). The little 'hill' beside the loco will be a scenery break, another idea from one of the guys on this forum.
I agree with Expalacedog in that you're eating up a lot of space for an incline that could be used for operational space... i.e. turnouts, business', yards etc. But, I also think that IF done right and sceniked well it will look great. BUT... I've come to a halt with mine and I'm rethinking if I really want to do that or not. I'll probably go ahead with it in the end. I'm in no hurry.. :)
I've been doing a lot of research on logging in the Appalachian Mountains, particularly in what is now the Great Smoky Mountain National Park from about 1900 to 1940 and believe me, 4% was a cakewalk for the Shays that were used. And as Zephyr said, over 12% wasn't uncommon, running up narrow valleys beside rivers, crossing back and forth over the river on rickety bridges. At one point they even put up a 'swinging bridge, of all things. So it is possible and it would be prototypical but modeling the inclines, even with Woodland Scenic risers and inclines.. well... theres more to it than running track on the flats. You have to think about how you're going to do the hills and valleys that run beside the track also.
Personally, I think it is an interesting aspect of railroading. I've seen it done by experts in On3 and it was a thing of beauty.
But, as most of the guys here can tell you.. I'm no expert and I'm just getting started in the hobby. So take their advice and try to develop a plan to go by. It'll save you a lot of grief down the road.
Jarrell

Well hello Jarrell[:D]
Nice pictures,when are we going to see more of your lay out,the grade looks good!!
my rule of the thumb is rase 2.5 inches in six feet , or just higher than your tallest peace of rolling stock.[^][2c]
JIM

[Anonymous]

I certainly appreciate your thoughtful analysis. I know it took a while to type...at least it would have me. I think the "young or inexperienced guest operator" is me!!! I barely hung onto your explanation. I don't know a LOT of the terms you're using, but I want to learn......and I know you don't have time to teach me. I have saved what you've written...and will anything else you write. It's great advice. Now I just have to figure it all out!

[Anonymous]

leighant, thank you VERY much. Now I have something to use as a guide.

[leighant]

The SHAY MOUNTAIN RAILROAD and GENERIC PACIFIC (A Layout Plan in Words)

Space specifications: 3’ deep (or less) L-shape along 12’ and 16’ walls, with 4-5 foot lobe allowed at each end for turnback curves.
Main modeling focus: steep mountainous short-line, mining and/or logging, possibly Shay-operated.

FIRST: Suggestion for a mainline connection.
A place for the short line to connect is important for the “story” of the short line and its meaningful operation, and a trunk line loop (long distance major railroad) would allow a larger variety of equipment to run, and allow for easy continuous running when desired. Although the trunk line (let us call it the Generic Pacific) is secondary, it will require the greatest track clearances, curve radii etc. and should probably be laid out first.

Curve standards for the Generic Pacific: much mainline equipment requires larger radius curves than branch line logging equipment. 24” radius is often recommended as a minimum, 30” or even 36” is even better for the appearance of full-length passenger. (I assume in the era of Shay logging, you are NOT running 89’ piggyback flats!) One trick to save “turnback curve lobe sprawl”… Sharper curves show up much more on the gaps between cars seen on the front curve, the one that curves away from the aisle and the viewer, than on the back curve, where the sharp curvature makes the ends of cars closest to the view get closer together. Therefore for APPEARANCE, you might consider having the back half of the Generic Pacific turnback curves with a radius just large enough for dependable mainline operation, say 22” or 24”, while the front half of the turnback curves have a radius of 28” or 30”. If you allow 3” from track center to the front and back edge of layout, the “front half-back half” curve combination of 22” and 28” would allow a minimum end lobe depth of 56” (4 feet 8 inches) which is halfway between your target of 4 to 5 feet. Besides the appearance-space compromise, there are two more justifications for the “front half-back half” difference. One, the back half of the mainline loop may be hidden or half-hidden behind terrain, trees or structures and less conspicuous. Two, the curve that takes up less visual space on the back than the one on the front represents a kind of forced false perspective, like putting 1/8” scale or TT scale or N scale buildings towards the back half of an HO layout to make it look farther away.

Schematic of the Generic Pacific: continuous oval with hidden staging on back half, interchange with Shay Mountain Railroad on front half. Sometimes modelers are concerned about not wanting to hide too much track. In this case, the Generic Pacific plays only a supporting role. It is not important to see much of the length of their operation, we just need to see them going through the scene where they connect with your little short line. But a variety of through trains and a contrast with the short line are important. My tastes would call for hidden staging at the back (under the mountain) with 4 tracks, to allow 2 through freight trains, one in each direction, one through passenger train, and one local peddler freight. A 4-track staging yard would take up about one foot of depth at the back. Short tracks and operations can occupy that same space higher up on the side of the mountain. We might want to avoid higher trackage over the turnouts at each end of the staging. [Corollary 27 of Murphy’s Law: if we don’t allow access, the chances of mishaps requiring access increases sharply.]
The “front” part of the Generic Pacific continuous mainline would be the interchange with the Shay Mountain line and it should probably include ONE long passing track. We are not trying to represent any significant length of the GPRR, just its relationship to the Shay Mountain RR. One good-length passing siding allows good length mainline through trains-- 15 to 20 car freight and 6 to 8 car passenger trains. It also allows modeling meets on single track between mainline trains running in opposite directions. It allows making runaround moves both for switching by a mainline local crew and possibly also for runaround use by the Shay Mountain (with clearance from GPRR dispatcher).
One reasonable passing siding for the GP is probably enough. One might also consider one industrial dead-end spur somewhere on the GP away from the passing siding/interchange “town”. It would have to be switched by a local going the right direction for a trailing point switch move, or the crew would have to go to the passing siding to make runarounds for the spur.
One other MODEL function of the Generic Pacific line… It allows unattended continuous running to keep guests happy, or to give a young or inexperienced guest operator something to run while the Shay Mountain is operated in more realistic “hands on” style.
Grades for the Generic Pacific: the mainline loop could be built flat, gradeless. But since this is somewhere in the mountains, an easy grade would be appropriate for a main line, perhaps one-half percent to one percent, just barely enough grade to notice. Making one end lobe a couple inches higher than the other would achieve that, and put all the change in elevation where it could be seen.
One might consider one or more reverse loops for the GP, to allow a train running one direction to run the other. That could be done by making a cutoff connection from the back track to the front track. Two reverse loops, one at each end, would allow trains to reverse in either direction without backing. However, they would create a mirror image repetition which might detract from realism. One reverse loop connection might be disguised and scenicked to appear as a junction on the mainline, but two would be harder to swallow. And in real life, trains do a lot of backing. My own “druthers” would be to have only ONE reverse loop on the main line. The same reverse loop might even be used by the Shay Mountain to turn locos at the lower end of their line. I would put the reverse loop so that it runs FROM where the turnback curve ends at the back, to the nearest connection at the front. That way, any backing move would NOT go into staging where you couldn’t see it, but onto the end curve or the front track.
This is only the beginning of my analysis. I worked it out in about 10 minutes while taking my morning walk but it is taking a lot longer to write up. I need to fix lunch and go to work. I will continue later with how the Shay Mountain would fit into this and be the main attraction.
Kenneth L. Anthony
See my own track plans at
old existing layout: http://www.railimages.com/albums/kennethanthony/acj.jpg
new planned layout: http://www.railimages.com/albums/kennethanthony/ael.jpg
portable mini-layout: http://www.railimages.com/albums/kennethanthony/aaa.jpg

[Anonymous]

I seem to remember reading that a cable assist was used at the rock quarry on the defunct shortline I am loosley using as a prototype. The Inclines in Cincinnati that took cable car passengers up Mt. Adams and Price Hill also used a second car as a counter weight. I would try to model something like it but I don't have the skills. Yet.

[NZRMac]

QUOTE: Originally posted by exPalaceDog

Who needs engines? Years ago, MR did an article on modeling an logging railway incline. The cars are pulled up or let down the grade with a cable hooked to a special car. That approach would allow almost any grade, maybe even 50%.

Have fun

Like this



This a model of a local coal mine, the weight of the loaded car pulls the empty one up, they meet in the middle and pass each other.

It's not my model, we had a train show recently, and was a huge hit.

Ken.

[exPalaceDog]

Who needs engines? Years ago, MR did an article on modeling an logging railway incline. The cars are pulled up or let down the grade with a cable hooked to a special car. That approach would allow almost any grade, maybe even 50%.

Have fun

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

There have been a few comments like "assuming you'll fini***he layout", and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can't tell me how to do this, but it's important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don't include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated.

Rob, because I'm inexperienced myself I can't help you with the layout very much. I'm still struggling to get mine going, but the rest of these people can. Thanks for the link to the old Shay photos, they make nice wall art when redone on the computer.

Rob,

I understand the "assuming you finish..." comments. I've started over on the same layout several times. I'm busily building along and I see a MUCH BETTER IDEA for benchwork, or tracklaying, or whatever in one of the magazines or on one of these forums, etc. and I back up and start over and usually learn something new in the process. Currently I'm unhappy with a curve I "eyeballed" instead of doing it right. Redoing it is going to require redoing some benchwork (not much but some) as well so I haven't done it yet. But until I do I don't want to work on scenery in the area that will be affected so.......well, you get the idea. If you don't mind/ aren't afraid to redo stuff then forge ahead. The things you learn along the way are the justification.

Cheers,

Ed

Jarrell
P.S. so you're from around Gray, eh? [;)]

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BigRedneckRob

There have been a few comments like "assuming you'll fini***he layout", and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can't tell me how to do this, but it's important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don't include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated.

Rob, because I'm inexperienced myself I can't help you with the layout very much. I'm still struggling to get mine going, but the rest of these people can. Thanks for the link to the old Shay photos, they make nice wall art when redone on the computer.

Jarrell
P.S. so you're from around Gray, eh? [;)]

[Anonymous]

There have been a few comments like "assuming you'll fini***he layout", and such. Please know I appreciate these, too. I would like all of your experienced suggestions that might help make this sucessful. Thanks so much for the graph paper suggestion. I had actually thought of that, and intended to use it. I know all of you can't tell me how to do this, but it's important to me to get it done for a number of reasons, all of which don't include me. Any input both positive and not, is greatly appreciated.

[ereimer]

there have been a number of threads here concerning the pulling abilities of our model locos . some seem to be even better than the prototype , some don't seem to do anywhere near as well . also there seems to be a lot of variation even among identical models .

so before you design a steep grade into your layout you should determine if your locos can handle it while pulling the number of cars you expect them to . maybe cut a piece of plywood 8' x 3" , attach some track and prop it up at the correct angle . put your loco and a few cars on it and see how it goes .

[Anonymous]

Hey no sweat. I don't take it personally. I know I'm stupid, that's why I came here for help. At this point in my layout, I can change anything, because I haven't laid the first piece of track.

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Rob, I rode on a 2-8-2 Tank engine a month ago. It was designed for heavy grades hauling. A plaque beside the water glass on the backhead said to not let the water level fall below a line near the top of the glass on grades of 9 degrees. That is NINE degrees.

Having people you don't know telling you to have a sober second look at your pet plan is disconcerting, I'm sure, but we sure don't want to see you building 'neat' things into your layout that won't be so neat after a few hours of running it. Better to bite the bullet now and make the changes that will make your layout a real pride and joy....with the little bonus of not being boring. [:D]

[selector]

Rob, I rode on a 2-8-2 Tank engine a month ago. It was designed for heavy grades hauling. A plaque beside the water glass on the backhead said to not let the water level fall below a line near the top of the glass on grades of 9 degrees. That is NINE degrees.

Having people you don't know telling you to have a sober second look at your pet plan is disconcerting, I'm sure, but we sure don't want to see you building 'neat' things into your layout that won't be so neat after a few hours of running it. Better to bite the bullet now and make the changes that will make your layout a real pride and joy....with the little bonus of not being boring. [:D]