1885, 1905 or somewhere in between?

[jeffers_mz]

Rock Ridge, Rock Ridge...  Splendid!

(Although the film that quote came from opened with a scene building the railroad, they didn't spend the money to include a locomotive.)

With the setting "out west", I concur with the comments suggesting that the collapse in the silver market around 1896 sort of froze some western lines in time.  You can come up with all sorts of reasonable explanations for including some older-style equipment still operating in 1905, but if you say it is 1885 then you are bound to that in your detailing.

I hope that your Rock Ridge will include a Sheriff's Office.

Bill

 

The silver market was wobbly as early as 1890, largely due to new discoveries in the American west. 

The market crashed and never recovered with the repeal of the Sherman Act in 1893. Sherman legally obligated the US Government to buy 16 ounces of silver for every ounce of gold, and when the market glut was radically increasedby the US decision to end the dual metal currency standard, the entire silver based economy went into a tailspin.

[IRONROOSTER]

BTW if you're not using link-and-pin couplers, you're already doing some historical fudging re 1885.

I decide on that compromise long ago. If I'm running ops sessions, I'll need the Kadees.

The Janney coupler was invented in 1873 and adopted by the MCBA in 1887.  Automatic couplers were the law in 1893.  So it's not too much of a fudge for 1885. (from http://www.narhf.org/nar01/NAR01awards_coupler.html).

Enjoy

Paul 

Actual implementation of the 1893 law wasn't complete for all interchange traffic until 1903.  The same law mandated what was essentially the Westinghouse K air brake system and more uniform placement of grab irons and steps.

The implementation of air brakes was what permitted train length to grow and drove the need for larger engines.  Before air brakes, being able to slow or stop a train was a huge constraint on train length and weight.

The 1893 law that codified coupler and brake development is a big reason why there are so many differences between actual standard practice on most railroads between 1885 and 1905.  Although the 1890s economic crashes and depressions slowed or halted development in the West, by 1905 very few railroads (and those were mostly isolated) could afford to use equipment and operating practices they used in 1885.  In 1900, 10% of the entire US labor force was working directly for, or in support of the railroad business.

Fred W

I understand full implementation takes awhile, but the idea is that it could be used on the 1885 layout without too much of a stretch.  The coupler had been invented before 1885 and achieved an acceptance with MCBA 2 years later so you could use it with the idea that your railroad was technologically up to date.

Enjoy
Paul

[fwright]

I understand full implementation takes awhile, but the idea is that it could be used on the 1885 layout without too much of a stretch.  The coupler had been invented before 1885 and achieved an acceptance with MCBA 2 years later so you could use it with the idea that your railroad was technologically up to date.

Enjoy
Paul

I agree with you Paul.  In fact (or at least in my mind), both my free-lance Picture Gorge and Western and Tillamook Head and Bethel did adopt the new requirements earlier than required by the law - which would have been unusual for Oregon short line and narrow gauge roads.  They installed the couplers and brakes on everything bought after 1890, and retro-fitted all the older rolling stock, including equipment bought used from other roads.  All this work was completed in the 1890s, despite nearly being forced in bankruptcy on several occasions.  Of course, both lines shared an interlocking, forward-thinking Board of Directors, most of whom owed their positions to nepotism.  Or at least that's what the newspaper archives say.   

Fred Wright

....modeling coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900.... 

[Anonymous]

  Wood cars built in the 1880s typically had a life span of 15-20 years

 

You have to be a little careful with that twenty year figure for a couple of reasons. The 20 year life span was set by the MCB as a means for working out a system of compensation for cars destroyed or damaged in interchange service.  It turned out in actual practice that a lot of cars ended up lasting  longer than 20 years.

  Additionaly we are talking about a Nevada setting here, so the dry climate meant that wooden rolling stock did not have to be subjected to the number 1 enemy of the wood car, rot from damp conditions.  That's the reason that so many of the vintage prototypes that have been preserved have come from this part of the world.

  Years ago my Grandfather told me that when he was working at a wrought iron rolling mill about the time of the end of WWI, they were buying a lot of scrap from RR's that were replacing rail and bridges with steel.  He told me that the rail that was coming out of the western desert was like new, still retaining the heat blue from it's original manufacture.  The stuff coming out of swampy areas down south was pretty well  rotted out.

JBB

[dehusman]

I think from the vantage point of 2007 the differences between 1885 and 1905 aren't that great.

They are just as significant as between 1965 and 1985  or between 1945 and 1965.

The cars were bigger, they had air brakes and knuckle couplers, the end sills were different.  Steel and steel underframe cars were fairly common in 1905 and virtually unknown in 1885.  1905 engines were generally bigger and wheel arrangemst such as pacifics and atlantics were more common.

Dave H.