Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

short line on a mountain side ?

6737 views
21 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
short line on a mountain side ?
Posted by 0-6-0 on Monday, October 17, 2011 8:33 PM

Hello  I am planning to build a mountain with a tunnel. And I would like to run a short line to a small mine. And I am not sure where to start. The mountain/tunnel will be a curve and 7-8 feet from one end to the other and go about 2 feet up. I am thinking of a shay and 2-4 ore cars ? to work the line  to make a 8 car train two times a week.

So how should I build the line in the side. I was thinking of using foam for the mountain. should I carve the line in the side? or build the line on a wood frame and foam around it?  I am not sure what grade I should use? I would like to have two switch backs. But not sure how to go from one grade to the other. Thanks and have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    May 2007
  • From: North Myrtle Beach, SC
  • 995 posts
Posted by Beach Bill on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 8:45 AM

Building the support for the track first is suggested.  Unlike real mountains, our mountains of foam or plaster might not give enough support for the track (although we usually don't have to worry about landslides, either). 

Plan this out on paper first.  The grade to use is up to you, and with a plan for a shay and about four cars at a time it can be fairly steep.  Still, grades over about 4% or 5% create operating difficulties even in smaller scales, such as the transition area between level track and that on the grade.  One can't go immediately to a steep grade or risk derailments (it's like a transition curve only vertical).  That track doesn't have to go to the top of the mountain:  The ore seam is not likely at the top, and trying to gain 2' vertical with a 16' run (back and forth on a 8' switchback) would still yield at least a 12.5% grade!

Also, consider in your planning whether or not you will need a run-around track at the top to be able to service that mine.  Generally (there were exceptions), railroads with steep grades would try to keep the shay (1) pointed uphill to help keep water over the crown sheet to reduce the risk of a boiler explosion and (2) on the downhill side of the train to reduce the risk of run-aways.

Plan it out.  Build the supports and base for your track before filling in the whole mountain with foam or scenery.

Bill

With reasonable men, I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments where they will certainly be lost. William Lloyd Garrison
  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: San Francisco Bay Area
  • 835 posts
Posted by mcfunkeymonkey on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:08 AM

And remember with switchbacks, the grade goes from turnout to turnout (where the next "leg" starts elevating), but you still need enough space past the turnout to hold the entire train.

So if you run 24" trains (about an engine and 3-4 cars in HO), you'll need at least 24" on the far sides of the turnouts, leaving whatever space inside that to rise in elevation.  To rise 2" over 48" (4.2% grade), plus switchback leads, plus slight transition grade (from flat to rise), means at least 8' of space.

Switchbacks do take up a lot of space (lengthwise) but can be fun or tedious to operate depending on your model railroading interests.

Like Bill said, plan it out first, then you can figure out your benchwork.

Hope this helps.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:16 PM

Looking at a couple of prototype samples here:

  1. The Grande's Monarch branch (Colorado) serviced a single quarry.  When they dieselized, they relaid that one isolated narrow gauge branch to standard, short switchback and all.  The switchback gained about twenty feet between switches, or about forty total feet from the switchstand of the lower tail switch to the rails on the hill above.  That was the difference between going over Monarch Pass and digging through the summit of Monarch Pass.  The latter would have been a deal breaker - the line didn't justify major earthworks.
  2. The Santa Fe (or one of its predecessors) had to climb to the summit of Crown King Mountain in Central Arizona to serve a number of mines and the small town that supported them.  It got there by building a ladder of switchbacks up the mountain, including some big trestles and at least one short tunnel.  The grade was 4%, the grade of the tail tracks was 2% up from the switch and it took ten (count 'em) reversals to gain a LOT of height!.  (Since this is high desert, the roadbed is still clearly visible.  Part of it is used by the Crown King Road, which has turnback street corner curves at the sites of the switches and takes little excursions to go around bridge sites and the collapsed tunnel.)

Switchbacks were used on light traffic lines (or temporary alignments bypassing bridges or tunnels under construction) because they were an inexpensive answer to major earthworks, or because they were the ONLY way to get the necessary height.  Both the operating and MOW departments hated them, but they were sometimes a necessary evil.

In my own modeling I use teakettle tank locos (and an articulated) to move short trains of light cars on a 4% ruling grade with 350mm radius curves,  The terrain allowed me to use single-turn helices where a tighter situation might have required switchbacks.

My tracks are laid on cookie-cut plywood, supported at appropriate heights above the L-girder joists below on risers.  If there are no joints and splices in the way, the plywood will form natural vertical easements between grades.  For a switchback I would have the switch level, and just have a slight suggestion of upgrade out to the bumper of the tail track.

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:57 PM

There was several short lines that used a shay to climb the mountain to the mine.The C&O used switchbacks to some mines.

As far as a run around at a mine-very few mines has a run around because of space limitations.

These mines was reverse move in and pull out..Even today in Virgina NS  reverse moves to several loadouts on the Pocahontas Division.

 

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:35 PM

Hello well I have been working with this and I think I have a plan. I will start at 0'' and go up to 2.5'' over 7 feet have a turnout . Go back though the turnout and go up 2.5''  do this two more time to reach a height 7.5''. This is where the mine will be. This will give me space past the turnout to the shay and 3 cars. So it will be three up and three down. I will not have room for a run around track. 

I have some EZ track I use under the x-mas tree I did some mock ups and I think with the right support  It should work out. I have some 1/4'' hardboard I will use under the track. But I still have some other things to work out before I start cutting up lumber. Thanks for the help and Have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Thursday, October 27, 2011 6:18 PM

Hello well I have been working on my short line. I have it just about done still need to add some supports. I Had to change some things but it works out better. I went with a 3'' rise over 7' with 4 risers to reach 12''. I did run my shay a three ore cars and it went up and down with no troubles. Here is a pic of what I have so far.

Let me know what you think ? Have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 4,115 posts
Posted by tatans on Thursday, October 27, 2011 7:01 PM

0-6-0

Hello well I have been working on my short line. I have it just about done still need to add some supports. I Had to change some things but it works out better. I went with a 3'' rise over 7' with 4 risers to reach 12''. I did run my shay a three ore cars and it went up and down with no troubles. Here is a pic of what I have so far.

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j229/0-6-0/DSCN2791.jpg

Let me know what you think ? Have a nice day Frank

YIKES !!  just what I've been planning to build, I'm starting a logging mountain also and could not figure out what it should look like till I saw this photo  (will try to make the flat part longer after the switches), the layout so far looks great, how are you going to fill in the Mountain?? screen or foam?  send us a photo of the entire layout , ----again, it looks great ! !

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,387 posts
Posted by cuyama on Friday, October 28, 2011 10:46 AM

How will you get back there after it is scenicked to retrieve a derailed car or maintain track?

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Saturday, October 29, 2011 4:20 PM

Hello I think it will be foam it will have some straight drops. Looking at it in the photo the edge of the line will be the drops. And the top should look like a mountain. I will leave the left side open a little so I can reach in. The right side that wall is a attic wall I can cut a hole in it so I can reach in.Here are a few pics of the room.

Have a nice day

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Monday, June 11, 2012 7:20 PM

Hello I made some progress on the short line. I made the rock face from some scrap foam.  The cardboard on the back wall is for mock up only. It will be replaced with some thing stonger. And hopefuly look like a moutain when done. Here are some pics.

So what do you think ?  Am I on the right track? Does it look like a rock cliff or should I try again.  Thanks and have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,221 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Tuesday, June 12, 2012 5:21 AM

Gidday  Frank, One of the reasons that I think that this is such a great hobby is how multi-faceted it is. Geology is some thing I know very little about, ( actually one of many things I know little about !!)  but  am often amazed by "The Force Of Nature", makes mans efforts look a little puny. That said I am also amazed by the efforts of our fore bearers, who with little more than dynamite, a pick, a shovel, and a wheel barrow, and a whole heap of determination, constructed railways, and or roads, in areas similar to that which you are modelling.  

A link to some photos.....

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=rock+strata&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ARHXT4_YH63BiQfxo62sAw&sqi=2&ved=0CGwQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=872

As long as you're happy with the result, though like Cuyama previously, I hope your track access is suitable ?

Have Fun Smile

Cheers,the Bear.

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Upstate NY
  • 229 posts
Posted by MikeFF on Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:16 PM

Frank,

 

My dad was an earth science teacher and I grew up with rock formations.  The orientation of your strata are highly unlikely, they should all run, more or less, the same direction.  In the earlier pictures, I had a hard time determining the thickness of your sub-roadbed.  If it is less than 3/8 it is likely to warp.  1/2 or 3/4 is much better.  You may still have time to sneak in there and beef it up between the risers.  It looks like you are building a really neat layout.

Mike

 

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:32 AM

Hello

JaBear I love this hobby for the same resons something new all the time. I also know nothing about geology but we have to try right. Thanks for the link some cool pics.

Markff  Thanks I did't even notice that they were off. I would like to ask how do the strata look as in thinkness ? Are they to long ? Are the gap's to big/deep. The sub-bed is 1/4 board but I did put in more support befor the foam went up. Thanks for the help Frank

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,221 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:38 PM

Gidday Frank, As you can see in the images that I linked there are no hard and fast rules regarding the thickness of strata.

Strata thickness depends a lot on what material and length of time each  individual layer  was laid down,  and what elements have weathered them over time, "The Grand Canyon" springs to mind as a good example.

I am of course referring to New Zealand, but on the Southland Plains, where I was raised, the strata layers were comprised of types of sedimentary rock, predominately sandstone, mudstone, greywacke (a combination of sandstone and mudstone), and limestone, I still have a decent sized fossilised shell I dug out of the local limestone quarry as a kid.

Living now on the edge of the Volcanic Plateau, the strata layers are mainly comprised of various types of igneous rocks, and volcanic ash, the thickness depending on the amount of volcanic activity at the particular time, and sedimentary greywacke.

So looking at what you've done  regarding the thickness and gaps, it looks fine to me,though I am pleased that Mark pointed out, far more diplomatically than I could, that the strata should have the same general orientation.

Keep having Fun    Big Smile

Cheers, the Bear.

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Saturday, June 16, 2012 12:49 PM

Hello

Mike  Iam sorry I spelled your name worng.

JaBear I also have a lot of sandstone cliffs by me. But its hard to get a good look at them. Most of it is covered with plants/trees.  I have been looking at them and photos for months and thought it was time to try and make some. I rework the foam so the strata looks straighter here are few pics.

Now I am going to work on the mountain for the back coner. Have a nice weekend Frank

 

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: Maryville IL
  • 9,577 posts
Posted by cudaken on Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:48 PM

 Frank, only rocks I know about is the ones I bought for the flower bed and the one for Miss Cuda Ken.

 Only thing I would change is add some lighter colors to high lite area's in  the sun. Other than that, they look fine to me.

 Cuda Ken

I hate Rust

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,221 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Sunday, June 17, 2012 12:23 AM

Gidday Frank, Looks good to me. Thumbs Up Smile

Cheers, the Bear.

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Thursday, November 1, 2012 8:08 PM

Hello well the more I looked at my mountain the more I did not like it. I have been looking at rocks,cliffs,hills,mountains everything. And you know what mine did not look like any of them. So I tried something else. I found a thread about rock molds. And I like the way they looked much better.So I found a good rock in the backyard and made a mold of it. The hardest part for me was getting the color of the rock right. Here are some pics of the new mountain.

I am still working on it. But I think it looks a lot better now. What do you think? Have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Monday, February 25, 2013 7:21 PM

Hello well I am still working on the mountain. But  I am almost done. Few more trees and rocks and it should be done. I also started laying out my farm. Here are some updated photos.

  Have a nice day Frank

  • Member since
    January 2013
  • From: PA
  • 481 posts
Posted by Schuylkill and Susquehanna on Monday, February 25, 2013 7:30 PM

Looking great!

If I were you, I'd add a low-relief rock face in the dip between the two hills or paint in some rocks to match the ones on either side.  The dip looks pretty sharp, but other than that it looks amazing.  I love the backdrop with clouds and the stuff by the tracks.

Nice shay.  Spectrum makes a great model!

 

Modeling the Pennsy and loving it!

  • Member since
    June 2006
  • From: northeast ohio
  • 966 posts
Posted by 0-6-0 on Wednesday, February 27, 2013 11:34 AM

Hello Schuylkill and Susquehanna   Thanks its been a fun project to build kinda hard but fun. I will have to try and mach the paint for the dip. There is no room for rocks I have the tracks to close to the wall. I did not see it till it was to late. I was not sure what to do with the space so I tried to make it blend in .I used a golden oak stain on the rocks so it should not be to hard to match. My dad gave me the shy and it runs great I am going to get one more it needs a friend. Thanks and have a nice day Frank

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!