zstripe Rich, I hope You realize, that the windows on the prototype, the sill is a little higher than waist high and a person can look out them and also open them. Take Care! Frank
Rich,
I hope You realize, that the windows on the prototype, the sill is a little higher than waist high and a person can look out them and also open them.
Take Care!
Frank
Therein lies the advantage od scratch buiding the freight house.
Now you see why I have been procrastinating.
Rich
Alton Junction
zstripe Rich, AAHHH! Yeah, that would make more sense. The prototype is only a two story structure. That would probably look better. Take Care! Frank
AAHHH! Yeah, that would make more sense. The prototype is only a two story structure. That would probably look better.
zstripe Rich, On Your mock-up, are there two sections there, a top and bottom. Or are they one piece? If they are two piece, cut about a 1 1/2'' off the bottom of the top pieces. The way it looks now, for anyone to look out the windows on the second floor, they would need a ladder to do so or be 15ft tall. That's the part that looks really different than the prototype. Also the mock-up looks to be a lot taller, than the proto building, more so, because of the space between the first and second floor. The second floor was all office anyway! Lifschultz was involved with International shipping. Take Care! Frank
On Your mock-up, are there two sections there, a top and bottom. Or are they one piece? If they are two piece, cut about a 1 1/2'' off the bottom of the top pieces. The way it looks now, for anyone to look out the windows on the second floor, they would need a ladder to do so or be 15ft tall. That's the part that looks really different than the prototype. Also the mock-up looks to be a lot taller, than the proto building, more so, because of the space between the first and second floor. The second floor was all office anyway! Lifschultz was involved with International shipping.
I think that I may have resolved my biggest objection to the DPM modules and that is the lack of height difference between the 1st and 2nd story windows.
I could take blank 1st story wall modules and cut them horizontally to cover the lower have of the 1st story windows, making those 1st story windows lower in height in proportion to the 2nd story windows.
I have a jeweler's saw and some fine and xtra fine blades, so with care and caution, I could cut to fit.
What do you think?
I appreciate all of those comments about door spacing, docks and awnings, eras, whatever. I really do. All are thought provoking comments.
But my main objective would be to make this freight house look prototypical, as it might have looked in the 1950s. That photo, taken in the mid-1970s, although showing the building in decline, gives the viewer a pretty good idea how that structure might have looked just 20 years earlier.
So, what it comes down to is scratch building versus a form of kitbashing, that is, using DPM modulars to create a reasonable facsimile.
To get the look as close as possible to the actual prototype, I would love to tackle the job of scratch building it, using styrene brick walls and Tichy windowa and doors which more closely match the prototype than does DPM windows and doors. But my main hesitation with scratch building is the super detail around the windows and doors, the sills, the arched brick work, etc.
What I fear most with scratch building is a close match to the prototype from afar but a mediocre, amateurish look from up close.
hon30critter Rich: I made an assumption when I did my last post that there were no docks and that the rails ran right beside the building. That may not have been the case with a facility with so many doors because the spacing of the doors would limit the facility to receiving only one size (length) of boxcar if all the car doors and building doors were to line up at the same time. When I think about it, the facilities that I have seen that have the tracks right next to the building (i.e. no outside dock) only have a few doors spaced fairly far apart. Re lengthening the windows - I agree that it would require a lot of work. I think that taking a bit off of the bottom of the two storey walls will make the existing windows look more in proportion to the height of the wall. For what its worth, I have a warehouse facility that is quite long. It is a kitbash of the Lifelike (?) Moore and Co. kit: I have thought about trying to make the building taller using parts from a second kit but the design doesn't lend itself to that very well. It would require a bit more chopping and splicing than I want to get into. Instead I will have much taller backgound buildings behind it. Dave
Rich:
I made an assumption when I did my last post that there were no docks and that the rails ran right beside the building. That may not have been the case with a facility with so many doors because the spacing of the doors would limit the facility to receiving only one size (length) of boxcar if all the car doors and building doors were to line up at the same time. When I think about it, the facilities that I have seen that have the tracks right next to the building (i.e. no outside dock) only have a few doors spaced fairly far apart.
Re lengthening the windows - I agree that it would require a lot of work. I think that taking a bit off of the bottom of the two storey walls will make the existing windows look more in proportion to the height of the wall.
For what its worth, I have a warehouse facility that is quite long. It is a kitbash of the Lifelike (?) Moore and Co. kit:
I have thought about trying to make the building taller using parts from a second kit but the design doesn't lend itself to that very well. It would require a bit more chopping and splicing than I want to get into. Instead I will have much taller backgound buildings behind it.
Dave
zstripeHe would have to git rid of all or most all gas powered vehicles and replace them with horse drawn wagons,
Heck Frank, I'm only trying to help Rich to see if he might want to give scratch building a go, not change era as well!!!!
Though that might be better than howlin' at the moon.
Cheers, the Bear.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
JaBear,
Good points. If Rich really wanted to replicate that structure in it's grand glory....He would have to git rid of all or most all gas powered vehicles and replace them with horse drawn wagons, because that's the time frame. Could have a few chain drive Mack's around.
richhotrainIs it close enough to be worth the time and money to build it?
See above.
richhotrain, I alternated the doors and windows because I felt that it looked better that way.
It is your model.
"How would you configure the first floor?"
What is not evident in the pic, with the N&W Engine, that awning and dock went the length of the building. The boxcars did not have to be spotted by a door. The tracks aren't even shown in the pic. A lot of that awning is missing. It looked similar to Dave's building with that kind of dock, but the length of it. That's how it looked in the 50's. You got to remember, most all those buildings were built, some before 1918 and many modifications were done to it over time.
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Dave, I have a book with a photo of a C&EI loco pulling a string of box cars up to the freight house docks. So, you may well be correct that the freight house door spacing was designed to line up with all of he freight car doors.
It would make sense to lengthen those second story windows, but that would be a lot of work to cut out the unneeded brick work, add sills, etc.
I'm only guessing at this, but wouldn't the freight house door spacing be designed to line up with all the freight car doors in the cut of cars when the train is parked, or did they position each car separately? Having to position each car individually would seem to be pretty inefficient.
Rich: The mock up looks pretty good. If you wanted to you could shorten the two story wall sections a bit, and you could also make the windows taller. The sills can be replicated with suitably sized pieces of styrene strip. You would need to chisel off the remnants of the original sills and scribe mortar lines where they were. You would also need to build up the window frame profile and lower the sash joint to suit.
That building is the C&EI freight house at Dearborn Station in Chicago. Unfortunately, it is the only photo that I can find of the freight house. While I suppose that the doors may have been modified over time, is it really likely that so many doors would be modified, and that the modifications would be consistent across the entire first story?
That photo, taken in the mid-70s shows the freight house in serious decline. My objective would be to model it in a better condition during the 1950s.
richhotrainMike, tell me more. How would you configure the first floor? Describe how you woud place the door panels, the window panels and the blank panels. One other DPM panel not shown in my paper plan would be a regular door and single window. I hadn't selected that panel in my mockup. http://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/Item/30105/page/1
Sounds like you want to go with a somewhat more original look than in the pic, maybe 1950s?
The Single window/walk-out door combination would be a good substitute for one of the lower section doors. I'm not sure you want it repeated as often as every casting. In fact, I was going to suggest two molds, as that would give you more variants. This might be one reason to do that.
As for the freight doors, I don't know the specific history of this building, but my guess is that the square topped doors were later modifications of some of the arched door locations. If I was going earlier, I'd make the freight doors all arched, rather than mixing them up. You may also be able to take a file and turn a couple of the arched door openings into square ones if you want to come up with another variation. Even though I try to stay away from cutting plaster castings, filing will work if done with care.
In any case, the older the building is from the present that you want to depict, the more of those arched doorways are likely to be original. My guess would be that they all matched when new and that the variations were made at later dates. And the more likely the doors were to be hinged eraly on, rather than roll-ups too, which didn't become common until the 1950-60s.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
Wayne,
It appear's my fingers and brain, aren't playing well together. I missed that one. Whacks and kwacks.
Maybe I watched too many Elmer Fudd cartoon's as a kid.
zstripeI have not had any problem's, with cracking or the like yet. I use a wood drafting board, that will not give when wamming, (actually, I think that should be whamming, yeah that's it) well anyway, two wacks with a small ball peen whammer does it. The one's I have are extremely sharp. I guess it is possible to crack, if you were trying to cut a raised section that was not laying completely flat.
I agree with you regarding the spelling of whammer, but didn't want to appear to be proofreading your post. That said, I believe the result of whammering is whacks.
My corner punch, purpose-bought for the Walthers brick sheets, is from Veritas, about ten bucks more than the MicroMark one. The Walthers brick sheet is only about .045" thick, but seems to be quite hard and, apparently, quite brittle, too. I did the whammering on a sheet of 3/4" plywood atop the workbench, and one blow blew the sheet into several fair-size pieces. Luckily, I was able to cement them all back together, but window-cutting in that stuff will revert to a drill/saw/file procedure.
Wayne
Were it me, I would continue on the rail side just like You have the bottom of the mock -up. Because the rail side has boxcars with more space between the doors. The truck side, if You are going to model it, the doors should be closer together, so trucks trailers part side by side. The freight that comes out of the rail cars, crosses the dock and goes into all different destinations that have little signs above the interior dock door where the vehicle is parked and loading. That's the idea behind cross-dock. Not a lot of freight is stored in the freight house. Immediately loaded.
mlehman Rich, That's a darn good start. I'd personally leave more doors and blank walls in the first floor if you are modeling from the picture above, i.e. in more recent years. If earlier, then the more regular doors and spacing on the first floor you depict in your mock-up likely resemble it more before thinsg got bricked-up and moved around. Maybe you have some earlier pics to guide you here?
That's a darn good start. I'd personally leave more doors and blank walls in the first floor if you are modeling from the picture above, i.e. in more recent years. If earlier, then the more regular doors and spacing on the first floor you depict in your mock-up likely resemble it more before thinsg got bricked-up and moved around. Maybe you have some earlier pics to guide you here?
http://woodlandscenics.woodlandscenics.com/show/Item/30105/page/1
doctorwayne zstripe Rich, The inside corner punch. Being used in a drill press, but you also can use a wammer...I do. You may not like the price, but can be gotten cheaper. The one's I got 15yrs ago, are still sharp: http://www.micromark.com/5and16-inch-corner-punch,7805.html Take Care! Frank However, do not use the wammer on Walthers styrene brick sheets (and perhaps DPM's, too)...they have a tendency to shatter. Wayne
zstripe Rich, The inside corner punch. Being used in a drill press, but you also can use a wammer...I do. You may not like the price, but can be gotten cheaper. The one's I got 15yrs ago, are still sharp: http://www.micromark.com/5and16-inch-corner-punch,7805.html Take Care! Frank
The inside corner punch. Being used in a drill press, but you also can use a wammer...I do. You may not like the price, but can be gotten cheaper. The one's I got 15yrs ago, are still sharp:
http://www.micromark.com/5and16-inch-corner-punch,7805.html
However, do not use the wammer on Walthers styrene brick sheets (and perhaps DPM's, too)...they have a tendency to shatter.
I have not had any problem's, with cracking or the like yet. I use a wood drafting board, that will not give when wamming, (actually, I think that should be whamming, yeah that's it) well anyway, two wacks with a small ball peen whammer does it. The one's I have are extremely sharp. I guess it is possible to crack, if you were trying to cut a raised section that was not laying completely flat.
I'm a bit late to the party. But, when I saw the picture my first thought was Hydrocal castings. I saw a picture recently, maybe in MR, of a building that I thought was just outstanding. It was a Downtown Deco model. Their structures are Hydrocal castings. There is just something about Hydrocal walls that looks more like brick and stonework than plastic walls.
When I got back into model railroading, my first scenery was the subway stations. I needed platforms and tile walls. Knowing very little about this, I did some research and decided to cast my own. I bought one sheet of Evergreen styrene sheet for the tile, and another for the platforms. From these, I made a mold with Woodland Scenics latex rubber, and then poured Hydrocal castings until I had enough. It somehow brought out my "inner artist."
So, I would definitely try making up that multi-panel section with DPM modules, making a mold with it and trying your hand at casting. The texture of a Hydrocal surface and the way it takes paint will be very different from a plastic DPM wall. Instead of the DPM windows, I would find a close fit with Grandt Line or Tichy windows. They are finer than DPM, and will once again distinguish your model from a DPM buildup.
Making molds is a mess. Mixing and casting Hydrocal is a mess. Cutting (razor saw) and sanding (sanding screen) Hydrocal castings is a mess, too. I love every minute of it.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I'm not sure how helpful this will be, but I made a paper mockup of a section of the freight house, using paper representations of the selected parts.
I started by selecting those DPM modular parts that most closely reflect the actual prototype building. The prototype is actually a 2-story building, but to capture the vertical separations of windows and doors, I selected 1-story and 2-story parts, creating a 3-story building on paper.
The window/door pattern repeats itself every six sections, so I have only shown one 6-section portion of the building. If I make this model, I will construct four sections, two sections will be 3-story and two sections will be 1-story.
Although there are three freight doors in a row, I alternated the doors and windows because I felt that it looked better that way. Also, I created the second story out of 2-story parts to give the vertical impression of space that you see in the prototype between the first and second story windows. Incidentally, those second story windows are taller than the first story windows on the prototype but the DPM modulars wouldn't accommodate me.
Tell me what you think, as crude as the paper mockup appears to be. Is it close enough to be worth the time and money to build it? Be criticlal.
The nibblers that Elmer mentioned work great on styrene.
http://www.micromark.com/nibbling-cutter,7761.html
The Walthers brick sheets that I mentioned earlier are close to .050" which is plenty stiff enough to stay straight, with proper bracing of course.
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/933-3524
Also, they are the same brick pattern as the freight house which Frank suggested you could use as a source for upper wall sections.
http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/933-2953
The freight house walls and the DPM walls look to be pretty close in pattern so you might be able to go either way depending on cost. The best way to compare would be to buy a package of DPM wall sections and a package of the Walthers brick and compare.
Making the pilasters on the Walthers sheets would be as simple as overlaying a vertical piece of brick sheet the width of the pilaster on to the wall. You might need a shim to give the pilaster proper depth.