Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
- Small-Layout-Design
- Messages
Search
|
New file uploaded to small-layout-design
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the small-layout-design group. File : /GandS.jpg Uploaded by : cpr_fan@... Description : Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe You can access this file at the URL To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit Regards, cpr_fan@... |
|
Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
I thought this might be of interest to the group. I came across it in
Track Planning Ideas from Model Railroader, which is a collection of track plans from old MRs. THe file in the Yahoo groups file section is an 18k jpg. It is a rendition I did of the plan using Atlas Right track software. The plan is a simple switchback that uses steep grades. The crucial items are the two tails of the switchback that need to be as long as possible. In this case they are 16" each. The author used short rolling stock and a 4 wheel caboose as well as a tenderless steam engine or small diesel. The lower right should have an engine house. The remaining 2 spurs could be industries or an exchange yard. The trick can be as simple as moving 2 cars from one end of the layout to the other. There is no runaround track so two engines have to be used. In the lower right yard, an engine makes up the train then drops the train and an engine couples on to the back end of the train pushing it onto the lower left tail of the switchback. It then pulls the train uphill to the upper right tail, then pushes the train into the upper left yard, dropping the cars and picking up more. If a runaround was included in the lower right yard, one engine could be used as it could move to the opposite end of the train once it has been made up. I hope I have communicated the author's intentions in a clear manner. I hope this little layout will spark some discussion. I am considering using it for my closet layout. Greg Williams cpr_fan@... www.trainweb.org/cprmodeling |
|
New member
Hi all,
I've recently started a small layout using an interesting storage idea. Check out my layout at: It's a shelf layout made with 3 sections 2 being stored above when the layout is not in use. It's early on in the building planning and running of trains. Yes I said planning. While I have planned some elements, I am leaving other things open because either I don't have the info I need yet or I have no idea what I want. The main revelation for me was just starting. It seems that layout design is a whole bunch of compromises that make up some sort of whole. Ken |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Greg,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
My question is, do you need the elevation change? Why not have the tracks cross on the same grade? It seems the train will spend a long time (relatively)just getting to a flat area so it can drop off or pick up a car and the scenery will be filled with retaining walls to support the grade changes. That's the first thing that popped into my head. Hope that helps in some obscure way. Ken --- In small-layout-design@y..., cpr_fan@r... wrote:
I thought this might be of interest to the group. I came across it in |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Greg,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
My question is, do you need the elevation change? Why not have the tracks cross on the same grade? It seems the train will spend a long time (relatively)just getting to a flat area so it can drop off or pick up a car and the scenery will be filled with retaining walls to support the grade changes. That's the first thing that popped into my head. Hope that helps in some obscure way. Ken --- In small-layout-design@y..., cpr_fan@r... wrote:
I thought this might be of interest to the group. I came across it in |
|
New Member - Plus "Exotic" Train Storage....
Martyn Read
Hi there folks, Just to introduce myself, I'm from Exeter, in
England, and I model midwestern roads from the 70's such as ICG, Rock Island, BN, Illinois Terminal etc in HO. I've just read back on some of your postings, and came across the thread about Iain Rice's book. I have operated layouts with sector plates and turntables, and can confirm they do work, and don't (IMHO) detract from the operation of the layout. Ref turntables, suppose for instance you have a four track turntable, with four trains loaded, each one runs "on scene", does what it has to do, and heads back to storage. Only after all four have made their appearance do you have to fully spin the turntable, it's not a constant operation. Selecting from one track or another is no more difficult than throwing a point in a conventional yard. Certainly you have far less disruption than lifting off your loco & caboose and swapping them over on each train! There are also plenty of ways of preventing "plummeting" equipment. They do take some "engineering" to get to work, but once they do, they...well just do! IMHO the "vertical" movable staging sounds a lot more dangerous. The thought of lifting a cassette manually over that sort of distance fills me with horror, and if the shelves were stacked vertically above one another you would also have to turn the train in the staging, to run into the next scene? If you had three scenes, two above each other and the middle level on one side, you could possibly develop some type of mechanical lift where your train starts from yard A, runs into staging, runs out of staging the other end into yard B, reverses formation, runs back into staging and out again into yard C. That would work, but it's complicated. Train turntables, sector plates etc are all vintage UK proven technology! Martyn Read |
|
Re: Nelson Yard - Yard Ideas
Martyn Read
Just A thought on this...
I did a design a couple of years ago based on the Illinois Terminal in Springfield Illinois. The idea was to model big trains (up to 3 SD39's) but to get away with not modelling the whole 70 car train behind them. The concept involved only modelling one yard ladder, plus the loco facilities. The yard tracks themselves are the staging, and become hidden a couple of feet back from the ladder (don't know if this will translate to your prototype yard or not, if it has a road bridge across it that's a possibility.) So trains arrive from the staging (unmodelled end of the yard) & appear in the scenic section running up to the end of a yard track on the end of their "train" (meant to be 70+ cars, in actual fact more like 5 to 10, as most of the train is hidden.) The loco's will cut off from their train and move for servicing, a switcher moves in and breaks the train down. The switcher builds outgoing trains by putting cars in an assigned track, and adding a caboose on the visible end. The Road loco's can now move out of the engine facility, and down to the other end of the yard to depart (they move into staging) The train now departs, you can either do this with a loco in staging or by hand, as the front of the train is "off set". (hope that made sense!) This may not be what you are looking for at all, but there are lots of ways of looking at a specific location. Martyn :-) |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Greg Williams
I was thinking the same thing. However I think the original intent was to have some senic interest and not have it be a flat layout. As you say, it could easily be adapted to that form.
I wish I could legally scan the artists rendering of the layout with the article as it looks impressive, even with the abundance of retaining walls. --- kensipel@... wrote: == Greg Williams Argyle, New Brunswick Canada cpr_fan@... _____________________________________________________________ Visit today! Get your free @RRmail.com e-mail account from ! |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Hello Greg --
Could this track plan serve as the basis for an industrial switching layout? Rather than mountainous scenery, consider surrounding the tracks with large industrial structures. And rather than modelling several industries, have the entire layout represent a single large industry - - such as a mill of some sort or a large manufacturing plant. I would modify the plan to include a run-around track and would eliminate the dramatic elevation changes of the original. You could build subtle elevation changes into the scene for visual interest and to suggest the general topography of the area. The odd arrangement of track – a crossing where the bridge is shown on the plan – might be justifiable depending on how you arrange the structures around the track. If you can convincingly position structures and perhaps a public roadway to suggest that these immovable items were "in the way", you may be able to make the odd arrangement plausible. I've seen some pretty strange track arrangements in my research that looked completely implausible, but that sort of made sense when I had the chance to actually visit the site. Take a look at the Paul Dolkos "Working the Mill Job" article from the April 2000 MR to see how he varied the elevation of the tracks in the mill scene. This is a great article for ideas on modelling a single large industry in a relatively small space. For more ideas on modelling a single large industry that was server by a railroad or had its own in-plant switching, go to a larger library and take a look through old fire insurance maps and books. In researching Brantford, Ontario, I found maps showing the plants for three major agricultural implement manufacturers – Massey-Harris, Verity and Cockshutt – and the arrangement of structures and tracks is absolutely fascinating. Fire insurance maps can also indicate what processes went on in different sections of the plant and in different buildings. For example, the maps I found indicate where tractor parts were cast, machined, painted, assembled, packaged, shipped and so on – this can give you a lot of ideas for modelling traffic patterns and determining which rolling stock to use. Whatever you do with the plan, let us know – I'm interested to see what you come up with. Thanks – Jon Piasecki jonp@... --- In small-layout-design@y..., Greg Williams <cpr_fan@r...> wrote: I was thinking the same thing. However I think the original intentwas to have some senic interest and not have it be a flat layout. As you say, it could easily be adapted to that form. with the article as it looks impressive, even with the abundance of retaining walls. <edit> |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Greg Williams
--- jonp@...
wrote:Yes, it easily could. BUT I have found another trackplan that I think lends itself better to industrial switching. Odd arrangements are not uncommon on the prototype as you say but how much track can one shoehorn in and still retain some credible prototypical look? Maybe this plan goes too far? I have not abandoned the Gumstump & Snowshoe either as designed or as a single level layout. But I want the most bang for the buck so to speak and I think operationally the G&S may be limiting. Check it out: == Greg Williams Argyle, New Brunswick Canada cpr_fan@... _____________________________________________________________ Visit today! Get your free @RRmail.com e-mail account from ! |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Hello Greg --
Thanks for finding and posting the link -- that's an interesting plan! If anyone is having trouble getting to the link, the last few words of the link should read as: switching_layout.html Thanks -- Jon jonp@... --- In small-layout-design@y..., Greg Williams <cpr_fan@r...> wrote: --- jonp@b...switching layout?wrote: think lends itself better to industrial switching. how much track can one shoehorn in and still retain some credible prototypical look? as a single level layout. But I want the most bang for the buck so to speak and I think operationally the G&S may be limiting.
layout.html
|
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Greg,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
That plan (which incidently is at tractronics/switching_layout/layout_diagram.gif) looks good. That is alot of track, but I think it's possible to give it a prototypical look. Plenty of fun can be had switching. Ken --- In small-layout-design@y..., Greg Williams <cpr_fan@r...> wrote:
--- jonp@b...wrote:Yes, it easily could. BUT I have found another trackplan that I think lends itself better to industrial switching. |
|
Re: New member
Hello Ken --
Thanks for the link to your site. Some interesting work you're doing there -- I hope to see more on what you come up with. Your notes on getting started and keeping the momentum going are very telling. With all these layout design discussion groups -- and even with my own recent posts about fire insurance maps and research- related stuff -- it seems like a lot of us, me included, are spending a lot of time planning and perhaps not as much time actually doing stuff. At least I feel that way from time to time about my own projects. I'd be interested in hearing more about your benchwork. How's it holding up? About how much does each section weigh right now, and are you finding them harder to handle as you get more and more stuff (scenery and structures) on them? I'm also interested to hear how your approach to tracks crossing the gaps is working out. I'm going to be running into the same issue on my own layout and I thought of using the same approach -- careful track laying and fine cuts to separate the rails at the section joints. I was thinking, though, that you'd need more physical support for the rails at this point, particularly for a small layout or small sections that may travel around a bit. I saw some time ago in a British magazine a system for supporting and adjusting rails at such gaps. If I recall correctly, the author soldered small threaded rods to the bottom of the rails. The rods were fed through holes in the roadbed and small nuts were threaded onto the rods. The nuts could then be used to adjust and set the vertical alignment of the rails. Apparently this was needed as the modules the author was working with travelled quite a bit and such fine-tuning was needed at each setup. Seemed a bit like overkill to me, though. Thanks again for posting your site to the list -- keep us updated on your progress! Thanks -- Jon jonp@... --- In small-layout-design@y..., kensipel@y... wrote: Hi all,idea. Check out my layout at:the layout is not in use. It's early on in the building planning andhave the info I need yet or I have no idea what I want. The mainrevelation for me was just starting.make up some sort of whole. |
|
Re: New member
Jon,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
A variation on the 'threaded rods to the bottom of the rails' trick is to screw a tiny brass screw underneath the end of the rail then solder the rail to it (leaving enough room for rail joiners if your using them). All these ideas take care of side to side movement, but not back and forth. The gap between the rails seems to have gotten bigger between my modules. The modules are holding up just fine. I would love to know how much each module weighs, I'll look into that. Ken --- In small-layout-design@y..., jonp@b... wrote:
Hello Ken -- |
|
Re: Nelson Yard - Yard Ideas
Paul/Celine Kossart
Hi Martyn,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I like your idea but I may be missing or misunderstanding something here so please bear with me. You say the actual train may be only 5 to ten cars but this length is hidden back in staging so the train appears to be much longer (since it came into the yard with three big engines on the point.) OK, I've got it so far. Now here is the part I am fuzzy on - when the switcher starts pulling cars from this train to sort them into the yard, doesn't the back end of the train come into view as the switcher is pulling the string and spoil the illusion? BTW, I was going to use this very idea in an early plan of my old Illiniwek River Branch, the four track yard disappeared underneath a road overpass, the illusion being that the modeled portion was only the east end of the yard. To reinforce the idea the lettering on the yard control panel said EAST WESTCOTT YARD rather than just WESTCOTT YARD. I abandoned the idea eventually when I decided that a small, rural branchline out in the middle of nowhere would probably only have a small, single ended yard to sort a couple of cars for the branch. This decision proved to work out and so, even though the track was already in, I just put a piece of Masonite across the tracks underneath the overpass and painted it a concrete color. Then I placed four track bumpers in front of the Masonite and planted a lot of bushes, weeds, grass, etc. between them and the concrete wall giving the illusion that the tracks actually did end just before the wall. This illusion was a lot easier and more fun than cutting and trying to rip out the track already in place. Cheers. Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club Proto-Freelancing The CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the 1960's... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ At 02:02 AM 3/16/01, "Martyn Read" <Martyn@...> wrote:
Just A thought on this... |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Paul/Celine Kossart
I recall this layout well. There is a similar layout (sort of) in John Armstrong's book on Realistic Track Planning for Operations book. Many years ago I had the bug to get going on building a layout but couldn't as I was in school with no real income. In the mean time, I built the Armstrong layout in a one foot by eight foot area in N-scale, sans turntable. It was fun to operate with just some 3 x 5 cards and a paper clip. I built that layout in a crate type box with removable lid with the thought of taking it to train shows and using it as a switching puzzle. Never did that, but when I moved here three years ago it sure made a good crate for holding a four and a half foot long bridge I had built as well as all the flex-track I had ripped up but wanted to save.
Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club Proto-Freelancing The CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the 1960's... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
Re: Nelson Yard - Yard Ideas
Martyn Read
I like your idea but I may be missing or misunderstanding something hereso please bear with me. You say the actual train may be only 5 to ten carswhen the switcher starts pulling cars from this train to sort them into theYes it would, but a couple of ways to counteract that: 1. Don't try & pull a massive cut out at once....if you're taking them one at a time it'll take you a fair while to take apart ten cars. 2. You can add cars in the hidden area if necessary (you could even have a never-ending train!) Not perfect, but I think it would work reasonably well. Martyn :-) |
|
Re: Nelson Yard - Yard Ideas
Martyn,
Welcome aboard! Could you incorporate a 5 or 6 track traverser behind the scene? Pull the fist cut of 5 off, then the second. Move the traverser over and pull the third cut etc... This presupposes 10 cars per track but even at 5 cars per track, a little "nudge" is all that would be required to sustain the illusion. Jeff Hatcher --- In small-layout-design@y..., "Martyn Read" <Martyn@R...> wrote: Yes it would, but a couple of ways to counteract that:them one at a time it'll take you a fair while to take apart ten cars.have a never-ending train!) |
|
Re: Chuck Yungkurth's Gumstump & Snowshoe
Hi Greg,
A similar layout that could be adapted to your space can be found in the June 1999 MR. It's called Maine Central's Rockland North Yard. It's quite similar in that two locos make up for the lack of a runaround. What I like about it is the (very)wee bit of hidden staging along with the decent siding length. To crank the operational challenges, I might place more than one industry on one or more of the long sidings, or put a couple of bays on the warehouse siding requiring particular "spots". Now this layout is 12"x54" so you could increase the trailing siding and staging by the 6" and still fit it into your space! It's not the be-all-end-all, but it does offer more than enough operation for the space IMHO. The author, Julian Andrews, has had a couple of articles in the UK mag Railway Modeller, which is a great source of inspiration for small layouts. It's sister publication, Continental Modeller, may be more on point as it covers the rest of the world including North America. You can get to it by searching under Peco. Cheers, Jeff Hatcher --- In small-layout-design@y..., Greg Williams <cpr_fan@r...> wrote: I was thinking the same thing. However I think the original intentwas to have some senic interest and not have it be a flat layout. As you say, it could easily be adapted to that form. |
|
Re: Nelson Yard - Yard Ideas
Martyn Read
Could you incorporate a 5 or 6 track traverser behind the scene?Hey that's a really good idea, you'd have to be careful not to leave cars over the join on any other track, but that sounds like it could work. Martyn :-) |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss