Author Topic: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report  (Read 334422 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

MichaelWinicki

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2096
  • Respect: +335
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1275 on: January 01, 2014, 04:13:34 PM »
0
Dave- I may get flogged for this, but I've never really liked the plan for Enola. I've never understood how it was supposed to work, beyond being staging with some very short tracks. It seems extremely limited for the amount of room it takes up. The execution is beautiful, but I think there are many more possibilities for operating and general interest if the same space was used differently, especially if "that's it" for available space.

I agree with this take. 

Once the track curves into the yard and you have the number of switches used to create the number of tracks in the yard... combined with the length of the module... well I can see that you're basically hamstrung.  I'd scrap it.

For a new module– well maybe the existing JD could "Y" into the new module, with the new module representing a branch line.  The branch line passes through a town or industrial area in front, curves around and you have a staging yard in back.  A down the middle scenic divider (ridge?) would separate the two halves.  The staging yard would curve back into the branch.  The curve from the staging back into the branch could represent an interchange, if you didn't want to employ it as a round-de-round kind of thing on the branch module.

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11250
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9357
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1276 on: January 01, 2014, 06:27:32 PM »
0
More than anything else, I want to lengthen the mainline run.  Even if it narrows to one track at some point (i.e., between HCDs), I want a train to be able to run continuously all the way around both doors.  I have some nice long consists that could really use a longer run (like my Broadway Limited).

Not sure if the great DKS is reading this, but I'm stymied as to where to start.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1223
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1277 on: January 01, 2014, 06:28:41 PM »
0
Not sure if the great DKS is reading this, but I'm stymied as to where to start.

A drawing of the room would be good (unless I missed that).

Jason

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11250
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9357
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1278 on: January 01, 2014, 06:43:00 PM »
0
A drawing of the room would be good (unless I missed that).

Jason

Good call.



It's the bedroom...  Nevermind the dimensions on the plan.  Once the walls were studded in and insulated, I have 10'6" x 14'8".  Right now, Jacob's 2'6" x 5' Apex layout occupies the space in the upper left corner, but it can be moved.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18400
  • Respect: +5672
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1279 on: January 01, 2014, 06:45:21 PM »
0
Knock out that closet wall  :trollface:

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1483
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +565
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1280 on: January 01, 2014, 06:48:50 PM »
0
Why not use the wye from David's original plan and then have the two legs go around the other door to form a huge bubble U mainline? You could then also close the second door's oval for the interchange Michael mentioned; I'm not familiar with the area but I imagine you could take some schemes from the prototype and place them along the new mainline on the new door
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018
American manufacturing isn’t dead, it’s just gotten high tech

pjm20

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1145
  • Gender: Male
  • Modeling the Bellefonte Central
  • Respect: +144
    • My Youtube Channel
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1281 on: January 01, 2014, 06:56:06 PM »
0
I think Tyrone would be perfect for the curve that will be at the end of the other HCD. Nice panoramic scene with a mountain as the background. You even get a branch off for the Bald Eagle Branch (future expansion?).
Peter
Modeling the Bellefonte Central Railroad circa 1953
PRRT&HS #8862
Live Steam Enthusiast

Check out my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/PennsyModeler

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11250
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9357
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1282 on: January 01, 2014, 07:15:21 PM »
0
Knock out that closet wall  :trollface:

LOL, no! I added that closet as a workshop!

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11250
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9357
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1283 on: January 01, 2014, 07:16:01 PM »
0
Why not use the wye from David's original plan and then have the two legs go around the other door to form a huge bubble U mainline? You could then also close the second door's oval for the interchange Michael mentioned; I'm not familiar with the area but I imagine you could take some schemes from the prototype and place them along the new mainline on the new door

That's also an option.

Bsklarski

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 673
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +6
    • B&M Conn River Line
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1284 on: January 01, 2014, 07:24:07 PM »
0
DKS's plan is a good place to start. Maybe 2 HCDs that are connected. Do this so you can arrange them and connect them in different ways to adjust to future spaces. Maybe the center connector piece can be something that can be sacrificed if you need to move again.
Brian Sklarski
Engineer, New England Central Railroad

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Boston-Maine-Conn-River-Line/173358446076160

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11250
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9357
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1285 on: January 01, 2014, 07:41:06 PM »
0
Unfortunately unless I change all out to code 55, there's no commercial code 80 curved turnout that matches the 15" radius for the top of the wye.

The closest is Peco at 18" inner radius.  I wonder if I could kitbash one...!

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1223
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1286 on: January 01, 2014, 07:46:48 PM »
0
Unfortunately unless I change all out to code 55, there's no commercial code 80 curved turnout that matches the 15" radius for the top of the wye.


Easily built if you can find a couple 3-point track gauges.

Anyone know if the ME c70 will fit the c80 track?


Jason

John

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 13407
  • Respect: +3263
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1287 on: January 01, 2014, 08:00:09 PM »
0
figure out a way to incorporate APEX ;) .. instant layout expansion

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 13424
  • Respect: +7026
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1288 on: January 01, 2014, 08:12:44 PM »
0
Unfortunately unless I change all out to code 55, there's no commercial code 80 curved turnout that matches the 15" radius for the top of the wye.

The Trix c80 curved switch has 15.3" inner radius and 19.8" outer radius.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1223
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1289 on: January 01, 2014, 08:35:29 PM »
0
The Trix c80 curved switch has 15.3" inner radius and 19.8" outer radius.

F that, just draw what works best, send me a 1:1 drawing, I'll print it and build it.


Jason