PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report

[DKS]

Vulcan, as Standard Steel at Burnham, goes to where JC Blair is (that stupid narrow mountain will finally need to be trimmed).

Might not need to trim the mountain if the siding is shifted toward the road a bit...

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Me gusta.

You can have a lot of fun with Huntingdon too.

[reinhardtjh]

My solitary thought about a possible change would have been to see if there was some way to spread those crossovers out farther at the new town - the way they were they made a pretty small runaround section.  The latest design makes that point moot.  Although now perhaps if you take Ed's out and back ops suggestion you might want some sort of runaround sections in the staging area so you can turn your train and head back out again (without 0-5-0 help).  But that introduces the nasty reversing loop wiring problem you avoided by changing the crossovers on the bridge.

[DKS]

Refresh for a couple of final tweaks...

[Dave V]

I love it!

Except for the station location that's an almost exact copy of Huntingdon.  Nailed it.

Middle Division hawtness at its hawtest.

[packers#1]

That's a pretty epic plan; local lone-wolf ops with orbiting mainline trains is basically the operations on Gerry Leone's Bona Vista that was featured in GMR a few years ago. The bridge looks so busy to me though, but I suppose that's the way the Pennsy did it so that's the way it should be

[VonRyan]

I think I'm just going to buy some Tomix "Fine Track" make a super tight oval, and run my British Railways Class 04 in loops... in a box.

I'm digging this plan with a mighty large shovel.
This will also probably be the first thread to hit three digits on the page count, if I'm not mistaken.

[Chris333]

I know there is some sort of prototype here, but this corner is just begging for some sort of track/industry:

[Leggy]

Dunno if that's really necessary....

[DKS]

I know there is some sort of prototype here, but this corner is just begging for some sort of track/industry:

I fought that temptation. Had to fight it really hard. I felt the need for some "negative space" to help separate scenes. Plus, it would be a facing siding, which was not desirable.

[Rich_S]

OK, I guess I'm going to throw a wrench into the gears  For me the biggest thing missing from Huntington is the river 



Having grown up myself in a river town, it wouldn't be fair to model the town without the river, plus that would help to use up some of that negative space 

OK, I'm ducking and running for cover now 

[DKS]

OK, I guess I'm going to throw a wrench into the gears  For me the biggest thing missing from Huntington is the river 

Having grown up myself in a river town, it wouldn't be fair to model the town without the river, plus that would help to use up some of that negative space 

OK, I'm ducking and running for cover now 

Um... did you miss the blue stuff across the end of the layout?

[Dave V]

That is the JD's eponymous Juniata River.

[Dave V]

Feeling the code 55 peer pressure...

I can do this with code 55 sectional, but I need a mechanism to connected the sections that is as reliable as Unitrack.

I could conceivably just do whatever new alignments are necessary on the existing JD in 55 and change the rest out at a later date...although I was liking the idea of partially-hidden staging being Unitrack with internal switch wiring.

If I could use cork instead of that damned WS foamy stuff I might get decent results.  I have quite a few code 55 turnouts that Enola could yield.

Dunno.  I may later regret using code 80 on the new part every time I photograph it.

[Scottl]

If the turnouts are running well, then it is a major savings to utilize them.  I have not had issues with joints with any track, but if you want to be sure, you can solder them.  I am also thinking that a smidge of No-ox on the rails before joining them might help avoid subsequent corrosion.

That is a nice layout design.  A good roundy round section to give some space to run, and a number of new signature scenes to do your magic on.