PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report

[OldEastRR]

Are you looking to have 4 active mainlines, all with trains running on them continuously looping? You say 100 trains a day for PRR division, but for every session could you run the same 4-hour period of a day using the just same 16 trains each time? Or some other schedule? Do you need a long mainline run or do multiple circuits of the same section do the trick?
For your limited space if you want staging tracks and an operating 4 track main of decent length it seems inevitable partial double helices and hidden staging will be needed. A 2-level layout.

[Dave V]

Waaaaaaay too complicated.  Still planning something that could be portable (call it paranoia after a lifetime of moving with little notice).  No helices for me.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

If I were to do this...........

.......how do I explain all the M1s and K4s?   

Other than that, man I could do Lancaster, Columbia, and Royalton so I could mix up some freight and passenger ('cause in Pennsy days fright was primarily separated from the Main Line and sent over the A&S Low Grade Line).

Hmmm...  Need to 3-D print COLA and CORK towers. 

See, the problem is that you model the 50s.
If you did the 40s, easy: too much wartime traffic for the Gs to handle themselves.
If you did the 30s, well... no need for catenary!

The other thing to think about is that the layout doesn't HAVE to be 100% cohesive. We've trained ourselves to think it does, but it doesn't. It just needs to scratch your itches. Think about Neal Shorr's layout... I know it's an inspiration for you.

/>
Does it matter if there are GG1s rolling through Lewistown if you're over railfanning Lancaster?

Does it matter that there's double headed M1s rolling through COLA if you're over railfanning Jacks Narrows?

It does to me, since I'm building a layout built around the idea of operations (although, even I cheat, see Hanover Junction). But I don't think it needs to matter for you (if you free your mind man).

[Dave V]

True 'nuff.  In the end what I want are long Pennsy trains rolling through undeniably Pennsylvania scenery on a multi-track mainline that bleeds Tuscan and DGLE.  But if I can squeeze some recognizable prototype scenes in there, then all the better.

EDIT:  Thinking outside the box here, what if I had a U-shaped layout (I know, we've been talking about that many times in this thread) but with one lobe have a no-kidding closed-off loop with catenary?  The non-electrified trains run the whole layout but the GG1s (and, eventually, an FF1 if I can grind some damn flanges) would stay on their own loop?  Yeah, they could connect to the rest of the layout but generally they would do their own thing, maybe on an elevated line similar to what you see near 30th street or along the A&S?  Just expanding my mind...

SECOND EDIT:  Probably too much in a small space.  Would be hard not to make it look like a tinplate layout with wedding-cake track stacks.  Ugh...   

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Though, if you're open to out of the box thinking, I think there are many creative ways to solve a situation like that. But space would be key.

That's why, the more I think about it, the more I think that simply "some scenes have catenary, some scenes don't" is the way to go if you can make peace with it.

[Lemosteam]

Or put it on magnets and make it removable for those times you don't want to be electrified!  Easy enough to hide the mounting spots beneath the ballast and let the magnets do the rest.

[Dave V]

That's why, the more I think about it, the more I think that simply "some scenes have catenary, some scenes don't" is the way to go if you can make peace with it.

That's what I'm thinking.  In fact if I have "scene dividers" like an overpass that's a perfect place to transition from catenary to non-catenary.

Or put it on magnets and make it removable for those times you don't want to be electrified!  Easy enough to hide the mounting spots beneath the ballast and let the magnets do the rest.

Hmm...  One of the things I've long thought about is using green EZ-line for a trolley wire.  The "removable cat" idea, while very creative and a good solution to my wishy-washiness, gets complicated with wire (in addition to dramatically increasing the probability that I bend or break some cat poles).

[C855B]

EZ-line is designed to give under the slightest pressure and won't take any contact from pans. They'll push it up so much everything will snag at the next support. OK if you were going for the look only.

[Dave V]

EZ-line is designed to give under the slightest pressure and won't take any contact from pans. They'll push it up so much everything will snag at the next support. OK if you were going for the look only.

Yup, I get that.  I've used EZ-line before.  I actually wouldn't plan to every have the pantographs ever actually touch the EZ-line...just be close enough that everything looks right.

The thought behind the EZ-line is to make it look like there's a trolley wire but make it very simple to reach underneath to clean track and retrieve derailments.

[Lemosteam]

Of course you are correct if you add wires...though It's not just the trolley wire, its the support and guide wires (if you want to be prototypical).



And if you intend on having it over curves   :



Note that the poles become very close together to follow the curve and support the guide wires...

[Dave V]

Oh, I know E-Z line doesn't give you the suspender wires or the messenger wires.  I wouldn't even try to model the entire catenary structure.

I've had this conversation before a long time ago and perhaps even on a different board.

If I used E-Z line with the catenary poles it would only be to represent the trolley wire and would neither contact the pantographs nor would it attempt to simulate all of the other complex wire structure that supports the trolley wire.  It would simply be a single line over each track to make it look like there's something between the poles rather than nothing.

When I wired my line poles I went with only four wires rather than go nuts and try to put one on every single insulator...the eye/brain circuit just assumes there's more.

[MichaelWinicki]

As far as the layout goes, maybe a 4 track folded dog-bone with the return tracks semi-hidden behind the "Alleghenies".

That way the rear tracks would still be accessible to a point.

I've done that with my layout– I have a 1 track main that circles behind scenery/buildings in a semi-hidden manner.  And it's all worked very well.

The visible 4 track main could meander through 2 or 3 different scenes. 

[OldEastRR]

I'm only trying to get an idea of what Dave wants, not what he actually will have to settle for. He talks about 4-track mains and a 100-train daily schedule, but then he says that's way too complicated. And he likes long trains crammed with Pennsy equipment running through countryside -- each train once over a long main or multiple times over a short one?  If 4 track main, would each be set up to run independent trains, like 4 at once? Let's say he could wave a magic wand and get everything he wants, space, trackage, , scenic areas, whatever ... what would "everything" be, specifically?
Technically, this is the "Druthers" list.

Oh, for the cantenary ... set up the poles, then train spiders to install and maintain all the wire work. Problem solved. 

[Dave V]

I'm only trying to get an idea of what Dave wants, not what he actually will have to settle for.

But the latter is what matters.

Yeah, would love the 4-track main and staging for a 30-train trick.  But as a lone wolf that's biting off way more thanI can chew!

Ed and I gamed this out offline and I think we have an excellent solution.  I'll try to draw a rough copy for everyone.

[Dave V]

The Rio Grande narrow gauge bug's been biting again so I figured the best cure was to put some ideas to paper for a Juniata Division 2.0...

Very rough but the basic idea.  I think I'd like to abandon the cockpit idea and this gives me a little more run.  I'm intentionally leaving the righthand side devoid of buildings (save for an interlocking tower) for scenic running.  The far right is patterned after the Atglen and Susquehanna Low Grade Line through Lancaster County and gives me a short stretch of dummy catenary under which to enjoy my GG1s in their correct environment.



I'm not 100% sold on the roundhouse but I've always wanted one.  There was a very un-Pennsy wooden 3-stall roundhouse and turntable in Lewistown itself that I could use there instead.