MR's N Scale Salt Lake Route

[Dave V]

I've said here and elsewhere I'm enjoying this little project layout.  It's not meant to be a Lance Mindheim Monon.  It's meant to be a beginner layout with a marketing spin for Kato.  Brilliant, actually.  With the weathering and ballasting, the track doesn't loom THAT bad.  The biggest detractor in my mind is the very awkward geometry in the yard forced by Unitrack's admittedly large but still limited repertoire.

Another KEY model railroading lesson MR is teaching here that I think people are forgetting--and it's one of my big soapbox issues--is the value of a single, unifying theme as an indispensable foundation for plausibility.  It's modern-day UP in the desert, and everything about the layout works toward that end.  I know over on the A-board they were arguing over the scenery, and whether it really works or not, but for an Eastern boy like me with only a few visits to the desert southwest, it looks great!

I find it unlikely that MR will do a project layout any time soon with some of the more advanced products (I know, is code 55 really THAT advanced?  Not really, but it's a mind thing more than a physical thing).  It may be to other periodicals to push the envelope with more advanced project layouts. 

Besides, once you're comfortable with, say, handlaying Z scale track, do you REALLY need to follow a project layout?

[Denver Road Doug]

The Unitrack helix I built used the doubletrack viaduct curves which have a 15" inside radius and a 16 3/8" outside radius.  Using a "clockwise down" orientation ensures that sharper radius is always downhill, for starters.  So focusing on 16 3/8" radius, that gives roughly 102 1/2" of track.  Since you have to allow a little for the Unitrack subgrade I was figuring a 3" railhead-to-railhead clearance so I added two 9 3/4" straight pieces to give me 122" of run or about a 2 1/2% grade.   Not sure I needed 3" of clearance so I might drop that down if I did it again.



This was just a "proof of concept" I did, and never made it onto a layout although I believe it would have worked fine.

I know superelevation might not be desirable on a helix, although I would like to try it.  So much so that I e-mailed Kato a few weeks back requesting that they offer their doubletrack superel viaduct pieces separately. (now only available in their V12 set.)  Lo an behold, I just went out there and the individual pieces now show up on their site!  So, maybe I'll give it a try.  The advantage of the superelevation is that you effectively increase your radius ever so slightly.  So, that combined with a little less clearance and I think builiding a pure curved helix might work.  A "compact" helix like that would be useful in a lot of situations, if it worked well.

[AlkemScaleModels]

I find it unlikely that MR will do a project layout any time soon with some of the more advanced products (I know, is code 55 really THAT advanced?  Not really, but it's a mind thing more than a physical thing).  It may be to other periodicals to push the envelope with more advanced project layouts.  

Dave, not true.  MR was fully behind my attempt at a N Scale project layout that was to showcase more advanced techniques.  It was a N Scale, code 55, double deck RR based on Soldier Summit, Utah. I was about 50 percent done, when we found the perfect house and moved. I had to stop work on the project layout. We ended up doing an article about the layout design, but I did not restart the project layout in my new house. You can see some pictures and track plan of the layout at http://alkemscalemodels.net/TennPass/SoldierSummitGallery/

Maybe if I used Unitrak I would have finished it
The layout survived the move as my good friend JD bought the house and built his PRR layout on the benchwork. But a few years later a fire destroyed it as well as the house. It is now being reborn, but all vestiges of the original project layout are gone.

[Dave V]

Bernie,

How recent was this?  If MR is willing to showcase an intermediate to advanced project layout, then I am happy to have been proven wrong.  It would certainly be out of character from the last few.  I guess the Beer line was somwhat more advanced.  It was very welcome following the grassmat and Unitrack 4x8 they did prior to that.

[AlkemScaleModels]

Bernie,

How recent was this?  If MR is willing to showcase an intermediate to advanced project layout, then I am happy to have been proven wrong.  It would certainly be out of character from the last few.  I guess the Beer line was somwhat more advanced.  It was very welcome following the grassmat and Unitrack 4x8 they did prior to that.

That was about 7 years ago. (Ouch, time flies.) Terry T. was the editor at the time.

[SkipGear]

How many fully complete or at least close enough C55 layouts are out there to do an article on????

There are countless layouts "in the planning and building stages" but I haven't seen very many if any, complete C55 layouts that could be used a showcase for an article on using the track. The closest thing would be the Modutrak guys but it is still an ongoing project.

On the flip side of that, I know of quite a few large C80 layouts that are complete and running. C55 my be the pretiest track but is surely is not the most prevelent. Most people (this comes from dealing with the public in a hobbyshop) are only worried if the track is reliable and works, not how it looks. They are worried about the trains and the scenery they run through, not the track it runs on. Atlas C80 snap and flex and Kato Unitrak are by far the best sellers in our store with Kato starting to take the lead. If Atlas would expand the C65 line, it could easily surpass them both but lack of track sections and especially turnouts is holding it back right now.

[AlkemScaleModels]

Bernie,

How recent was this?  If MR is willing to showcase an intermediate to advanced project layout, then I am happy to have been proven wrong.  It would certainly be out of character from the last few.  I guess the Beer line was somwhat more advanced.  It was very welcome following the grassmat and Unitrack 4x8 they did prior to that.

John Pryke's HO Boston switching layout was pretty advanced in terms of techniques and outcome. Pele's work also fits that category.

I built a small N Scale code 55 switching layout for the cover of MRP for my Bush Terminal article. http://www.kalmbachstore.com/mrp030101.html But the way the things worked out, it didn't get a lot of coverage.  There was a second warehouse building on the layout, but photoshopped it out for the cover text.

I would love to try another project layout in N Scale, but will have to wait until I retire. They are a lot of work. They have to be competed on a deadline and so by necessity need to be of limited scope.

[ednadolski]

This is a great idea for a quick & easy helix.  What are the outside dimensions that this fits into (somewhere around 3' x 4', I'd guess)?  Also, how do you handle the vertical curve transitions between level & grade sections, without introducing (vertical) kinks at the section joints?

One other thing - isn't Unitrack horribly expensive?  What would it cost for the pieces to build one lap of a helix like this?

Ed

[SquirrelHollow]

Not having a copy of the issue, I've been guessing as to the content.  I just looked up the articles on the MR website, and.... now I have to go track down a copy.  The scenery seems close to believable, but a few things really look odd.  I need better photos than the MR thumbnails to see what's really going on.  

 It was a N Scale, code 55, double deck RR based on Soldier Summit, Utah. http://alkemscalemodels.net/TennPass/SoldierSummitGallery/

At least I'm not the only fool that loves Utah Railway.  Soldier Summit is a simple operation to model, but amazingly captivating.  And the towns provide awesome opportunities for modelling everything from brand new structures, to 100+ year old wood-frame buildings, to scattered machine parts, to classic car graveyards.  (Unless you focus on revenue service, and the coal load outs.)

Passenger service.  Unit trains.  Mixed trains.  Tunnels.  Grades.  Sweeping curves.  Switchbacks.  Wyes.  Through traffic from every major western RR.  It's awesome...

[SquirrelHollow]

Also, how do you handle the vertical curve transitions between level & grade sections, without introducing (vertical) kinks at the section joints?

One other thing - isn't Unitrack horribly expensive?  What would it cost for the pieces to build one lap of a helix like this?

Ed

The track sections flex a lot more than you would think.  The flex eliminates a lot of the vertical gapping you would expect.  The rest is eliminated by the Kato track joiners.

It's not as expensive as it used to be... but, the new Super Elevated Double Track Viaduct set is running about $150-175.

Edit- There were three posts between this one, and my last.  What happened?  Had I known I would be replying after myself... I would have put it all in one post.

[Dave V]

Bernie,

I would respectfully submit that several of the examples you're referring to happened under a different regime at MR.  I'm not trying to bash MR here either.  It just feels to me as if in the last 5 years or so they've conceded much of the more advanced content either to their own "special editions", Kalmbach books, or to non-Kalmbach niche periodicals and are focusing the monthly mag more toward a novice--or, dare I say outcome-based?--audience.  

If this is a marketing strategy that they feel works, then that's fine.  I'm upset from a wallet perspective that I have to pay for the good, juicy meat separately from my monthly subscription, but Kalmbach is a business and not a charity.

Again, not bashing MR here.  It is what it is, and I don't expect 100% of its content to appeal to me and me alone.

I should probably have clarified that my statement that "I doubt MR will do an advanced project layout anytime soon" referred STRICTLY to the monthly periodical.

[mcjaco]

The other thing I'm learning as I mature in the hobby, is that shiny object syndrome keeps me from having finished layouts.  It's easy to have grand plans for a huge layout, but how much can I actually get done?  One way to approach this is a modular club... if you can get a group of guys together that want to stick to a theme (I think Modutrak is doing this) then you can divide and conquer.  I'm also going to need a lot of help with the N&W Pokie Div home layout as the basement comes together.  But, I'm also really interested in modern day BNSF in Z scale.  I keep dreaming big about a Z scale Scenic Sub/Columbia River Sub modular layout in Z.  But, I really just need to do a hollow core door layout so I have somewhere to run some Z that's not just a loop of MTL track.  Because that I might be able to bite off, but that syndrome will get in the way sooner than later and I'll be off on another tangent. 

Small layouts to test out a theme are cool.  And this MR layout shows that splendidly.   

Mike, I think you point out our greatest issues in the hobby, and one of the greatest ways to help with them.  Helping each other out.  I have grandiose plans to one day model the NWP/Cal Northern in N, but I know I'll never get r done by myself.  First and foremost, I need the space to do so, but I know I'll need help planning, building, and certainly operating.  I am a big proponent of inviting others over to help, and I am always willing to lend a hand as well.  I've found over the last few years that the social portion of the hobby is just as fun, as the shiny new objects.  

And yes, QFT is Quoted For Truth....although I like your take on it too!  

[SkipGear]

This is a great idea for a quick & easy helix.  What are the outside dimensions that this fits into (somewhere around 3' x 4', I'd guess)?  Also, how do you handle the vertical curve transitions between level & grade sections, without introducing (vertical) kinks at the section joints?

One other thing - isn't Unitrack horribly expensive?  What would it cost for the pieces to build one lap of a helix like this?

Ed

There is one problem, the double track viaduct pieces are no longer available except in the super elevated track. The largest radius single track is 15"

[Denver Road Doug]

Ed, yes those dimensions are pretty much right on.  The plywood base I had it on was 4ft wide of course and I think the outside dimension on the narrow side is 34".  Cost is ~$40 for the hardware (threaded rods, nuts---no jokes please, hehe) and about $50 street per lap for the track.  So no, not cheap, but in line with what you'd pay have one built.  (one caveat, I'm told large steam doesn't like the Kato viaduct and I'd tend to believe that.)

To get back on topic (sorry) I do think a project layout based on Atlas C55 is due.  When Atlas announced their shay (and initially with a decoder which never happened)  I thought it would be cool to do a fairly small logging/mining "vertically large" layout using C55, laser cut structures, etc.  Using DCC, have a couple of shays, maybe a early diesel, (44-tonner?) and a Doodlebug for passenger service....simplistic wiring, etc.  Not an area of interest personally, but I thought it would showcase some of the newer items at the time.

[SkipGear]

The 15" R single track sections are retail of $4.50 each. It would take 12 pieces per lap of the helix so you are still talking around $50 a lap at discounted prices including the straights to stretch out the grade. Might be more expensive but it is a whole lot easier than making it yourself and you can know that your track in the helix is pretty darn bulletproof. Not a place where you want derailments and it has built in guards so trains won't hit the floor.