The Transcontinental PRR

[conrail98]

Phil-  I looked at the Manyunk bridge very seriously as a possibility.  I worked on Boathouse Row for several years, and I always loved that bridge.  Unfortunately, it's just too tall.  I've got staging tracks below, so the river can only be so far below the bridge.  I suppose I could try to design a (vertically) shorter bridge using the same arch-on-arch look, but I'm not sure how it would work in my (linearly) limited space.  For that design to fit, I think I'd have to figure out a way to expand the bridge so that the crossover is on it, and to hide the linkage to the switch machine.  Not easy with such an airy structure.

Hiding the linkage is easy, put a tower there, on a hillside, which will hide the tortoise machine. The layouts around me do that all the time for ease of maintenance. How high above the staging is that scene and could you get away with a "dip" just there above staging? The NEC bridge is another good one also,

Phil

Phil

[eric220]

The more I think about a bridge based on the Manayunk bridge, the more I keep winding up back at Dave V's post.  If I'm not doing a lift bridge, I think it should be stone arch.  Of course, there's always a design based on Rockville.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockville_Bridge

Although that bridge would be 24 feet long in N Scale.

[Dave V]

That wasn't my most profound post, but at least it was more concise than is usual for me!

[eric220]

That wasn't my most profound post, but at least it was more concise than is usual for me!

It was profound in its own way, and it reminded me of comments that you have made elsewhere about using visual clues to establish a prototype.  I think a stone arch bridge better accomplishes that goal.

[John]

It was profound in its own way, and it reminded me of comments that you have made elsewhere about using visual clues to establish a prototype.  I think a stone arch bridge better accomplishes that goal.

hmmm ... so, will we see GG1s on Tehachapie     ...

[eric220]

hmmm ... so, will we see GG1s on Tehachapie     ...

Actually, in the latest version of history, the PRR doesn't acquire the Tehachapie line until later.  So no, no GG-1's on Tehachapie.  However, there will be GG-1's in the rockies! 

[eric220]

I guess this is more of a "marketing" update than an "engineering" update, but I'll include it none the less.  I'm working on transitioning my PRR website over to a new hosting service.  In the process, I decided to see if "modernprr.com" was available.  Turns out is was!  Just for giggles, I started checking some other permutations.  Someone is squatting on "pennsylvaniarailroad.com" (TWSS), but "pennsylvania-railroad.com" was available.  And so:

http://www.modernprr.com
http://www.pennsylvania-railroad.com

I've set up the old address, www.eric220.com, to forward to the new site, so it still works.

Onward!

[eric220]

OK, back to engineering.  I missed the last update.  A few weeks ago on Nov. 15, the Gandy Dancers came over and kind of got away from me.  I had not intended to fill in the area that will eventually be River City until I worked out a few kinks in the upper staging yard.  Well, before I knew it:



Oh well, there were only a couple of screws holding it down, so I was able to uproot it without much trouble.

This week, the Gandy Dancers returned and we filled in the gap between the end of the line up from staging and the benchwork for River City.



This small piece of wood completes a very important milestone.  There is now continuous benchwork from the point where the mains split around the passenger terminal throat all the way to the west end of the layout!  With that accomplished, we went to the east end of the ROW and added another 1,280 feet.  The ROW has now reached Walnut Hill!



This morning, I broke out the straight edge and trammel and laid out the small freight yard in front of the passenger terminal:



The junction where the passenger terminal throat takes off from the mains:



And Walnut Hill:



Just for giggles, I broke out some of the turnouts that I recently purchased and laid them out:



There's just enough room to squeak in the junction for the passenger terminal throat using #10's, as planned.  Looks like I need a few more turnouts, though!

I also laid out Walnut Hill.



There will be a small town here with a commuter station between the crossovers serving only the eastbound main.

Time for lunch!

[seusscaboose]

lovin' it!

[eric220]

After lunch, the grading crew got called out.  In a burst of effort, a little over a mile of roadbed was laid.  The mainline through River City was first, eventually coming to the terminal throat junction.







By the time the mains came back together and pushed through Walnut Hill, the crews were complaining about lack of supplies.  (I'm down to one piece of roadbed.)  Fortunately, they were approaching the end of the ROW, so there wasn't much more work for them to do anyway.



Slowly but surely, this thing is coming to life!

[seusscaboose]

The more I think about a bridge based on the Manayunk bridge, the more I keep winding up back at Dave V's post.  If I'm not doing a lift bridge, I think it should be stone arch.  Of course, there's always a design based on Rockville.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockville_Bridge

Although that bridge would be 24 feet long in N Scale.

there is a vendor at the timonium, md Great Scale shows that does an HO version and has previously done N Scale versions...   i contacted him a year ago and he still ahd a handful of n scale forms and kits...  at worst, he could recast one for you... 

i can contact him in february (next show) if you are serious about putting in Rockville Bridge and want a top level, detailed kit ($$$).

EP

[eric220]

Can't hurt to ask.  Of course, I've only got two or three feet to work with, so it wouldn't be the full bridge.

[davefoxx]

Eric,

The layout is really coming along nicely.  It's so nice to see the pics, which puts the layout into better perspective than trying to interpret plans.  From the pictures, it would appear that the Gandy Dancers are doing a professional quality job.  Keep those pics coming.

By the way, seeing all of the cork roadbed down helps visualize the ROW.  Those are some good-looking curves and tangent sections that you've designed.  However, since you have not laid the track yet, you WILL be installing superelevated curves.  Right?!  One trick I did successfuly was to lay down strips of masking tape under the outer rail.  Five or six layers of 1/4"-wide strips of tape raised the outer rail nicely.  I also started each layer above approximately 1/2" back from the layer underneath providing a nice taper or easement into the superelevation (think of stair-stepping the tape layers at each end of the superelevation).

DFF

[eric220]

you WILL be installing superelevated curves.  Right?!

Actually, I hadn't planned to.  Horseshoe will definitely be superelevated, but I had planned to leave the rest of the curves flat.  That brings up something I need to do.  I was going to experiment with using a tethered router to create a superelevated ark, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

[wm3798]

All that cork on plywood makes me wonder about variations in the landscape that might slip below track level...  Hmm?


Is it too late to ponder adding an inch of foam between the plybird and the cork?
Lee