The Transcontinental PRR

[glakedylan]

Eric
looks good, as always
super job on the helix
creative design
I really like the sawing jig
I plan on employing a like jig if and when I ever get to cutting mine
thanks for the updates and sharing.

respectfully
[another] Gary

[3DTrains]

The idea there would be to give guests somewhere to set up their trains that's nice and open and off the mainline.

Very clever, and nice that you're considering your guest operator's setup ahead of time.

Cheers!
Marc - Riverside

[eric220]

A train of MP-54's trundles past a brand new train of MP-85's, which will shortly end the careers of the Ol' Rattlers.

[davefoxx]

Two points about your Silverliner.

1) Since it would appear you are the new owner of Ron Bearden's incredible work, you can now paint those wheels.
2) What happened to the coupler on the front of the Silverliner?   Did it take on the "unforgiving" track bumper at the Five Fingers Maintenance spur?   

DFF

[eric220]

So after posting the shot of Five Fingers Maintenance over in Weekend Update ( https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=34214.msg395793#msg395793 ) there was a bit of backlash over the area. I figured that I should explain a bit more what's going on here. I wanted a track on my workbench that connected into the layout. It's been in the plan for a long time. I never intended to finish this area, since it's a workbench, and much of the time it's liable to be covered with various projects. The plywood bench is topped with a removable veneer, so that if it gets damaged during a project, I can simply replace it. If I ever get to the point of showing the finished layout off to people other than my regular crew, I'm going to have to find a way to cover the whole workbench, FFM and all. I don't see any advantage to further finishing this area.

The bumper at the end of the track gave me some heartburn. The bumper needs to be removable, because it's right at my elbow as I sit at the workbench, and I see many injuries if it's a permanent fixture. That also allows for connection of the previously mentioned cassette for loading/unloading trains from the layout. I came up with the idea of putting it on a swivel, so that it could just hang out of the way when not in use. We had some brackets left over from building the helix, so I simply screwed one of them in. It works, but I do have some concerns about it. For one, if a loco hits it with enough force, or at enough speed, the angle of the bumper may deflect the loco off the tracks, and possibly off the bench. It's also rough metal with lots of edges. I don't relish the thought of brass smacking it and scratching paint. As a proof of concept, it passes the test, but I do think it needs some refinement.

[eric220]

Two points about your Silverliner.

1) Since it would appear you are the new owner of Ron Bearden's incredible work, you can now paint those wheels.
2) What happened to the coupler on the front of the Silverliner?   Did it take on the "unforgiving" track bumper at the Five Fingers Maintenance spur?   

DFF

Yeah, fat chance I'm going anywhere near that Silverliner with paint or chemical blackeners. They're so far out of my era, I'm just planning on enjoying them as is. Like I told Ron, they bring back fond memories for my wife and me from when we lived in Philly.

The couplers are another story. They seem to have been tweaked in transit. I'll have to get in there to straighten them, and I'm contemplating drawbaring the two cars together.

[jagged ben]

...
The bumper at the end of the track gave me some heartburn. The bumper needs to be removable, because it's right at my elbow as I sit at the workbench, and I see many injuries if it's a permanent fixture. That also allows for connection of the previously mentioned cassette for loading/unloading trains from the layout. I came up with the idea of putting it on a swivel, so that it could just hang out of the way when not in use. We had some brackets left over from building the helix, so I simply screwed one of them in. It works, but I do have some concerns about it. For one, if a loco hits it with enough force, or at enough speed, the angle of the bumper may deflect the loco off the tracks, and possibly off the bench. It's also rough metal with lots of edges. I don't relish the thought of brass smacking it and scratching paint. As a proof of concept, it passes the test, but I do think it needs some refinement.

What about taking one of those rubber bouncy balls and cutting it half and gluing it onto the bench?   Firm enough to stop a train, not so slick as to ricochet it off the bench, not a scraping hazard for your arm. 

[eric220]

What about taking one of those rubber bouncy balls and cutting it half and gluing it onto the bench?   Firm enough to stop a train, not so slick as to ricochet it off the bench, not a scraping hazard for your arm.

That precludes attaching a cassette for loading/unloading.

[davefoxx]

Why not just cut the track back about six inches or more from the layout's edge?  You probably don't need a programming track that long, and if something went off the end of the track (unless you're emulating Rocket Bob), it won't go off the workbench.

As far as not touching the Silverliner with paint and blackener, I don't blame you.  I've had more than a few suggestions from other modelers on how to modify the commissary building that I have that Lee built.  I don't want to alter it, either.

DFF

EDIT: Oops, a simultaneous post.  I didn't realize that you were intending to add a cassette.  So, on the first paragraph I wrote above, nevermind.

[chicken45]

Just cut a slot in a tennis ball and stick it on that bumper. I think most people were just trolling on the WU. I laughed pretty hard.

...but you may want to keep it the way it is and rename it to the Middle Finger Maintenance track.

[C855B]

End-of-track-into-deep-canyon bumper: I was serious, that angle bracket had model breakage written all over it.

What I have done for our club layout when we run the yard stub-ended is use a bit of Masonite with craft foam (that 1/16" stuff) laminated to it. It gets clamped on where the next module would go, blocking all tracks. It is unforgiving in the sense that you're not going to run anything past it, but has just enough give to not immediately break off fragile bits unless you make an effort to run into it at great speeds. Even then, there's still enough cushion there to do little more than mangle a coupler.

[peteski]

I think that we said all that could be said (jokingly and serious) about that metal bracket. 

[chicken45]

I think that we said all that could be said (jokingly and serious) about that metal bracket. 

It's a little known fact that Eric is the Chuck Norris of model railroading.

During his last trip east for the RBQ, the TSA confiscated his toothbrush:



It made national news; I'm surprised you didn't hear of it.

[eric220]

Bringing this thread back from near oblivion, I wanted to come back to this post a couple of pages back.

Back to design, here's an elaboration on the nolix up from lower staging idea:



The idea on the right is that the track would be in a slot in the facia so that the train would be visible as it rises from staging.  Not only is it more visually interesting, but it would serve as a warning that something is coming up or down.  There's a total of 380 inches of travel in the track marked in red.  Given that there's 9" separation between staging and the lower level, and the track has to rise a minimum of 2" on the left side (to clear the staging throat) and drop a minimum of 2" on the right side (to clear the mains running overhead), that's plenty of room for a nice, gentle grade.

For orientation, the blue arrow on the right connects to the "Down to Staging" arrow in these images:





Like I said before, this spits out trains from lower staging so that they're headed into the helix, hence the need for the turnaround under the helix.  The alternative to this is a helix down under the main helix, and another helix over the turnaround in the upper right of the staging level to connect to the N&W interchange.

I'm still pondering this design, and it's the next piece of ROW that needs to be built. Basically my question is, should lower staging operationally represent only the Norfolk and Western or also serve as Chicago? I want lower staging to be primarily a storage yard, with some capacity for "beyond the basement" shipping. Either way, it will serve as the Norfolk and Western. In my original plan, I was going to splice in a turnout on the right side of staging and run a line up a small helix to connect into the N&W interchange above. The connection from the layout down to staging would be via a helix at the same location where I show the entrance to the two holdover tracks on the left under the main helix.

The original design has its advantages. The N&W trains wouldn't have to turn. They could simply go from the layout, down one helix, through staging, and back up the other helix to the layout. Also, trains coming up from staging would be oriented toward the main yard, and they appear on the eastbound PRR main. That means that the connection could represent Chicago, St Louis, Louisville, or pretty much anywhere on the PRR west of Ohio. On the downside, that plan requires two more helixes, one almost completely buried. It also means that I can't run trains directly from the upper level of the layout until the whole lower level mainline is finished (at least, not without a long backing move). Finally, getting a reasonable grade on the ramp up to the helix on the right side is going to be tricky.

The new design addresses the major disadvantages of the original: no more helixes, and with the nolix up from staging and about 10 feet of ROW, I could run trains all the way from River City to lower staging. The major disadvantages are that lower staging no longer represents PRR tracks, and trains come out oriented to go up the helix. Both disadvantages can be mitigated with the addition of the small holdover yard under the main helix. Trains can turn and go directly to the yard, and there is still a place for off-layout PRR destinations. The holdover yard shown is a draft, but it illustrates the concept.

Which direction seems better?

[eric220]

Perhaps illustration would help.  Black is visible layout, primarily the double track mainline leading up the helix and on to River City to the left, and to Altoona and the main yard to the right.  Blue is the lower staging yard.  Red is "behind the scenes" trackage.

Original design (neglected to mention, this design also has the advantage that I can maintain my 18" minimum mainline radius down the primary helix track; all other designs, including the N&W interchange helix in this version necessitate 15"):


New design, shown above:


Variant of new design that would involve wrapping the "Chicago" holdover yard around the bottom of the helix.  This has the advantage of allowing more holdover tracks, as well as direct access from/to either main.