Gibbon, Cozad & Western - "The 100th Meridian Line"

[C855B]

Wasatch grade:

Helper wye: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Wasatch,+UT&aq=0&oq=wasatch&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=56.200193,90.439453&vpsrc=6&t=h&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wasatch,+Utah&ll=41.215063,-111.09699&spn=0.006602,0.01104&z=17

Tunnel recently bypassed: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Wasatch,+UT&hl=en&ll=41.19494,-111.115841&spn=0.006604,0.01104&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=56.200193,90.439453&oq=wasatch&t=h&hnear=Wasatch,+Utah&z=17

Separated double track through tunnels with crossover bridge. Very cool: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Wasatch,+UT&aq=0&oq=wasatch&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=56.200193,90.439453&vpsrc=6&t=h&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wasatch,+Utah&ll=41.168648,-111.154894&spn=0.006606,0.01104&z=17

[Ed Kapuscinski]

This is really exciting!

[C855B]

Thanks, Ed. That map of the flyover and tunnels did a hard brain jog, and I realized a staged UP publicity shot was taken here in 1972 when they were promo'ing the new "We can handle it." theme. This shot happens to grace the cover of the UPHS's "Cabooses of the Union Pacific Railroad", by Don Strack and James Ehernberger:

http://shop.uphs.org/cabooses.html

This photo and setting certainly convey the feel of what I hope to achieve.

I'm shaking my head that they actually tied-up both tracks for a publicity still, considering how busy that line was at the time. Amazing.

[C855B]

Spent a while at the studio today taking measurements. Floor plan:



Major grid divisions are 10', minor are 1'. Dotted gray lines are existing walls or features to be removed, magenta are features to add. A lot of devil in the details to make each happen, including prospects of a load-bearing center wall that will need to be replaced with beams and columns. I didn't note doors related to the workshop space since they don't affect layout planning, at least not right now, and can be placed once the layout plan is roughed.

The existing wall placements make for some seriously bad space use. What were they thinking?

[nscalemike]

I've been reading this as you progress and know you are thinking about some designs but I thought I'd just throw out a suggestion that may avoid removing the center load bearing wall.  What if you used that wall as the center divider to a peninsula and just create a large door way to the other side?  You can make use of the wall, not change the structure, and keep your large layout space.  Further, you could even keep the small room in the upper right of the layout space and make it the 'staging room.'  Just some thoughts that might prevent some headaches!

Either way, this will shape up to be a layout destination!  Lounge/showers/workshop . . . . get your self a mini kitchen and cot and you'll never need to leave!

Mike

[C855B]

Yeah, Mike, you'll have to zip down 51 and visit after work starts. Even if for a good laugh. (Or ride the train, maybe. It's an easy walk from the station. #391 arrives 12:16pm, 392 leaves at 4:58.)

I've been wondering about keeping that center wall as you suggest. I've been in the attic but once, and wasn't able to immediately determine what is and isn't structural. The trusses appeared to be free spans not directly supported by the center wall, just stabilized. However, there are very few of them considering the building length, so I will have to get an expert on post-frame construction to make the final determination. The center wall mostly holds-up the joists for the mezzanine and ceilings in the main area; I want to raise the ceilings to the trusses, so the center wall may be moot.

Oh, there will be sleeping quarters in the form of a sofa bed and/or futon in the lounge. There is already a kitchen area against the wall at the "top" of the plan.

BTW, really, really good news today from our insurance agent. He is allowed to rate it as a "detached structure", but still part of our home even though it's a mile away. $175 a year for structure replacement and $1M liability, contents coverage is per the existing house policy. Unbelievable.

[nscalemike]

Yeah, Mike, you'll have to zip down 51 and visit after work starts. Even if for a good laugh. (Or ride the train, maybe. It's an easy walk from the station. #391 arrives 12:16pm, 392 leaves at 4:58.)

Well I guess with this I've figured out where your at and yup its around an hour and half drive or so.  May just need to make a day of it sometime later in the year!

Mike

[C855B]

Coupl'a quick notes...

One of the sellers mentioned today they're trying to get cleared out by the end of June. Again, fat chance. But I repeated "Whenever you're ready!"

Went up into the attic today and verified that the trussing, while on the light side, are free trusses, leaving the entire width of the building clear. The center "load wall" is there only to hold up the false ceilings and mezzanine storage area, which we're going to remove. Demo plan is shaping up.

What I was able to determine today is the likelihood we'll be replacing the entire HVAC system. Mechanicals are about 20 years old and the ductwork is uninsulated and not in the conditioned space. If there's a plus to this replanning, it's the new false ceiling can be regular 2'x4' grid and I can blow in a bunch of insulation on top of it. With the truss locations known and the studio space (new mezzanine) better planned, I should be able to gain about 120 sq. ft. of additional layout space over what was shown in the sketch above.

[C855B]

Not too much to report. Sellers are getting serious about closing on 6/29, and their junque has been flying out the door all week. Even their dumpster is full ('bout time!). They promise to have it empty by the end of next week and devote the last week to cleanup.

Shopped around for rental quotes on a small scissors lift to do the ceiling work and found prices all over the ballpark. One place was half of another just down the street, for the exact same make/model of lift. That's nuts, but I'm sure glad I asked around.

Found a deal on a programmable-color LED floodlight on eBay, so we're impatiently waiting for a sample to arrive. Lighting plan is all-LED. Costco has some great LED spots for under $20 each, and if the eBay color floods work I can at least formulate wiring.

Something fun... while it may seem inconvenient to have the layout space not at home, it's not a big deal. The building is walking distance, about 3/4 of a mile, but we have an electric neighborhood car for getting to and fro, not to mention errands around town. We can go for days without starting a "real" car:



I'm starting to scratch-out a layout plan - tip o' the hat to Jim Reising for the confirmation that "mostly mainline" makes a great layout - but am waiting for contractor input on relocating the front door. Lots of wasted space if we can't do it reasonably.

[C855B]

OK, thinking out loud with some real layout planning:

Benchwork construction. I ran across this HO club site: http://www.allpointsnorthmrrc.org/gallery_layoutconstruction.htm. Very well-documented start-to-finish process. I found it especially interesting because they have roughly the same size and shape of space I'll be dealing with. They also designed their layout with a second, narrower shelf level around the perimeter, something I'm seriously considering for the LA&SL segment.

I am thrashing over benchwork height. Right now it's 40" then add 12-15" for the second level. I know this is not the current trend, but I don't want to start too high and then realize I'm screwed if I later execute the perimeter shelf plan.

Trackwork. Micro Engineering Code 55 with Atlas turnouts, #10 on mainlines, #7 yards and branches. 24" minimum radius on mains, 18" on branches and industrial, easements on all mainline and branchline curves, mild superelevation on mains. I've been closely following the threads here about turnout preferences and recommendations, and (IMO) there being no clear winner with all having one issue or another, I'm favoring the reduced construction time of ready-built.

One issue ping-ponging in my head is Code 40 on sidings and branchlines. Sidings, OK, but on branches it's going to look funny to have the small rail in between Code 55 switches. Did I mention I was preferring ready-built turnouts? An additional incongruity with Code 55 mains, Code 40 sidings... and then Code 55 in yards.

Switch machines. I'm seriously looking at Tam Valley's R/C servo controllers. Input appreciated if anybody has tips or experiences to offer.

Grades. 1.5% max on mains, 2% on branches.

Power and control. DCC. I hope to master JMRI in the process. Most layout-side hardware will be Digitrax duplex, mostly because I have an investment in it already. Booster zoning should be relatively straightforward.

Signaling. Mainline operation = signals. I always find it jarring to see model railroads depicting heavy main/heavy power operations without a signal in sight. Ain't that way in the real world, and signal-related clutter is everywhere. Anyway, here's hoping that Craig (BLMA) gets his supplier issues settled in the next year or so and releases his line of H2 searchlights. It is fortuitous that he is modeling the LA&SL signals, but am I on my own for Type D's? Jim Reising, where do you get those signals?

Intentional anachronisms. The target being 1970, I'm starting to think of things I'd like in scenes that are too new but would be recognizable to the casual observer, and some mild jokes. F'rinstance, there is a Taco John's in Lexington, NE, I'd like to include because it's a frequent train-chasing stop for us. Probably opened well after Y2K, it is right off the tracks, Lexington being yet another of the anonymous grain elevator towns like Gibbon and Cozad.

[Coxy]

Wasatch grade:

Separated double track through tunnels with crossover bridge. Very cool: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Wasatch,+UT&aq=0&oq=wasatch&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=56.200193,90.439453&vpsrc=6&t=h&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Wasatch,+Utah&ll=41.168648,-111.154894&spn=0.006606,0.01104&z=17

Location is "Curvo"

Access is poor and local ranchers unfriendly apparently.

Here is a Z scale rendering:

[C855B]

Thanks! Yeah, I was looking at the access prospects from satellite pix and noticed that the best road in was the M of W trail, anyway. Helicopter, maybe?

[GaryHinshaw]

A few comments from the peanut gallery:

* Benchwork - I think one of the first things you should decide is: one level or two.  This has so much bearing on everything: layout height, how you approach benchwork construction, etc.  I'd start by sketching a one-level plan to see if you can possibly cover the bases you want to, and go from there.  Note that I don't count staging as a level in this context.

* Track - Your track work specs sound good.  You might think about hand-laying code 40 turnouts in a limited number of secondary tracks.  I think it really would enhance the appearances to have that contrast.  FWIW, I ended up adopting .020" superelevation on my pike and it's pretty subtle.  For your curves and grades, I wouldn't hesitate to consider .025" or .030".

* Signals - You should look into the new components from BeNscale Models, in particular his H2 signal heads.  I have one pair so far to use on my Walong bridge and they are very nice!  I haven't incorporated them into a working detection scheme yet, but I'm hoping to.

* Switch machines - I am considering Tam Valley too, but I'm also looking at the Mole from proto:87.  They're smaller & cheaper than the Tortoise, but I have no idea how robust they are.

-Gary

[C855B]

I value your input greatly, Gary. Many thanks.

As far as a benchwork height target, the thinking is firming-up to 44" in the "open" area and 40"/55" in the two-level plan around the edge with a nolix transition. But that's pre-pre-pre-preliminary... today's attention is on HVAC and prep for the closing.

Speaking of benchwork, thank you for your progress photos, which confirm regular 1x4's for the framing. For a couple of recent projects I've been ripping down cabinet-grade 3/4" plywood for dimensional stability, and that HO club did the same thing. However, for what I'm facing with this layout that's entirely too much saw time.

OK, I'll reconsider hand-built for Code 40 turnouts. You're right about the contrast. It's not like I'm going to avoid building switches altogether, anyway. Based on our previous discussion about Monolith I'm seriously thinking of "bending" the Victorville cement plan into a narrow-gauge operation based on Monolith, even though it's a standard-gauge plant. (In fact, Victorville bought several F-M H20-44 from UP, which they operated from '63 to '84.)

I have a bunch of the BeNscale signal heads on my workbench for an N-Trak project. Tho' quite functional, I'm not totally happy with the scale fidelity, especially when silver paint draws the eye to surface detail. Anyway, since this layout is obviously a very-long-term project, I think Craig will come through long before I'm ready for signals. On further research, TrainCat (Bob) is working on a Type D board to use with his signal head kits, so I can stand by for those.

Thanks for the Mole link. In truth, I had been working on my own screw-drive design that would live under the turnout (similar to Peco, I think), but the integrated DCC of the Tam Valley controller and the super-cheap micro-mini servos solve multiple problems. I just need to get off of dead center and pull together a test rig.

[MichaelWinicki]

Hey C855B... You've got loads of space, why the double-decking?  I use it because my space is limited, but given the choice I'd go the same route as Jim R and Daryl K and go single deck.  A lot less hassle.

No matter how you space the decks, one of them will not be at a good height.   40" is pretty low.   How tall are you?   I know running some shorter height layouts that it plays havoc with my back after a while with all the bending over.   Some use chairs for the lower deck, but I've found that to be a hassle too with all the getting up/sitting down.