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

[C855B]

Model railroading is fun.

Very funny. 

Michael... we did consider all the ramifications of acquiring a commercial property like this. This gas bill thing was honestly the only surprise. We were told by the previous owners "$150 a month" for the utility bill, which was perfectly reasonable in the big picture, so I didn't parse it any further than that. What I didn't grok was that they were not the brightest bulbs in the string, not understanding that of the $150, they were paying $75/mo. the entire year for gas service they only used November - February. Really, really stupid.

Taxes are a sweet deal, considering. $1100/yr. for the half-acre plus building. [I'll pause here while you Eastern city dwellers pick yourselves up off the floor.] The building is in a special tax district, literally the "Railroad Corridor TIF" (catchy theme!), so low taxes to start and then no tax increases for 30 years or something like that.

So, no regrets, just a very odd surprise. Which we dealt with. $75 more a month for the flex-track kitty. Lord knows I'm going to need it. 

[Ian MacMillan]

Taxes are a sweet deal, considering. $1100/yr. for the half-acre plus building. [I'll pause here while you Eastern city dwellers pick yourselves up off the floor.]

That's cheap! Ya don't wanna know what I was paying!

I'm looking forward to how this awesomeness progresses!

[MichaelWinicki]

Yep Mike that's a good deal on the taxes...


Have you settled on a security system yet?

[C855B]

Have you settled on a security system yet?

Yep. A pretty good one came with the building: we are 1/2 block from the police department, and the city maintenance yard is across the alley, where the officers go to fuel their cars. Also, couple of guys regularly park in front while finishing paperwork.

That said, I'm looking at camera systems anyway.

[MichaelWinicki]

Yep. A pretty good one came with the building: we are 1/2 block from the police department, and the city maintenance yard is across the alley, where the officers go to fuel their cars. Also, couple of guys regularly park in front while finishing paperwork.

That said, I'm looking at camera systems anyway.

Yeah I would too.

[Ian MacMillan]

Since its my line a work, I can vouch for how well a good video system will help us in the event that something does happen. Also make sure they have good angles and are functioning regularly. There are many times where I go to view a video and its pointing to a floor, completely out, or so grainy that it is useless. I now employ a few infrared flash game cameras to nab people hitting spots like scrap metal piles or other high target areas. I'm a little more iffy on alarm systems...just my .00002 cents... for my area I generally don't see the point in paying for PD monitoring as for us its generally 1-2 cars covering a 98sqmi area. Even going balls to the walls it will take a good amount of time to get there and said perps are gone, and unless my K9 is on it is generally no different than had I been dispatched in the morning when it was found.... it generally just lets you know you got broken into earlier. HOWEVER if you get a silent alarm system you better your chances...for some reason everyone now is getting these annoying audible "Burlglary! Burglary! wooooooooo wooo Police are enroute!" alarms. Most perps are then just doing smash and grabs, knowing that about the time the alarm goes off and PD is enroute they can get a decent amount of stuff.  Plus some departments may charge for false audible alarms after a certain number of responses. The dept I worked at before Ossipee, charged after the 4th false alarm in a calender year. You were sent a notice to fix the problem (Usually pets, loose doors that swung in the wind, or hanging signs that set off motion alarms) and then it was $25, $50 and $100 after that for additional false responses.

If your police department does direct alarm monitoring, I would go with that. For ADT and others from experience on average it is about 10min from the time they get the alarm, to the time dispatch gets the call. The reason is because some companies will go down a key holder list to get a responder for an alarm before contacting authorities...its dumb when you think about it...but its how its done. By having it go direct to the department if you can if they support it, it eliminates some delay.

Fire monitoring hands down works wonders and can save your building; leaving it only with smoke damage, compared to having a new swimming pool filled with water and foam! Things like low temp alarms can also save the building from expensive water damage.

[Dave Schneider]

We don't need any stinkin' security cams...we want train cams!

Best wishes, Dave

[C855B]

Okey dokey on cameras, train and otherwise. Part of my most recent job was... well, technically still is... building digital CCTV systems for monitoring traffic. I've already selected a professional grade HD camera for the railcam, but not going to buy it yet, not until it's safe to put the tower up for it (building exterior work is in the way). As to aiming security cameras... oh, after six years of aiming traffic cameras until my eyes rolled back in my head, I hopefully wont have a major brain fart and screw-up angles and locations.

The only problem I see (...no pun...) is that cameras everywhere are unusual in our small town. I'm concerned about the opposite effect, that going overboard on cameras becomes a "marker" that there is something of special value inside. I will have to be discreet.

Alarm systems are also unusual here. I'll talk to our police chief first (a friend and supporter) and get his take, and we're friends with the ex-mayor, who runs the history museum a block away. She'll know what's best here, too. We're a relatively crime-free town, at least in terms of random crimes against local businesses, etc. Our blotter is mostly full of DUIs, domestic disputes and possession arrests, the downside of living in a rural town with little to do.

[GaryHinshaw]

Other than the glass doors, it would seem that the building is pretty securable.  Is a camera system really worth the trouble?

[C855B]

Ask the museum director that question. They had a couple of Handlan lanterns walk away last month, probably worth $500 combined. They're still reviewing video. Like most local-theme history museums it's mostly piles and piles of junk cleaned out of well-meaning donors' attics, worthless to anybody outside the local community. However, somebody clearly knew what they were after when these lanterns disappeared.

The windows you see in the photos, on the north side of the building, are going away, but we're adding two more on the southwest corner. And we will eventually have the occasional stranger/visitor referred by the museum. So, yeah, a necessary evil, I think.

[C855B]

I started waxing philosophic in Dave's "Beer Line" thread about benchwork construction, but thought better of burdening his thread with my ramblings. I'll burden mine instead.

Given Gary's thoughts about substantial benchwork (which, again, his work is gorgeous), my desire for lightweight benchwork techniques can be blamed on three things. And I ain't no spring chicken, either.

1) Education as an engineer. Get the desired results with least expense, least time, and least use of materials. If the end results looks good, so much the better.
2) Early experience in MRR clubs with benchwork constructed like a house. I mean, rip the track and scenery off the top, add tar paper and shingles, and you could live under it. These layouts had to be destroyed, as they were impossible to disassemble for movement when the club (inevitably) lost their quarters.
3) My current N-Trak club, and that I'm the one who owns the big truck, so I'm the one who schleps the modules everywhere. The standard dimensional lumber plus plywood construction, combined with covers, means that these [insert expletive!] sometimes weigh 40 lbs. each.

If you get the impression that I am experiencing considerable angst over benchwork construction for the GC&W, you be right. Simple using simple materials but overkill and clunky, or finessed and purpose-engineered. I like what Dave is doing - a basic plywood prairie with foam topper, with 1-by frame. I am waffling between luaun or ply, or not, which sort of depends on how my switch machine mount testing works (directly to the switch, like Peco). If I don't need the ply for the switches, then foam only with 2' frame spacing, with wiring support on the backside of the frame face or neat through-holes (like Dave has). Hmm. Or 1-by-6s dadoed for glued 1/4" ply, inset 2" for the foam topper, no cross bracing - maybe one - for each 8' length.

[aaaargh!]   

[GaryHinshaw]

Sorry Mike, didn't mean to cause any angst; I was just being reactive - and provocative - in Dave's thread.   Here are my (unsolicited) comments on the points you raise above.

1. You should definitely use a design that suits your needs and use materials you're comfortable working with.  Period.  In my case, the bulk of my benchwork sections are simple box frames made of 1x3 with 3/4" plywood cookie-cutter sub-roadbed. The resulting structure is lightweight and very solid, especially when anchored to the wall.    The 3/4" sub-roadbed is probably overkill, but in the end, it's a small fraction of the total mass, and I just love the foundation it provides.  Foam as a sub-roadbed just doesn't do it for me; in addition, I really dislike working with foam.  YMMV.

2/3. I don't think portability should drive your design unless you expect to move on a time scale that is short compared to the build time of this layout.   If you can achieve your goals with lightweight, sectional construction, by all means do so; but what are the odds that you'll actually want to move a mostly-completed layout of this size en masse, especially if you're no "spring chicken"?  The club analogy is a bad one for a personal layout, because - unlike you and me - club members are "forever young".  (By the way, sectional and lightweight are two different things.)

The most important consideration is one you didn't raise directly: what are you designing?  Before you worry about a detailed benchwork implementation, you need to know what your benchwork is supporting.  Will you have any odd-shaped, or large signature scenes (like my Tehachapi shelf), or do you imagine having something closer to a truly modular style?  I'm guessing more the former, which makes portability a more elusive goal.  If so, you might focus on making a portion of the layout portable: something you can take with you to the old-folks home.

Anyway, enough of my blathering.  Let's see a track plan!

[C855B]

[chuckle]

The angst is natural, Gary. I over-engineer constantly, "over-engineering" in this case meaning continuous revision of designs and specs because nothing is ever optimum-enough. Portability is not a goal, certainly. We have the benefits of owning the building and land outright, and full retirement is coming as soon as somebody at the office pi$$es me off (again), so there's going to be no moving due to job.

Anyway, lightweight is a priority mostly for ease of handling during construction. Assemble basic components in the shop on the bench, then schlep the sections to the display floor. Most of the layout is going to be long stretches of semi-straight, and the general design is bent dogbone with three, maybe four center lobes, depending on how creative I get with some of the middle stuff. I'm thinking mostly plywood-prairie base with foam topper, and cookie-cutter on the foam for vertical curves, supported by either foam or 1-by risers depending on location. Clearly I've made my peace with foam. The "foam prairie" approach, at least my vision of it, is probably better for a layout of this size because it means more solid surface goes down quickly, and I'm not having to fill the gaps of a cookie-cutter skeleton everywhere, although there will certainly be some cookie-cutter areas that will need to be addressed.

(Let me add here... and I'm not by any means referring to your great progress... that in my [mumble mumble] years in model railroading, I've seen dozens of layouts done entirely cookie cutter where progress screeched to a halt as soon as the track was down and the "golden rail joiner" was put in. There is a lot of fear of scenery, and especially a lot of fear of "getting it wrong" when committing to screen (or whatever) and Hydrocal, etc. I don't know if it's the mess of putting it in, the mess of undoing mistakes, or fear of screwing-up the "working" railroad. But I've seen it as an issue too many times and self-assess that I sympathize with this fear, too. So starting flat then building up or down as the scene executes seems to work better, at least in my head.)

Track plan. Uh-yup. I'm struggling with the software, which is pretty sad considering I'm a software engineer with CAD experience. I started the layout plan in the AnyRail demo version because I found it to be "least non-intuitive", but in the interim bought 3rd Plan-It because the club uses it. So I restarted the plan in 3rd Plan-It and have managed to throw the mouse at the monitor only three times. Went back to AnyRail and ran into the demo limit. I should really just pay for AnyRail and get 'er done.

Speaking of "get 'er done", my roof/metals guy just called and wants to get together for a project review. Considering that he's been scarce as hen's teeth the past three weeks I'd better duck the heck out of here while he's interested in getting the job started!

[C855B]

Actual progress to report. First, deconstruction of the back half of the layout area is nearly complete:



Yes, this is half of the layout space. Up to the stud wall still standing is 50' or so, and it's 22 feet wide. That pile of 2-bys on the left are recovered ceiling joists, and will be re-used in several sub-projects including stud walls for the increased height of the layout room.

We gave up on the roofer/pole barn contractor we have been talking to since July... haven't heard from him for nearly three weeks. I was favoring him because he had firsthand familiarity with the building from previous (LONG time ago) construction. Meeting with new guy on Saturday.

An "Oh, CRAP!" last Saturday started with going to the dumpster emptied the prior day and discovering that somebody dumped several bags of household trash, taking-up about a quarter of the can. Poorly timed, as we were at the point of filling it up with the deconstruction. Since the apartment house next door had their dumpster removed earlier in the week, the conclusion was obvious. I went to ask the apartment manager about somebody there dumping their trash, and the first words out of his mouth were "Prove it!" He was ready for the confrontation, having apparently given the nod to using our can. Lovely... now I have an enemy in the next-door neighbor. Jerk. Dumpster now has a lock on the lid.

Old A/C has been decommissioned, the compressor taken off its pad and moved to our recycling area. Still can't install the new system until the roof is fixed. If it gets too cold too fast, I have baseboard heaters left over from the previous but aborted layout room project, and will wire those up if need be.

I finally bit the bullet and have a fully-licensed version of AnyRail. I've been working on the track plan off-and-on for about a week, filling in room shape details. I am running into space utilization issues. It hit me that the original orientation was totally bogus in wasting a unique space accessible from both sides that would be an ideal spot for the main staging yard. Back to the drawing board... literally.

Unless somebody strongly advises otherwise, construction will be 1x4 frame with 2" foam topper supported by frame members every 2', and 1/8" hardboard fascia. Still wavering about lauan under the foam.

[C855B]

OMYGOSH... actual layout engineering!!!! Will wonders ever cease?

Here are a couple of first drafts of rough benchwork thoughts. Shape of basic space is a 39'6" square, which does not include the 4' walkway on the right (east). Walkway required in this space and orientation due to door, upper right. Orange represents walls. I have slightly violated the 24" reach rule, adopting instead a 30" maximum depth, with the objective that 24" applies to trackage, with an additional 6" for scenery. Areas accessible from both sides are good for 60". Aisles are 4' minimum, although I'm allowing a squeeze of 3'6" in the lower right.

The rigidness and symmetries of the design is not the objective other than looking to have maximum opportunity for long tangents, hoping to represent a mostly arrow-straight transcon over the prairies and desert. Nebraska, remember? The center "lobes" will be split with background panels, the end lobes will likely get the loopness broken with scenery elements. Any inside corner will have a curved fillet; the drawing tools in AnyRail are abominable and I wasn't going to spend another hour drawing fillets on a rough draft.

Version 1 has maximum lengths, but would be loopy around the stairs:



Version 2 creates lots of opportunity for breaking up the return loop, and makes for better train watching from the walkway:



The wide section at the bottom will represent the Los Angeles end of the railroad, and will be the staging yard.

A revision of #2 is to orient the center lobes north/south, which actually solves a problem with a possible change in floor level if we decide not to pour new concrete in the west half of the room, shown in the photo in the previous post. The floor steps up at the wall on the left; you can see a ramp in the far left.