Author Topic: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line  (Read 7227 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1222
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2012, 01:23:14 PM »
0
Jason-

Thanks for the offer, I appreciate it if you wouldn't mind. Just to be sure, would you know if the 1984 The Chicago Great Western in Minnesota would cover the period I'm interested in? I'm looking for history and photographs for the early-to-mid twentieth century, which I have not been able to find a satisfactory source for yet.


I wasn't able to get to my dad in time but I will page through both CGW in MN books and see what might be of interest to you


Jason

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1222
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2012, 10:31:25 PM »
0
From the looks of it, The Chicago Great Western in Minnesota only covers the Cannon Valley line as part of the Minnesota Central.  Basically everything is pre 1900's.

More CGW in Minnesota has a small section on the Randolph to Red Wing line (which is what I assume you are looking for) with some pictures from the 1960's.  I think I wouldn't worry about finding the 1984 release, but the second book has a bunch of info on the MN branch lines along with pictures.


Jason

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2012, 05:29:28 PM »
0
Jason,

Thanks for looking into that. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the newer book, I've seen it floating around some of the train shows a few years ago.

Quote
Finally, many large state universities have map and air photo libraries. Most of my Beer Line photos are scans from photo print at the U Wisconsin map library. UM may have a similar library, but I'm sure it won't be as good as the one in Madison!

Hey, cheap shot! Just because Madison is better at just about every sport than the Gophers doesn't mean it's a better school! alright... I'll keep telling myself that...  :scared:  :D

Seriously now, Dave, you've been too kind helping me out. I'll be sure to check out the USGS site when I get a chance.

My brother is a UMN alumnus and has access to some of the online databases, he knows the secret handshakes and what not. He did show me this free website that has aerial photographs of Minnesota over the past century, but I don't know if it'll work for badgers;)

http://map.lib.umn.edu/mhapo/index.html

Kinda cool to look at. The photo of 1938 Welch has ten boxcars on the siding, perhaps I should roll back twenty years  :ashat:

Go Gophers,
Lucas

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2012, 05:52:18 PM »
0
Alright here's something that's long overdue, a track plan:



First, it's only a rough approximation of the real layout. All track will be flex, so don't worry about the curves being made of sectional- I haven't quite figured out Anyrail yet. I also have the track plan tilted at a slight angle for visual impact and to avoid track running parallel to the edge.

This layout is heavily inspired by this plan by Mr. David K. Smith, tweaked a bit to resemble some of the actual trackage in Welch, with an addition spur:

https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=22448.msg231297#msg231297

The layout is mostly so I have a long-missed loop to run some trains, with some operations included. The idea is to keep the plan as simple as possible with some interest. I've always like Ed K's kidney layout, especially with how sparse it was, and modeling "nothing" has always been tempting. The goal is strike a happy medium between track and scenery while attempting to remain true to the prototype- hopefully that makes some sense.

The two industries will be Welch Oil and Streater Lumber Company, I'll work out more specific configurations once I learn know more.

The "staging" is just a simple hidden storage track, playing triple duty as an interchange, a connection the the outside world, and storage. I figured something is better than nothing, especially in such a small space. It'll give the sense that the trains actually go somewhere and not just loops, I hope.

It's not much, but it shows what I'm working with. Track laying will begin soon, I've been looking forward to actually running some trains!

-Lucas

wcfn100

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8842
  • Respect: +1222
    • Chicago Great Western Modeler
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2012, 09:12:15 PM »
0
Jason,

Thanks for looking into that. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the newer book, I've seen it floating around some of the train shows a few years ago.


There's one one E-bay right now, $42 buy it now.


Jason

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2012, 06:36:19 PM »
0
Finally had some modeling time! I finished a simple project, preparing to super elevate the curves. It's totally unnecessary on my podunk line but I like the look, and hey, the real thing never had 10” radius curves either  :D

To superelevate I used the masking tape method, which I read about in one of Dave Foxx's projects. I layered masking tape six pieces deep, with a 1” step between each layer on one side, then cut the tape into 1/8” strips, as this photo shows:



The 1/8” strip is pretty easy to form around the curve as well:



Finally I painted the tape and cork black to help with future ballasting efforts, shown is this nauseous aerial photograph. This is so if I happen to miss a spot ballasting it shouldn't be too obvious.



A coat of earth colored paint will cover up my paint and glue slop, but you have to crack a few eggs to make an omelet right?  8)

I wanted to start laying track, but the roadbed paint is still wet after three hours with today's damp weather. It'll be good project for tomorrow- to guarantee that there won't be any gunk on my turnouts.

Thanks for looking,

Lucas

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2012, 06:43:15 PM »
0
There's one one E-bay right now, $42 buy it now.


Jason

I bit the bullet and bought the book. Thanks for the heads up, that was easily the best price out there.  Of course, now that I have a copy, there will be one listed for $30 next week :facepalm:


milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2013, 11:26:49 AM »
0
Finally finished the track work and dropping feeders after 3 months of on and off work. A new job with more hours has really dipped into my free time, at least that's my excuse  :D

Code 55 main, staging, and passing siding, with code 40 spurs. The code 40 rail looks amazing, almost enough to make me wish the entire layout was code 40! Now that I have a decent soldering iron, I can probably lay my own turnouts....

It's hard to tell in this photo, but I'll take some close ups of the code 40 in the future.



Apologies for the poor lightning and quality, I really need to work on some sort of permanent lightning rig.

Wiring is up next. For DC operation, would 22 gauge be suitable bus lines, or should I use 20/18awg?

Thanks,
Lucas




GaryHinshaw

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 6346
  • Respect: +1869
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #23 on: January 13, 2013, 05:58:21 PM »
0
Looks good from here.  I'd love to see some close-ups of the track.

For the power bus, you'd probably be fine with a 22 ga bus: the length of your main loop is about 10 ft, and the resistance of 22 ga wire is 0.16 ohms per 10 ft, so you would not have much voltage drop along it.  However, 18 or 20 ga would be mechanically stronger and might be wise of you'll be moving the layout much.

mcjaco

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1714
  • Respect: +110
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2013, 03:12:15 PM »
0
Looks good!

Wish I had the foresight of this when I attempted my first N scale layout.  Bit off a bit more than I could chew and stagnated.  Simple and small! 
~ Matt

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2013, 09:04:55 PM »
0
Thanks for the reply Gary. Good to know, I have plenty of 22 kicking around, so it's exactly what I wanted to hear! Great website too, I have a feeling I learned that in my crash courses in basic electricity but it's long gone now.

I was thinking of adding another sheet of plywood underneath the layout to “sandwich” the open grid, if that makes any sense. The electrical works would be safe then, and the plywood would only be fixed with a few screws for easy access.

Matt, I wish I could say I've be moving along on the layout. The track/feeder work probably could have been done in a determined day if I knew what I was doing and didn't struggle finicky feeders so much. It was mostly mental hurdles though, and I'm happy it's over.

It's amazing how much I forgot since I attempted my last layout, I don't remember struggling this much with keeping the track neat and in line. The way I did the feeders kind of forced the track out of where I wanted it, so there are some odd kinks I'll need to fix.

With the long weekend coming up, I'll do my best to get some better photos to show off some of the track once I get the biggest embarrassments taken care of.

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2013, 09:12:16 PM »
0
Now with the electrical wiring, I was considering using suitcase connectors to connect the feeders to the bus. Specifically these:

Tap connectors

Is this a viable alternative to soldering each feeder? I went overboard and there's probably 40+ feeders on my little layout, and I don't like soldering that much. Plus I'm concerned about voltage drops across each solder joint if I did solder every connection.

Basically, if there's a track joint, I placed a terminal joiner there. At the time I did most of this I didn't have the ability or proper equipment to solder directly to the rail, so I compensated for the usually crummy mechanical connection between the rail and joiner by supply power to each joiner. At least that's how I want it to work in theory, it seemed like a good idea at the time :facepalm:

Thanks,
Lucas

JSL

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • In the Heart Of BNSF Country
  • Respect: +4
    • In the Heart Of BNSF Country
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2013, 12:12:44 AM »
0
The 905B's will work but you will need a buss line of 12 to 16 AWG as that is the run(buss), the tap(feeders) is 18 to 22 AWG. Hope you understand the terminology.

mcjaco

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1714
  • Respect: +110
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2013, 10:36:46 AM »
0
^ What he said.  Otherwise those work well. 

Lucas, liek you it had been a long time in between layouts and a switch from HO to N.  I built too big, and eveno though I had the track all down and wired for DCC, I stagnated because I didn't really draw a plan.  It was all freelanced as I went, and it didn't hash out well.  This is a perfect "starter" layout.  One, in fact I may keep in mind when I have enough space if/when we move.

Keep the updates coming!
~ Matt

milw12

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: +333
Re: Milw/CGW Cannon Valley Line
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2013, 08:20:18 PM »
0
Thanks guys, I'll keep that in mind. Eventually I may want to go DCC so having the larger gauge bus wire will be nice.

Matt, thank you for the kind words. Having someone be inspired in any way means this project log has accomplished more than I intended. Even if this layout is only a warning on what not to do :scared:

I may have mentioned it before, but all my former layouts have been built up to working condition before I even considered a prototype or geography. After that I'd usually get lost as nothing felt 'right' since I had no idea what my modelling was supposed to represent. Telling myself that this layout is Welch, Minnesota in 1953 really keeps me on track, which is good since I'm quite unimaginative :D