Author Topic: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report  (Read 333163 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1005 on: July 26, 2013, 07:54:40 PM »
0
DKS FTW.  I thought about that 3-door setup but the new room will only have a 10' 9" width.  That width is quite unfortunately dictated by the water heater that's not in my budget to move.

Enola can be improved as well.

I like the plan you posted...  Even includes the Vulcan structure.

MichaelWinicki

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2096
  • Respect: +335
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1006 on: July 26, 2013, 07:55:37 PM »
0
Yep, I could see a Vulcan end to end being where the paper building is.  And I think it would look good there...

But why not incorporate it on a not-yet-built extension of the JD?  Maybe it would be just a tad further east.

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 24696
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +9181
    • Conrail 1285
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1007 on: July 27, 2013, 10:26:41 AM »
0
Okay, fans, riddle me this...

Can you find a way to fit a double-length version of Walthers' Vulcan Manufacturing on the existing Juniata?  Tracks can be rearranged.

What about stripping down Enola and putting it there. You could probably build quite the cool switching area in that space. Call it Burnham.

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1008 on: July 27, 2013, 11:31:33 AM »
0
Ok, so mucho good news.

Measured out the space this morning with the contractor.  It looks like I have enough room to take DKS' plan but actually wedge another narrow HCD in where DKS has the short connector piece at the base of the U.  So that could be an HCD scene with the main in the foreground and the mill in the back!

While it doesn't give me a longer roundy-round it could become an industrial switching area that could be a lot of fun.  That saves Enola AND the rest of the Juniata Division.  Even Patricia was encouraging me to fill the space.

chicken45

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 4500
  • Gender: Male
  • Will rim for upvotes.
  • Respect: +1013
    • Facebook Profile
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1009 on: July 27, 2013, 03:19:41 PM »
0
I must say, it is exciting to watch DKS work his magic on track plans. I'm sure you feel the same way I do when he pulls something else out of his hat. People aren't wearing enough hats.
Josh Surkosky

Here's a Clerihew about Ed. K.

Ed Kapucinski
Every night, he plants a new tree.
But mention his law
and you've pulled your last straw!

Alternate version:
Ed Kapucinski
Every night, he plants a new tree.
He asks excitedly "Did you say Ménage à Trois?"
No, I said "Ed's Law."

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1010 on: July 27, 2013, 05:03:25 PM »
0
An 18"-wide HCD would make the connection nicely...  It would allow for a decent turning radius coming off the existing JD and plenty of room for industrial goodness.  In fact, I could make the grade elevated and have a siding come down to the industrial part.  That center HCD could have catenary too.

Me likely!

EDIT:  You guys suggested I look into David Popp's layout--and I'm already a fan sans the aforementioned foliage--and this is in keeping with his model.  He added a small industrial area that required its own job during an ops session that covered no more space than what I propose.

I'm interested in any suggestions!
« Last Edit: July 27, 2013, 05:07:32 PM by Dave Vollmer »

conrail98

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1456
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +41
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1011 on: July 27, 2013, 11:20:34 PM »
0
An 18"-wide HCD would make the connection nicely...  It would allow for a decent turning radius coming off the existing JD and plenty of room for industrial goodness.  In fact, I could make the grade elevated and have a siding come down to the industrial part.  That center HCD could have catenary too.

Me likely!

EDIT:  You guys suggested I look into David Popp's layout--and I'm already a fan sans the aforementioned foliage--and this is in keeping with his model.  He added a small industrial area that required its own job during an ops session that covered no more space than what I propose.

I'm interested in any suggestions!

Are you looking at the 18" door as the connector in DKS' the offset U (more like a J) or replacing Popp's 4' connector between his two doors?

Phil
- Phil

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1012 on: July 27, 2013, 11:25:04 PM »
0
Are you looking at the 18" door as the connector in DKS' the offset U (more like a J) or replacing Popp's 4' connector between his two doors?

Phil

Neither...  Looking at the full color plan DKS posted, instead of that short 3' long connector, going with a full HCD.  I might have to go with a 20" wide HCD because the Ebco telescoping folding leg sets I use on the other parts of the layout happen to be 20" wide.

Chris333

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 18359
  • Respect: +5649
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1013 on: July 28, 2013, 02:30:46 AM »
0
Happen to have any photos of the real Standard Steel?

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1014 on: July 28, 2013, 02:43:24 PM »
0
Happen to have any photos of the real Standard Steel?

A few of my own, but not great...  There are some online as well.

The question is do I want the base of the U to be the Milroy Secondary to Burnham (it would leave Lewistown on my layout from the wrong direction) or draw a stark contrast with the Middle Division and make something industrial and Pennsy-under-catenary?  If I did the latter, Vulcan would not be Standard Steel.  It could be part of Bethlehem Steel in Steelton (near Harrisburg).  However, because of how the track on the existing parts is configured, the main would have to remain well on the backside of the HCD, meaning the industrial parts would be in the foreground.  Steel mills are far better suited for backgrounds because so much of their massive infrastructure can be consigned to the backdrop.

pjm20

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1140
  • Gender: Male
  • Modeling the Bellefonte Central
  • Respect: +144
    • My Youtube Channel
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1015 on: July 28, 2013, 04:32:08 PM »
0
Its in the shape of a an upside U, what would match?... I know just do a giant Horse Shoe Curve layout!  :trollface:  In all seriousness, I would stick with the Middle Division, trying to replicate the Pennsy catenary is freakin near impossible, and also trying to fit huge industries on corners doesn't sound good. The Middle Division is big enough to be Pennsy, but not so big you can't model it realistically. For the bottom on one of the side HCDs I would suggest Mt. Union/Mapleton as the prototype is one a massive curve.
Peter
Modeling the Bellefonte Central Railroad circa 1953
PRRT&HS #8862
Live Steam Enthusiast

Check out my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/PennsyModeler

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1016 on: July 28, 2013, 04:53:38 PM »
0
I'm not articulating myself well at all, and I know a picture is worth a thousand words...  The base of the U would be a 6' 8" long HCD.  That's a lot of straight.

I could do Huntingdon, but it would be obviously out of order.  Not much on the Middle Division between Enola and Lewistown that would generate traffic.  I kind of want something industrial as all of this awesome industrial modeling has me wanting to jump on the bandwagon.

I also have a kit for Harris Tower which is begging to be used.  I could always stick it at Enola where the stock Atlas one is and pretend it's DAY tower.

pjm20

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1140
  • Gender: Male
  • Modeling the Bellefonte Central
  • Respect: +144
    • My Youtube Channel
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1017 on: July 28, 2013, 05:32:38 PM »
0
To me, 6' 8" is not enough for a steel plant, plus you got to look at your width, even with a 36" door, the space gets chipped away fast if there is any provision for continuous running and steel plant building are huge. Back in the day Duncannon had a pretty good industrial base, even with and iron works and an interchange with a short line. Plus you even get Shermans Creek. Newport also had some industry including a tie plant. Curious: are you shooting for 4 tracks now or still going with 2?
Peter
Modeling the Bellefonte Central Railroad circa 1953
PRRT&HS #8862
Live Steam Enthusiast

Check out my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/PennsyModeler

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11210
  • Gender: Male
  • Foothills Farm Studios -- Dave's Model Railroading
  • Respect: +9294
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1018 on: July 28, 2013, 05:45:28 PM »
0
Two tracks still...  Plus a passing siding serving whatever industrial base I build.  The orientation DKS has does have trains entering Lewistown from the wrong side so there's maybe less concern about which way things should be oriented.  Coming out of Enola across Sherman's Creek the way this U would work would place the Susquehanna in the aisle, so there wouldn't be that iconic view we all know and love.  Mifflin and Newport are both possibilities, but I may need to re-orient them backward to make better use of the space (the main will be confined to the back wall due to space constraints).

Mifflin station is easily bashed using the Walthers Santa Fe mission style station.

Newport, OTOH, brings back some good memories and gives me an excuse to model the Hard Hat bar.

OR...  I could piss on accuracy and make that door Huntingdon (backward again), move my paper factory from the existing JD to Huntingdon, and fill the void on the JD with the Vulcan building representing Standard.

Lots of options.

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1477
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +562
Re: PRR/Conrail Juniata Division Engineering Report
« Reply #1019 on: July 28, 2013, 05:46:07 PM »
0
I say keep with the Middle Division theme and don't sweat the scenes being out-of-order...it's merely a model railroad, and having scenes out of order isn't as much of a compromise. Plus, since this isn't the last layout you'll build, merely an addition to an existing layout, I'd try to be a bit more cohesive with the other parts of the layout. But with my lack of knowledge on the Middle Division, any further commentary from me would be coming directly out of my  :ashat:
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018
American manufacturing isn’t dead, it’s just gotten high tech