The Transcontinental PRR

[eric220]

Welcome to the fold, Phil!   I really should do some more work on that FileMaker DB.  Unfortunately, the same can be said for benchwork, cork laying, track laying, electrical, DCC, and various modeling projects.   

[eric220]

Despite in-laws in our guest bedroom and trying to get oriented in a new job, I've managed to get a little work done.  First off, I've played around some more in Filemaker.  I've built an admin screen for waybills:



I need to develop a switch list interface so that yard operators can assign empties to the waybills. That among other things.

I also managed to get four more pieces of flextrack down, bringing the mains into Colorado.



While it may not look like much, it allowed me to do this:



Note that this train is running wrong-way.  I've finally got enough track down that the Pennsylvania Limited can negotiate the crossover at Walnut Hill, meaning that I can run back-and-forth now.  That shot should also answer the critics who said that I need to superelevate my curves.

With this newfound running potential, the first train to run through the upper staging yard under its own power has come and gone.



And the inspection train has run to the end of the line.



There were a few minor issues, but most were attributable to facing-point turnouts that are free-flaoting (as in not attached to switch motors or otherwise secured in one direction or the other).  Regardless, it's nice to be able to run trains.

[eric220]

A little prep tonight for the Gandy Dancing that is scheduled for tomorrow night.  The track gangs (who were diligently finding ways to get around rule G) managed to prepare grade up the Blue River and Snake River through Keystone.



Work then progressed up to Loveland Pass.



Although this curve seems rather nondescript, it is actually a significant milestone.  This curve marks the crossing of the railroad over the continental divide from the Pacific basin to the Atlantic basin.  For you historical sticklers, at least I've gotten into the right side of the continental divide.

Work wound down grade toward Idaho Springs, and came to a stop at the end of the prepared ROW just outside the town limits.



The goal for tomorrow is to get track and electrical down on all of this.  That includes two sets of universal crossovers, using four members of that endangered species, the Atlas code 55 right-hand #10 turnout.

[John]

This is really starting to look good ..  did you leave room for all the wiring for things like signals, etc ..

[eric220]

This is really starting to look good ..  did you leave room for all the wiring for things like signals, etc ..

Room was either left, or will be made as necessary!  One of the Gandy Dancers carries the nickname "Dr. Sawsall"  , so I think we'll be OK.

[eric220]

I tried to post this last night, but at the same moment that I went to post, my ISP decided that I didn't deserve an Internet connection.  Oh well, we're back up this morning!

The Gandy Dancers came and put in a diligent two hours of work.  Before some union rep pointed out that Management had kept them on the job for an extra 20 minutes with no additional pay, they managed to get some wiring done, install a few tortoises, and push the mains through KEY interlocking:



and into Keystone:



The next day, while the Gandy Dancers were on strike, Management tried to hire some scabs to continue laying track.  Being unable to find any, the managers themselves showed up and began throwing down rail.  They pushed the mains past the Keystone team track, up over Loveland Pass, and were closing in on Idaho Springs when the caulk ran out.



Fortunately my Gandy Dancers are volunteers, so Management shouldn't have too much trouble finding the money to pay an extra 20 minutes at time and a half.

[mike in bc]

Double Time or they walk
looks good
mike

[S Class]

Not sure if it's a trick of the lens but would it be better to have the crossovers swapped around so the right to left in the foreground coming out of the curve and the left to right forming an easement into the distant curve?

Just a thought if for no other reason than cosmetic ones.

[3DTrains]

It appears to me that if the crossover were reversed, you would wind up with a nasty s-curve.

Cheers!
Marc - Riverside

[davefoxx]

I don't think it would be nasty, because Eric is using #10 turnouts, but it would definitely introduce S-curves into the fold.  Unless, of course, you had the main run through the reverse side of the turnout as the easement.  That's not the way the Pennsy would have done it, though.  The high speeds of the mainline are usually through the normal (straight) route, with the reverse (diverging or curved) side at reduced speed.

So, my vote is to keep it as is, except that I see a spot or two on the track on the right (eastbound?) that could use some realignment, especially at the far side of the crossovers, leading into the far curve. Measure the track centers, and you will find it.

DFF

[wm3798]

What Barrister Dave said, translated:
While there is potential liability to the railroad in the event of a derailment at this S curve situation resulting in personal injury, it is more likely that litigation would be introduced if the "standard" railroad of the world diverged from that standard, resulting in claims of false advertising.

[davefoxx]

What Barrister Dave said, translated:
While there is potential liability to the railroad in the event of a derailment at this S curve situation resulting in personal injury, it is more likely that litigation would be introduced if the "standard" railroad of the world diverged from that standard, resulting in claims of false advertising.

Heh, poke fun at the General Counsel for the Laurel Valley Ry., will you?  Be thankful that I talked another one of my clients, Hoffman Manufacturing Company, down from suing you for trespass and/or a private nuisance due to that "thing," not-so-affectionately known as "The Blob."   Oh, and in case you're wondering, I do not have a conflict of interest, since that lawsuit would be, in the event my client changes its mind, Hoffman Mfg. Co. v. WMRY Western Lines, not the Laurel Valley Ry.  Lucky for you, mister...  for now.   

DFF, Esq.

[DKS]

I don't think it would be nasty, because Eric is using #10 turnouts, but it would definitely introduce S-curves into the fold.  Unless, of course, you had the main run through the reverse side of the turnout as the easement.  That's not the way the Pennsy would have done it, though.  The high speeds of the mainline are usually through the normal (straight) route, with the reverse (diverging or curved) side at reduced speed.

So, my vote is to keep it as is, except that I see a spot or two on the track on the right (eastbound?) that could use some realignment, especially at the far side of the crossovers, leading into the far curve. Measure the track centers, and you will find it.

DFF

What he said. Reversing the crossovers would actually introduce two s-curves. When crossovers are adjacent to a curve, I always arrange it such that the first switch at the curve continues the curve, which means that first switch would be on the curve's outside track.

I also agree that there appears to be a slight misalignment on the right-hand track at the far end, adjacent to the last switch. However, I believe the camera may be compressing the image and exaggerating what amounts to a trivial misalignment that likely needs no attention.

[davefoxx]

I also agree that there appears to be a slight misalignment on the right-hand track at the far end, adjacent to the last switch. However, I believe the camera may be compressing the image and exaggerating what amounts to a trivial misalignment that likely needs no attention.

No doubt about the foreshortening, but I'm not concerned about a kink, just aesthetics.  What I see is the track centers narrowing as the tracks approach the curve, when, in reality, the track centers ought to be parallel or perhaps even widening for clearance purposes in the curve.

DFF

[eric220]

I didn't see that misalignment until I took that photo.  Unfortunately, on further investigation, the problem lies not in the flextrack, but in the turnout.  It's slightly crooked.  The photo makes it look a lot worse than it actually is, and I think I agree with the Daves that it is probably OK as is.  Especially since this view will not be possible once the skyboard on the peninsula goes up.

As for the arrangement of the turnouts, I very deliberately installed them so that the diverging routes would continue the curvature of the curves on either side of the interlocking with no s-curves.  Also, one of the design standards that I have held myself to is that all mainline turnouts on the layout are situated so that the mainline route goes through the normal alignment.  Hopefully the PRR will be safe from the litigation of false advertising on that front.