Tehachapi, BC

[wm3798]

Scott's right on.  That's one of the reason I always scoff at the guys who ask questions like "How wide should a two lane highway be?" as they attempt to scale out every element in perfect detail.  It's more important for those ancillary elements to "LOOK" right, more than to be exact.

Here's my treatise on this subject:
http://wmrywesternlines.blogspot.com/2010/05/keeping-it-real-thoughts-behind-models.html

Point 4 is the main point, I think.


Lee

[3DTrains]

Hi Gary,

For some reason, I had it in my mind that your newest version had Caliente changed from the inside to the outside view. At any rate, I believe it more natural to view Caliente is from the outside of the curve, which makes everything run counter-clockwise (less confusing to the viewer and operator, IMHO):







Unmarked turnouts are #5.

Caliente is moved to the right 12". This reduces the available operator space, but not too severely. Grades are fairly accurate from the prototype - even the loop doesn't exceed 2.5%, but then, the separation is only 2.75". I suspect you could increase the separation a tad and bring the loop grade to 3% (18" radius, measured from the mainline track). If you keep the curves between Bakersfield and Edison flat, deduct a couple of inches from all measurements.  (I just noticed that I may have goofed on the grades on these curves anyway.)

Level areas are Caliente and Bealville. All other areas marked. I allowed 15" of separation between decks, but I suspect you could make the separation between decks 2 and 3 @12" if it suits. You'll note that I didn't draw in Monolith - an access hole at the top-left of the plan would allow you to access for switching, but might be a PIA. I guess that one's up to you to decide.

Walong might need a tweak or two, but at the height you indicated above (58"?), I doubt you'll notice any change one way or another. Curve from Woodford to the loop is rather relaxed, but at least the area isn't hidden. I think it'll work just fine as is.

One more thing, there's quite a bit of track length in Bakersfield, so you might wish to consider putting in a return loop that connects the top most track to the bottom, with the loop running under the middle-left of the plan...

Cheers!
Marc

[GaryHinshaw]

Good points gents - keep them coming.

Thanks for the Loop pic Ed, that's the one I was thinking of.  In the spirit of theatre, I think you pulled it off exceptionally well(!), as I don't find myself thinking the low crossing looks toy-like.  In my case, I'm thinking that slightly exaggerating the horizontal separation might help too -- a mockup is definitely in order, as are considerations of increasing the radius.

[By the way, where did you get your Walong signal bridge?  As I write, I'm sitting at my bench gluing 112 gusset plates on the cross truss of the new Traincat kit....]

On the larger stage, I'm still contemplating whether I want to flip the peninsula, and whether I want to go with 3 levels in some spots.  I like how your plan incorporates so many signature scenes on the hill, but I'm a bit worried about people flow.  [On the other hand, what if I build it an no one comes?...  :] 

In my plan, I surprised myself with how many scenes I included before & after the hill: Edison, Sandcut, Monolith, Cameron.  I'm not sure why I'm drawn to that -- clearly, the ops potential is one reason, but I think the contrast of the flattish sections to the middle section has a certain drama to it.

Cheers,
Gary

Note added: just saw you posted some drawings Marc.  Thanks, I'll study carefully!

[GaryHinshaw]

Here's my treatise on this subject:
http://wmrywesternlines.blogspot.com/2010/05/keeping-it-real-thoughts-behind-models.html

Point 4 is the main point, I think.

Spot on, as usual.  You should get paid for this stuff!   

Note added: Ed's point reminds me that sometimes theatre can backfire:

;D

[GaryHinshaw]

Very nice ideas Marc - thanks for taking the time!  I really like the way Caliente is laid out, and, as with Ed's plan, the addition of a Bealville/Woodford middle layer is tempting. 

Does anyone know of a 3-level shelf layouts that "works"?  I'm having trouble deciding if its too much.

Cheers,
Gary

[Philip H]

The only 3 levels I've seen are tri level HO "mushrooms" where two levels face the opposite way of the middle deck.  Never sure they "worked" but never actually operated on one.

I think as long as you have good seating for the bottom deck, and good lighting between decks, these plans will get you there.

[GaryHinshaw]

Philip,  I think you're right about the need for seating in a 3-level pike.  I'm worried that would present a problem with the relatively tight aisles I'll likely have.  I think another mock-up is called for; but first, I must build a 1:1 fence.   :-\

-gfh

[John]

Philip,  I think you're right about the need for seating in a 3-level pike.  I'm worried that would present a problem with the relatively tight aisles I'll likely have.  I think another mock-up is called for; but first, I must build a 1:1 fence.   :-\

-gfh

Gary - I wouldn't make the aisles any smaller than what I have .. if you remember the trouble we had getting people to pass last time you were over ..

[3DTrains]

Philip,  I think you're right about the need for seating in a 3-level pike.  I'm worried that would present a problem with the relatively tight aisles I'll likely have.

Hi Gary,

I attended an ops session last week where the owner used several bar stools around the room. They're cheap, take up little space, and we never worried about tripping over them. At 30" height, they slide easily under the benchwork when not in use, and also without sticking out into aisles.

Cheers!
Marc

[ednadolski]

Very nice ideas Marc - thanks for taking the time!  I really like the way Caliente is laid out, and, as with Ed's plan, the addition of a Bealville/Woodford middle layer is tempting. 

Does anyone know of a 3-level shelf layouts that "works"?  I'm having trouble deciding if its too much.

Gary, I  think you might be in for a bit of soul-searching on this one.

I don't know much at all about operations,  but to me 5-6 operators in a 10x20 space sounds like a pretty tall order, no matter what prototype you choose.  Won't you have to allow space not just for the operators to sit, but also for them to move around back-and-forth, pass each other, enter/exit the room, etc.?    Even 30" aisles would be pretty snug for that, esp. with any kind of middle peninsula.  (I'm just asking, since as I said I really don't know much about this part of it.)

If you're highly interested in switching/operations, then (again, just MHO and FWIW) it seems to me that Tehachapi as a prototype is rather a square-peg-in-a-round-hole sort of fit, at least to some degree.  Hope that doesn't come across as too blunt; again just MHO, when I think of Tehachapi, to me it is more about the long winding & grinding trains, varied consists, and signature scenes, rather than the switching opportunities.

So if switching/ops is an important goal, here is a (slightly?) OOTB idea that may (or may not) be worth considering:  in the sketches, there is wall space under the upper tunnels section that would be ideal for a 10' long switching shelf layout section.   This could be built as a switching branch off the Tehachapi layout, or FTM even as an entirely independent shelf layout, possibly even with a totally different prototype, theme, setting, and/or era if you feel so inclined.   It could even be a different scale, such as HO (or even P:48!), if that's something that you might want to dabble in, perhaps along the lines of a Lance Mindheim approach.  And when you get tired of it, you can swap it out for a new one with out affecting the main layout.  Anyways I just thought I'd give it a mention, entirely FWIW.  (Operator congestion would still be something to look out for, but at least that part of the room the aisle is less narrow and closer to the door.)

BTW speaking of Tehachapi signatures,  I'm not sure if you noted on the plan, but as drawn a person standing at Bealville would be able to see a train emerging onto Woodford, similar to a scene on the prototype when an uphill train emerges from Tunnel 5 in the distance as seen from Bealville.  I think this ties in rather nicely with the idea you have of the Caliente/Bealville peninsula being a open scenery area that stands out as one of the highlights of the layout, and it is a kind of unique signature that few other Tehachapi layouts could capture:




HTH,
Ed

[ednadolski]

In the spirit of theatre, I think you pulled it off exceptionally well(!), as I don't find myself thinking the low crossing looks toy-like.

Thanks, but it definitely looks a lot different in-person than in the picture.  If you're ever in the Denver area, by all means I'll be more than happy for you to come over & have a look.   (You can also see what a string of autoracks/centerbeams looks like on that 19" curve too, esp when not lowered and doing the MT pogo).

By the way, where did you get your Walong signal bridge?

That's a kitbashed variety of the old NSN kit, with some stripwood and detail parts from Sunrise.  (Wish I had stocked up on those Sunrise signals when I had the chance!)

I had one other thought too:  Since this is a garage, what is the climate control like?   Do you have large temperature and/or humidity swings?   Does the garage door offer enough insulation and/or protection from air or water infiltration?   Would there be any benefit to replacing the garage door with a section of wall?

HTH,
Ed

[MichaelWinicki]

I don't know much at all about operations,  but to me 5-6 operators in a 10x20 space sounds like a pretty tall order, no matter what prototype you choose.  Won't you have to allow space not just for the operators to sit, but also for them to move around back-and-forth, pass each other, enter/exit the room, etc.?    Even 30" aisles would be pretty snug for that, esp. with any kind of middle peninsula.  (I'm just asking, since as I said I really don't know much about this part of it.)

Ed, I think you make a pretty good point.  My space is slightly larger at 20' x 11.5'.  It's double-decked with a peninsula. 

Here's a picture from February when one of the local modeling groups paid a visit...



That's 7 guys in that photo.  I took the picture from the doorway. 

For a regular operating session I have my doubts that 6 normal, sized individuals would be able to move around the layout without it being a little too "close".

And keep in mind that my aisles are 33" to 36" wide.   

I'm not big on the bar-stool thing and having to stay in one place while your train navigates the layout.  Heck the whole point of wireless throttles and such is to be able to follow your train.   Plus the top deck is at 60".   You can't follow a train up there from a sitting position. 

[ednadolski]

Great picture Mike.  Looks to me like if you took another 18" out of that room width, it would be snug indeed.   What size is the peninsula?

BTW if the bar stools came with the appropriate beverages, I'm sure the crew wouldn't mind....  ;D

Ed

[MichaelWinicki]

Great picture Mike.  Looks to me like if you took another 18" out of that room width, it would be snug indeed.   What size is the peninsula?

BTW if the bar stools came with the appropriate beverages, I'm sure the crew wouldn't mind....  ;D

Ed

That peninsula is 12' long and is 24" wide, except for the "blob" portion which is about 36" across.

I get the whole "I wanna cram as much RR as I can into my space", I really do get that, but wide aisles are truly a godsend when it comes to ops sessions of more than a couple of people. 

Many times the various doo-dads that either hang or jut-out from the fascia cut even more aisle space.  And if you have remote controlled switches and a schematic of layout on the fascia, one has to back up to see it/use it... Again, more space is needed.

[PGE_Modeller]

Hi Gary,

I have been following the comments and suggestions for the design of your new layout with interest.  I have been particularly interested in the comments about possible crew size, space for operators and aisle width.  I resized the diagrams of Marc's three level design and combined the three levels into a single diagram with all the tracks superimposed.  I then sketched in fascia locations allowing between 3" and 6" of "foreground" scenery.  When I did this, I found a few areas where aisle width shrunk to about 16" - 18", which is probably going to be very tight.  Importing a copy into AutoCAD and using the "area" command, I get a value of 66 square feet for what I term "people space".  This is the space available for operators to move around in.  In my pre-retirement employment, I made use of a lot of data for what was known as "reference man" as defined by an international commission.  As it happens, my height and weight match "reference man" at 176 cm tall (5'-9") and 73 kg (161 lbs).  Based on an ellipse with the same dimensions as myself, 20" wide X 10" front-back with a triangular area representing the arms holding a throttle extending forward another 9", "reference man" may be considered to occupy 1.6 sq. ft. of floor space.  I generally think in terms of ten times that amount of space (16 sq. ft.) per operator when estimating operating crew size and that would allow 4 people to move around quite freely in your area.  5 operators would cut the "free area" to about 13 sq. ft. per person and may possibly also work reasonably well.

I don't seem to have access to my photo hosting site at the moment, so I'll bring a hard copy of the diagram to Sacramento for you.  I seem to recall that you indicated you were attending the convention.

Cheers,
Greg Kennelly
Burnaby, BC