Lance's latest Blog entry (Mar18)... food for thought?

[CVSNE]

Let me be clear that I do not think the rr modeling world should be either/or. And I have had great fun operating on larger layouts with timetables, a dispatcher, train orders, etc. I love the op sessions at our club, which has several hundred feet of mainline, a grade requiring helper service, 

 

And, Marty, I have seen Andrew's layout, now gone I understand. One of my favorites of all time.

 

Mike

Actively working on the largest Iayout I've ever attempted I find some days I have a real love/hate relationship with the thing. Talking to Lance before I went down the path of tearing out the upper level and radically simplifying the layout really helped me determine what I needed to focus on and how I could get from here to there without following blindly with the "fill every inch of space with multi-decks" that some people have taken as mantra. 

 

I will say  - to keep this is the spirit of the OP's topic - the Central Vermont didn't use six axle power on locals - ever. Although successor New England Central did on occasion. 

 

And Andrew sent me some pictures today of progress on the Colorado Midland - it's going to be another spectacular layout. 

 

Marty

[Northpoint]

Dear Dr,

 

Any details on the basis of the slugs? I'm currently in the process of packing down a significant ammount of stuff to allow some built-in wardrobe construction to happen, but when I get back, a IHB PB1 slug is one of the projects which really needs to get-done...

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

 

As far as I am aware, the SP built slugs from former Alco C628/630s and former GE U25Bs, and I even think they built some form old EMD switchers, but I stand to be corrected.

 

Given the 6 axle trucks on the one in the photos, it would seem to be a former Alco Century.

[doctor quinn]

Nick,

I think you're right, the SP one even retains the fuel tanks, the hood and grille arrangement also looks to be cut down from a Century.

 

The ATSF one looks to have Alco trucks (same as the RSD it's mated to) but the frame and hood look to have had more work..

 

Sooo - that's a couple of old Model Power C628s and a Broadway RSD15 we're looking for.

Nick

[shortliner]

Well  - there is one on ebay.uk at a rather inflated price

[Mike Boucher]

I will say  - to keep this is the spirit of the OP's topic - the Central Vermont didn't use six axle power on locals - ever. Although successor New England Central did on occasion. 

 

Did the CV have any 6 axle power, other than x-6-x steam?

[w124bob]

CV pooled power with parent railroads GTW/CN would occasionally throw up 6 axle power which may have done some local switching, but I have never seen, certainly in the CV green era,any 6 axle power on local freights and non were ever rostered. 

[MikeHohn]

I've always been partial to Alco locomotives, and the Century series was very interesting and forward-thinking. Unfortunately, it was too little and too late; EMD was definitely in the lead, and GE had started to manufacture their own locomotives.

 

Ironically with regard to this topic, photos of the six-axle Century series locomotives are sometimes accompanied by captions that refer to their rough rides, poor tracking, or being hard on track. This may have been particularly true of the high adhesion ("hi-Ad") trucks they introduced in the late sixties.

 

Mike

[highpeak]

Did the CV have any 6 axle power, other than x-6-x steam?

Up in Maine in the pre-Guilford era I don't think any roads used 6 axle power other than perhaps CP way up north. MEC certainly never had any 6 axle freight engines, the Bangor and Aroostook used their E7s for a while after re-gearing, but they were not 6-motors of course, the B&M was all four-axles. I can't remember seeing any 6 motors on the GT, they just made sure they had plenty of M-420s on the Portland-Montreal trains. There was very little traffic out of Portland towards the end (before the trestle burned) and it looked quite odd seeing four or five engines pulling a couple of cars and a caboose.

MEC went the other way in fact and used their SW7s/9s almost entirely as road engines. They started out in helper service out of Bartlett, worked the Beecher Falls branch, then in the early 60s migrated to the Rockland branch before more or less settling down in Bangor and monopolising the Bucksport locals. The SW7s had the same tonnage rating as the GP7s and were slightly heavier. If you didn't need to get anywhere in a big hurry (and Bangor to Bucksport is only 18 miles) then a pair of chunky SW7s would work just fine.

I remember when the ex-RI U25s showed up and we all thought how huge they looked compared to the GPs and the baby boats (U-18s).

[Andy Reichert]

Presumably, the model turnout wasn't, and this is your point?

Are such turnouts available off the shelf?

To get many, if not most, past snap-track and into modelling, they would need to be. Lance is trying to distill the initial burst of enthusiasm, to get something up and running as soon as possible, and to then work on the various components step by step to improve them.

Fair criticism: lack of advice is better than wrong advice.

For track detailing, I would refer to Mike Cougill's masterpiece, preferably the paid-for version, but the free one is pretty good.

 

As far as "getting up and running", that seems to be the instant gratification goal of every US model magazine, I've ever seen, regardless of the end results. From their point of view it seems that track is merely the picture frame needed to hang the art on the wall, not part of the picture itself.

 

My opinion, FWIW, is that Mr Cougil's work is the normal par for the course, if one is taking the trouble to work in Proto:48. It's a large enough scale to include every detail in full 3D. I strive for that same realism on HO and Proto:87, by using some thoughtful tools and components to remove the extreme skill and make it available for anyone else who wants to model that accurately, but can't otherwise. So yes, we do have both kit and RTR self-gaurding frogs in HO, that will convert almost any RTR turnout. But I didn't notice any reference to them in Lance's article. And the magazine editors were very upset that the difference was mentioned in the reader's forum.

 

Andy

[Andy Reichert]

As far as "getting up and running", that seems to be the instant gratification goal of every US model magazine, I've ever seen, regardless of the end results. From their point of view it seems that track is merely the picture frame needed to hang the art on the wall, not part of the picture itself.

 

My opinion, FWIW, is that Mr Cougil's work is the normal par for the course, if one is taking the trouble to work in Proto:48. It's a large enough scale to include every detail in full 3D. I strive for that same realism on HO and Proto:87, by using some thoughtful tools and components to remove the extreme skill and make it available for anyone else who wants to model that accurately, but can't otherwise. So yes, we do have both kit and RTR self-gaurding frogs in HO, that will convert almost any RTR turnout. But I didn't notice any reference to them in Lance's article. And the magazine editors were very upset that the difference was mentioned in the reader's forum.

 

Andy

 

Just discovered I had some pictures of Lance's "single turnout" article. I claim "fair use" for education purposes

 

 

 

Here's the major feature of the prototype picture used.

 

 

Here's the frog in close up

 

 

Here's the model equivalent (in HO).

 

Andy

[roundhouse]

A curved turnout aswell.

[Supaned]

one of the things that does come out of these topics and blogs etc , certainly for me is a better understanding of the how and why that certain operations are done as they are , and that in turn makes operating both more prototypical and interesting.

 

Taking the example of corn syrup , until reading that different grades had to be unloaded in dedicated car spots , and the reasons why this mattered , I'm sure a lot of people (unless they had specific knowledge of the real thing) would have merely spotted a tank car at an unloading point - although it does take a little bit of "imagination" to then say that tank car A contains one type of product and must thus go to car spot 2 , at least it gives more of a purpose to switching , especially on a smaller ISL layout where movements are often more limited. I'm not sure I'd quite go to the extent of simulating fusees and unlocking gates and switches , but I understand why that is done and can see how it can add a degree of realism to operation.

The thing being , nobody is being told to do things that way , and that that is the only way ; in some ways it's like the difference between having a circle of track on an 8x4 board and running anything for the sheer enjoyment of seeing trains in nice colours , to having a finely detailed exact model of a location and operating to the day's timetable in July 1973. Those who want to work towards a greater sense of realism can do so , armed with the information from sites and blogs and magazines , so personally I don't see the point in criticising folks who share such information.

 

Someone hit the nail on the head earlier in this thread that not everyone has an expansive knowledge of prototype operations - especially so for those of us outside of the US , where although we may know how a railway works from a UK perspective , things elsewhere are very different.  Any information that can help to fill the gaps is always gratefully received here.

[Glorious NSE]

...although it does take a little bit of "imagination" to then say that tank car A contains one type of product and must thus go to car spot 2...

 

Either imagination, or an ops system of some type (whichever one) that can come up with the scenario's for you to solve...

 

[Supaned]

Either/or Martyn , but hopefully you get my point.

 

As long as you have a basic knowledge , obvious "errors" such as spotting an open hopper next to a warehouse loading door can be avoided , but more specialised things such as the corn syrup example require a degree of information if operations are to be elevated from moving a few cars around to switching with a purpose ; as an aside , does anybody know if plastic pellets are treated in a similar way to corn syrup with dedicated unloading points based on types , or are they all the same?

[Pugsley]

does anybody know if plastic pellets are treated in a similar way to corn syrup with dedicated unloading points based on types , or are they all the same?

Potentially, yes, it would depend on how the receiving plant is configured.

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear Ned,

 

Sounds logical (that different size/chemical-makeup of plastic pellets would be handled by dedicated carspots/equipment).

 

After all, contamination in any industrial chemical process is generally considered a bad thing,
and most industries who actively manufacture anything have specific requirements for their incoming source materials.

 

The same can be said for Autoracks, steelmill torpedo-cars full of molten steel, or even oldtime multi-coal-grade tipples loading 34' coal hoppers...

 

Want "one single defined car type shoved indiscriminately at any position in a multi-carspot industry/spur"? 
Then look to a merry-go-round Point-to-point unit train...
(and even that doesn't strictly hold true, while a Lake Michigan iron ore train may look "unit" to the trackside observer,
at the ore dock, there are some amazingly detailed classification/switching moves go on to ensure the right grade chemically-speaking and size physically-speaking get loaded into the ore-hauling boat that's due to depart in a few hours time...)

 

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

[Scottish Modeller]

Either/or Martyn , but hopefully you get my point.

 

As long as you have a basic knowledge , obvious "errors" such as spotting an open hopper next to a warehouse loading door can be avoided , but more specialised things such as the corn syrup example require a degree of information if operations are to be elevated from moving a few cars around to switching with a purpose ; as an aside , does anybody know if plastic pellets are treated in a similar way to corn syrup with dedicated unloading points based on types , or are they all the same?

Hi all,

 

For a short time I worked at a plastic plant that took in pellets as the base stock.

 

You are right about different pellet types.

 

From memory...

 

New pellets - classified by material type - all one size as this was determined by the machines we had.

 

Plastic recycled - classified as above.

 

We had six storage silos which had to be checked at delivery point to ensure the correct materials went to the correct silo.

 

The silo content varied according to what we were producing as sufficient stock of pellets were brought in for the production run.

 

On occasions we had a bulk delivery and the trailer was left for unloading when required.

 

For smaller runs we had pellets delivered in bulk bags which then had to be manually loaded into the machine hoppers.

 

Thanks

[The Bigbee Line]

If you model an earlier era, are there still opportunities to use larger units for occasional switching?

 

I have a Seaboard Air Line Centipede (2-D-D-2 3000hp Baldwin) and a GP7 to cover the non cab end.  I think they lingered to the 1960s.  Any ideas?

[dave1905]

If you model an earlier era, are there still opportunities to use larger units for occasional switching?

 

I have a Seaboard Air Line Centipede (2-D-D-2 3000hp Baldwin) and a GP7 to cover the non cab end.  I think they lingered to the 1960s.  Any ideas?

 

While there is the potential for any engine to be used in any service at least once in its lifetime, a lot of it depends on what you mean by switching: yard classification (probably no), industrial spotting and pulling (probably no), setting out blocks (yes), setting out bad orders (yes) or yard to yard transfers (probably no).

[The Bigbee Line]

While there is the potential for any engine to be used in any service at least once in its lifetime, a lot of it depends on what you mean by switching: yard classification (probably no), industrial spotting and pulling (probably no), setting out blocks (yes), setting out bad orders (yes) or yard to yard transfers (probably no).

If anything does come it will be setting out at an interchange, thanks Dave