Gulf, Atlanta & Eastern - into the second decade

[Barry Ten]

No, it's very much a permanent layout, although as I'll get around to outlining later, I've got plans to include a detachable module which could be exhibited on its own.

[Barry Ten]

Slow but steady progress in the industrial area. This week I've added a fire escape to one of the buildings, some roof details, and finished the grade crossing. That, and just enjoying running trains

 

The Peco point mechanism needs treatment.

 

 

Switching in progress. In this view, I've made some efforts to cut down/disguise the Peco point mechanism, but there's still more to do.

 

 

Atlas GP7. I suspect this is one of those love 'em or hate 'em liveries but I think it's fab.

 

 

Windows still need glazing...

 

[John B]

I'm definitely in the "livery looks fab" camp.

 

Then again, I like ACL purple, SAL Citrus and FEC Red & Yellow. So the CofG is positively subtle by comparison.. B)

[Patrick]

Brilliant stuff, Al!

 

One of the first things I'd do each time I logged-on to the old RMWeb was to check for updates on the GA&E layout thread, so I'm delighted to see it on here now!

[Barry Ten]

John: I'll photograph the Seaboard GP40s I picked up at Colonial last time.

 

Patrick: glad you're still following it!

 

I put the original design plan at the start of this thread, but I thought it was about time I did a new one to show the way the layout has worked out, and where I'm hoping to go with it.

 

It's a bit simpler than the original in some respects, as there is now only one run-road loop in the industrial area. I dropped one of the sidings on one side of the tracks, but added another on the other, so in that sense there are the same number of switching destinations. Comparison with the other plan will show that this one occupies a 10x12, rather than 11x12 space: there's room for it to expand by one foot (imagine adding an extra 12 inches to the staging yards) but with the pre-existing boards, it made far more sense to stick with 10x12 for the time being.

 

 

The main development in the last year has been to put in place the possibility of an extension to the layout, as indicated by the "phase B" area on the plan. The spur for this was the realisation that I already have more structure kits than the existing layout can easily accommodate, and that I like exhibiting enough to want to have a small, detachable module that I can take with me and show off now and then.

 

Initial thoughts were for this to be a purely switching/industrial area that I was going to call Mercy Street, but gradually my plans have turned in the direction of adding a loco servicing terminal with turntable, roundhouse etc. However, I still need to work out the best way to arrange this and also include a small stub-ended classification yard. Whether this ends up being on the Phase B or Phase C extensions, I don't know yet. So far all I've done is put in the 1 in 30 gradient and flyover that enables the track to pass over the double mainline and project into the room.

 

The other realisation is that the 6-road fiddleyard isn't much cop for fiddling! It's all but impossible to swap engines, cars over without clearing all the other trains out of the yard, so all hands-on stuff tends to take place elsewhere on the layout, with the yard merely being a staging area where I can hold six assembled trains. That being the case, I don't really need access to the yard at all. The track stays perfectly clean since most trains have one car in the consist with one of those Gaugemaster cleaning pads fixed to the truck - I never clean the track, except for the sidings.

 

Therefore I'm intending to add a removable scenic area over the central portion of the yard, incorporating a town scene and perhaps a siding or two kicking back from the Phase B extension. Experience has shown that derailments in the staging yard are rare enough that the scenery would not need to be removed all that frequently (touch wood, etc).

 

As for the yard throats, I do need to be able to see where trains are stopped, since there's nothing to prevent them fouling each other or over-running points set against them. However, I don't need to be able to physically access the throats any more than I do the central area, so some sort of scenic viewblock seems to be the idea, with the throats being monitored by low-cost wireless CCTV cameras bracketed off the upper-level boards. I've got a camera and 7" monitor on order - total cost about two N scale diesels - so I'll be keen to see how this works out. If it's successful, I'll add second camera monitoring the southern end of the yard, and perhaps a third covering the bridge/swamp scene.

 

The key thing, which I hope comes across, is that I like to have some idea of a plan but not be tied to it 100%. And I'm willing to rethink or rejig major elements of the plan if something new occurs to me.

 

Lessons learned thus far:

 

American N is very reliable. Derailments and electrical issues are almost non-existent, at least with diesels. Most of my locos put in hours of steady running while I'm busy with something on the workbench.

 

MTL couplings seem to work best in conjunction with MTL couplings. I am gradually swapping all freight car trucks to be MTL. With the MTL bulk packs, this isn't too expensive. And I've really only had success with the large magnets, not the ones that fit between the rails.

 

11" radius curves work fine most of the time: I've yet to find anything that absolutely refuses to go around them. The only slight exception was an Athearn SD90 (or similar) that seemed to grind and slow a bit on these curves - with reluctance I returned it to the shop. Kato and Atlas diesels of similar size whizz round without a grumble. Modern rolling stock, such as 89' auto carriers, intermodal stuff, etc, is not a problem at all. However, if there's anything likely to derail on tight curves or dodgy rail joints, it will be steam! Every new steam loco seems to require the layout to be fine-tuned to suit its particular characteristics. I don't doubt that things would be much easier if I could have eased those curves out to 15 or 18". In fact I am giving some thought to relaying the hidden areas with set-track since I think this will make it easier to maintain a constant radius and avoid kinks. As I said, diesel is far more trouble-free in this regard.

 

All Peco code 55 points are now wired for independent frog switching. I don't do any additional work on them for DCC, and when I have tested the layout under digital control, it's all worked fine. In the long run, I'd like to be able to go to fully DCC but I'll need to get quite a few more locos chipped before that becomes viable. For now twin-cab control works fine, although having a mish-mash of DCC and non-DCC locos means that I can't always run loco X in a consist with loco Y.

[Barry Ten]

A small, boring update. I took the plunge and ordered some Atlas set track to match the 11" radius of the turnback loops at either end of the layout. I had some trepidation about swapping the track over as the existing rails not only pass through a short tunnel, but access is difficult due to a 2" crash barrier running all the way around the edge of the curve. However, it turned out to be dead easy. The Atlas code 80 track connects to Peco code 55 without difficulty using Peco rail joiners (the Atlas ones are a bit stiffer, but also workable) and a semicircle of set-track was able to be laid with only a tiny adjustment to the ends of the existing code 55. There's a slight "ramp" between the two rail sections but not enough to cause difficulties. I opted for Atlas code 80 on the basis that Atlas do the right radius, and that Code 80 is actually a better match to Peco Code 55 than "true" Code 55. As this would be concealed track I was also not concerned about appearance.

 

Once I'd lifted the old section of flexible track, I found a massive dip in one of the rails which was obviously the cause of the derailments with steam engines. This was all but invisible once the track was in-situ, and although I could feel it with my finger, I was amazed at how bad it was once I could actually get a good look at it. I think I dropped a hammer on that part a year or two ago. The surprising thing was that not that things were derailing, but that anything was able to run through that part at all. As it was, all my diesels sailed through. Anyway, with the new track in place I was pleased to be able run my two problem steam locos without issues.

 

I've got a second semicircle of set-track to replace the left hand turnback loop but I'll leave well alone for now, as to date there haven't been any problems on that side of the layout.

 

Personally I find this kind of fine-tuning type stuff to be very satisfying, especially when it goes smoothly and the results are readily apparent. What I had envisaged being a tricky day's work was over and done before my tea had cooled.

[Barry Ten]

A bit more detailing around the paint factory. The overhead crane is a nice little Faller kit which I assembled and painted during the German grand prix coverage. Humbrol green was splashed on, left to dry a bit and then attacked with MIG rust effect pigment.

 

One of those kits which, after you've built it, you immediately want to build another one - always a good sign.

 

 

Seaboard GP40s rumble through with a westbound freight. I don't know much about this livery, whether its from the SAL or SCL period - maybe someone knows better?

 

 

 

Overall view of the industrial district as it now stands.

 

[Gene]

LOLOL...I built the exact same overhead crane last month for my clubs' layout....I think I have 2 more sitting in my stash!

[John B]

 

Seaboard GP40s rumble through with a westbound freight. I don't know much about this livery, whether its from the SAL or SCL period - maybe someone knows better?

 

 

 

AFAIK the GP40s were the only Seaboard Air Line units delivered (or painted) in that lime green colour scheme, Al. Pullman Green with stripe was much more usual. It was the final hurrah for SAL "citrus" before the black and yellow of the ACL came in with the SCL merger.

 

Love 'em. I've got an Atlas HO version...

[Barry Ten]

AFAIK the GP40s were the only Seaboard Air Line units delivered (or painted) in that lime green colour scheme, Al. Pullman Green with stripe was much more usual. It was the final hurrah for SAL "citrus" before the black and yellow of the ACL came in with the SCL merger.

 

Love 'em. I've got an Atlas HO version...

 

Thanks, John - suspected you'd know a thing or two!

[PMP]

Very very good, I'd say it's better than a lot of magazine US layouts shown. In the track plan it clearly has 'play/operating' value, without being too busy like a lot of the US articles depict. The color looks well ballanced and homogenous too.

[Barry Ten]

The color looks well ballanced and homogenous too.

 

Cheers, Paul. I end up using the same basic shades on all my layouts, I think - brick reds, some mid-greens, plenty of greys, usually warmed a bit with some red, not too many blues or yellows or bright reds.

 

I do need to muck about with white balance in these shots, though, as I suspect the green ground cover is popping out a bit too much.

[AndrewC]

Dunno how I missed this one before. Looks really good. I think what makes it work is not just the overall balance but the lack of cliches that non-US modellers usually go for. Its one of those layouts that has an atmosphere. Perfectly formed and not contrived or overcooked.

[Gene]

It looks so good that I have to keep reminding myself that its N-scale...truly amazeing work!

[trisonic]

It looks so good that I have to keep reminding myself that its N-scale...truly amazeing work!

Agree with big +1 - best N I've seen in photos.

 

Best, Pete.

 

 

 

[Steve K]

Not much to add at all, except to echo Al's own comments about the crane. It's great how something so apparently simple (and that applies to the fire escapes, too) can really give the buildings an extra dimension.

[Barry Ten]

The kind remarks are much appreciated, all.

 

Re: the track, I think the secret to getting Peco code 55 looking acceptable is deep ballasting - it may have been Graham Hedges who pointed this out. The sleeper mouldings are very thick, so you need to get the ballast really up to the top of the sleepers to convey the right impression of thinness. The other thing is lighting - in all the photos, the illumination is coming from striplights over the layout. If lit from the side, as for instance when I don't have the layout lighting on, and the room's ambient lighting is taking over, it's surprising how much it emphasizes the rail height.

 

Steve: not sure how obvious it is, but those buildings conceal the return track for the continuous run. You can look through the windows and see trains going through the factory floor!

[signalmaintainer]

This layout really needs to be in one of the American mags, such as Model Railroader's annuals "Great Model Railroads" or "Model Railroad Planning."

 

With that in mind, I took the liberty a couple weeks ago of sending the editor of "N Scale Railroading" a link to this topic. He likes the layout, but concluded his reply with some gibberish about NSR needing "original content," whatever that has to do with anything. What's not original?

 

When I worked as an associate editor at a large model railroad magazine in Wisconsin several years ago, we would have strongly considered an article on such a fine layout as this!

[Steve K]

Steve: not sure how obvious it is, but those buildings conceal the return track for the continuous run. You can look through the windows and see trains going through the factory floor!

Not obvious at all! However, that just emphasises my point - that the crane and fire escape make the buildings seem fully 3D, so one doesn't suspect that they're effectively a backscene. Most effective.

[Barry Ten]

This layout really needs to be in one of the American mags, such as Model Railroader's annuals "Great Model Railroads" or "Model Railroad Planning."

 

With that in mind, I took the liberty a couple weeks ago of sending the editor of "N Scale Railroading" a link to this topic. He likes the layout, but concluded his reply with some gibberish about NSR needing "original content," whatever that has to do with anything. What's not original?

 

When I worked as an associate editor at a large model railroad magazine in Wisconsin several years ago, we would have strongly considered an article on such a fine layout as this!

 

Thanks for taking that initiative, though. I guess they don't want something that's been on the internet but that must be an increasingly tough call these days, with the way layout builds are documented. Of course I'm always happy to take new pics.

 

I do mean to submit a photo to MR's readers' layouts page, just can't get off my backside and do it. This week, maybe.

 

Steve: cheers!

[Barry Ten]

I haven't said much about rolling stock on any of the GA&E threads because, to be honest, there's not a lot to it other than opening boxes and splodging on a bit of weathering. This is about as far as it goes: these 60 foot excess height waffle sided box cars have been renumbered, and in one case I changed the slogan on the right side of the car. As you can see, I struggled to get a precise match to the existing number sizing - neither of the two Micro-Scale sheets I had carried the right size of numerals - but I can live with the slight mismatch in the last one or two digits. I have used an airbrush on some of my weathering jobs but (purely because I felt like a change) these were done using Tensochrom active surface agents, followed by Mig rusting. I need to tone down the trucks a little.

 

 

If you think N scale has to be small and fiddly, it's not always the case! These cars have serious presence, and they're not even the largest freight items on the GA&E. No - I haven't changed the end numbers...

 

 

[PaulRhB]

I think the last picture on post #33 would make a nice magazine front cover. I think the N scale mag might have been worried about it appearing on the net and considered that as publishing. Thankfully MR and CM over this side consider the wider audience that will see the magazine and will even link to authors web content if they have a website.

I still think there's room for both types of publishing as I would rather sit and read a magazine some times and there's a lot of times I can't go online but have a few minutes to fill.

So Barry get on with it and submit it to MR and CM as they have even occasionally cooperated and featured the same layouts in times past and CM does with some of the Euro magazines at times I understand.

[Barry Ten]

So Barry get on with it and submit it to MR and CM as they have even occasionally cooperated and featured the same layouts in times past and CM does with some of the Euro magazines at times I understand.

 

They have, haven't they? I think I'd like to do a bit more scenery before I try and push an article, though. Ideally I'd want to finish the top 12' of the layout, and maybe down the left side leg until the point where the new module bolts on. That way there'd be a bit more variety in the shots and a sense of completion of the first phase. That's probably going to take until at least the end of the year though, at the present rate of progress...

[PaulRhB]

So Barry get on with

. . . the layout and then . . .

submit it to MR and CM

Couldn't resist but the sentiment is honest it really is nice and worthy now so it will be worth the wait.

[Barry Ten]

A few posts back I mentioned the use of a camera to monitor the staging yard - well, here it is, plonked in place temporarily (although knowing me, it'll stay like this for some while):

 

 

And the monitor screen, which came in the same kit:

 

 

It's a "Sentient" wireless camera and monitor, sold by Maplins. The monitor will support four cameras in total. The quality is more than adequate for monitoring the yard throat. Ultimately it would be quite useful to have a second camera monitoring the other throat.

 

I must admit, until recently, I'd have considered it overkill to install a camera system on a small layout like mine. I've seen setups like this in MR, and always thought to myself that it was the kind of expensive luxury that the Americans seem to go in for on their vast basement systems. Plus, there was an element of technical fear-factor. However, over the last year or two my wife and I have been using a camera to look at our birds and foxes, so I've become much more aware of how cheap and easy to use this gear is. The cost of this Maplins unit was not much more than a decoder equipped N loco, so I consider it money well spent. The camera allows me to free up more layout space for scenery, by avoiding the need to be able to see the staging yard. I must still be able to access it, of course, but that's easily solved with removable scenery modules, of which there are already many on the layout.

 

Over the weekend I did a lot of final wiring and fine-tuning of the yard throat, making sure operation is "bulletproof", as they say in MR. With that in place, I'm now happy about beginning to push the scenery around the bend onto the left side arm of the layout. Here's evidence of progress: this is the spur with the Woods furniture factory. This was the first kit I built and made in N and has been finished for quite a few years. I would now aim to do a bit more to personalise a model, rather than building it straight out of the box, but it's a nice, imposing structure. Obviously there's still a fair bit to do with detailing and painting, and bedding the building into its scene.

 

 

Moving on, here's an area of the layout where two of the point motors for the staging yard could not be situated by their tracks, and where the framing did not permit under-board mountings. They use brass rods to work the points, pushing through the scenery under the three intervening tracks. I wanted to be able to get at the Peco polarity switch units for adjustment, so I made a section of removable scenery to drop over the motors. Yes, it's all very low-tech, just card and plaster - knocked up in about an hour, simples. The "wrinkly" fascia will eventually be neatened over. And the slight mismatch at the left side of the module is intentional, 'onest.

 

 

 

Finally: two massive 86 foot auto parts box cars, courtesy of Bluford Shops. Lovely models. They have body mounted couplings but will still go around 11" curves. Rather nicely, they also come with kits to adapt them for even tighter curves - top marks to Bluford Shops.