Blue Heron- 3-2-2 HO Inglenook

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear Jack, RMWebbers,

 

The key problem being the 90 degree curve which "EATS" space - even laying it out in setrack.

 

Jack, I'm working on it... hope to have something useful shortly...

 

The layout has inglenook possibilities if the loop is a pair of tracks, each holding three cars (with a hidden sectorplate holding one, or a pair of, loco(s) at the far end, replacing the turnout/lead track) and a five car, individual spot, siding at the front - of course using two locos will extend the length of the tail track at the other, end which should hold a loco+ three, by another loco length...

 

But the big problem is that 90 degree curve - which will probably involve a custom turnout and curve of about radius 0 (around 11") which may cause problems for locos/ 50'+ boxcars -

 

IMHO, I don;t think it's actually that big an issue, just requires some creative lateral thinking RE benchwork...

(and being open to the idea of a dropleaf, if the only form-factor available is a strict linear shelf ;-) ).

 

The 90 degree crossing is available from Atlas One point re the track diagram - in the bloggy post http://lothes.blogsp...hort-track.html it does say that the curve is the equivalent of approx 15"radius and the spur holds 2 x 50' cars rather than the 3 shown on the diagram - I wonder which is correct

 

I've been comparing notes here, and as always in RR research, it takes more than 1 "primary source" in order to get to the _truth_ ;-)

 

- according to _this_ BingMaps view, the Short Track definitely holds 3x50' boxcars

http://binged.it/HSXDbe

 

As such, 1 for BingMaps, 1 for FOGChart, 0 for Blog

 

- according to _this_ BingMaps view, the 15" radii curve to access the Short Track does _not_ cross any tracks on a diamond.

http://binged.it/HSZ0Xq

 

Indeed, the turnout for the Short Track clearly comes off the track _ahead_ of the turnout for the NE end of the passing loop,

not _inside_ the passing loop as implied by the FOGChart.

(although, if you're a fan of, or want the handlaying challenge of the "turn left to go right" trackage, go ahead,

promise I won't tell anyone... ;-) )

 

As such, 1 for BingMaps, 0 for FOGChart,

 

Comparing

- Bing and Google maps

- the FOG Chart

- the "Locomotives 2011" annual

 

there would appear to be around 3 spurs coming off the South side of the "Main", as well as the 2 passing-loop tracks,

and the single Short Track coming off to the North.

 

As such, If I read it in the right light, there looks to be maybe room to truncate the Mill's throat maybe 3 different ways to get a 'nook... ;-)

 

Given the Long Tracks 6-car spotting positions, even that track + a headshunt and portion of the Main could keep a proto-switcher fan amused... :-)

 

I note the woodchip spurs listed on the FOGChart, but have you seen any pics with the SW1500s spotting chipcars in the mill???

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[Prof Klyzlr]

As always, "the feel" here is important. While I interpreted the comment above to refer to the types of rolling stock, which really is quite mixed, there's also the surrounding environmental aspect.

 

Dear OzExPat,

 

Oh no, I definitely include the scenery, structures, weather, and time of day under the term "feel"...

("Brooklyn" simply wouldn't have made any sense if it wasn't in the context of a drizzly 3AM... )

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear RMWebbers,

 

OK, we gotta start somewhere...

 

- with the HUGE assumption that no-one can tell me the actual length of the block between 5th and 6th streets,

- and the slightly larger assumption that the FOGChart is correct on this point,

 

that switchback/headshunt/"lead" track 783 is rated to hold 2x locos (SW1500s @ 45' each) + 4x cars (assumed 50' boxcars @ 55' ea over couplers)

 

= 310'

or around 1085mm in HO

(IE less than 1200mm/4')

 

If we align one end of that with the SW boundary of the Main/5th intersection, ....

(seriously, this is looking very do-able... )

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[shortliner]

Yes John, you are quite right - I've been trying to lay it out per the FOG chart

Edited by me in light of Daves comment about dates below.

Edited April 18, 2012 by shortliner

[dave1905]

The minimum radius for 2 SW1500's coupled is 154 ft. In HO scale the minimum radius would be just over 21", not 15" The minimum radius for a single engine NOT coupled to cars might be 15" but that doesn't do you any good spotting an industry.

[dave1905]

I've been comparing notes here, and as always in RR research, it takes more than 1 "primary source" in order to get to the _truth_ ;-)

 

- according to _this_ BingMaps view, the Short Track definitely holds 3x50' boxcars

http://binged.it/HSXDbe

 

As such, 1 for BingMaps, 1 for FOGChart, 0 for Blog

 

- according to _this_ BingMaps view, the 15" radii curve to access the Short Track does _not_ cross any tracks on a diamond.

http://binged.it/HSZ0Xq

 

Indeed, the turnout for the Short Track clearly comes off the track _ahead_ of the turnout for the NE end of the passing loop,

not _inside_ the passing loop as implied by the FOGChart.

(although, if you're a fan of, or want the handlaying challenge of the "turn left to go right" trackage, go ahead,

promise I won't tell anyone... ;-) )

 

As such, 1 for BingMaps, 0 for FOGChart,

 

Comparing

- Bing and Google maps

- the FOG Chart

- the "Locomotives 2011" annual

 

 

 

Actually I think the FOG chart is correct. For 2004. They are drawn by the crews. I also think the Bing and Google Maps are correct. For 2012. If you look at the zoom in on the satellite photo, at the spot where diamond should be according to the FOG chart there is fresh asphalt.

[shortliner]

Dave - you may well be correct about the difference in dates - looking at Bing and Google, I am unconvinced that there is even a runround loop track currently in existence

Jack

Edited April 18, 2012 by shortliner

[Ozexpatriate]

Actually I think the FOG chart is correct. For 2004. They are drawn by the crews. I also think the Bing and Google Maps are correct. For 2012. If you look at the zoom in on the satellite photo, at the spot where diamond should be according to the FOG chart there is fresh asphalt.

I'm a bit confused about the notional 90° crossing. There is a 90° curve inside the mill - but this is a spur into a shed.

 

This is the end of the shunt (Main and 6th Street) where the google aerial view shows fresh ashphalt.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Ozexpatriate

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dave - you may well be correct about the difference in dates - looking at Bing and Google, I am unconvinced that there is even a runround loop track currently in existence

Jack

 

Dear Jack,

 

I'll readily admit that it was the Kalmbach "Locomotive 2011" article that grabbed my attention.

As such, I guess the "era" (and "feel"?) that got my attention was "current"...

(or "most current rail service last handled by SW1500s" ;-) ).

 

With that in mind, check out

 

http://binged.it/JeR6Dv

Zoomed out, showning both ends of the "passing track"

 

http://binged.it/Jc7Uje

Southern end, closest to the Mainline and Interchange, you can _just_ pick out the frog location, adjacent to the White/black/white set of 3 utes in the line of parked cars

 

http://binged.it/JeSczk

Northern end, closest to the 5th St intersection, turnout can be clearly seen next to the forklift and the white dot in the large circle (Helicopter landing pad marking?)

NB that this "passing spur turnout" is _south_ of the "Short Track" turnout, the Short Track comes off the Lead directly.

(Hint, by moving the Short Track spur turnout onto the passing track,

IE effectively swapping the order of the turnouts as encountered heading SW from the 5th St intersection,

the "pass + Short Track" becomes more "trad inglenook", and saves 1x linear turnout length, or around 2 carlengths...)

 

Based on the datecodes at bottom right of the pimage, this is "Pictometry 2010 MDA Geospatial Services"

 

Sat down last night with

- the Kalmback article

- the FOG chart

- and Google/BingMaps

 

and tried to plot "photo angle" positions for each of the images. Most were not too hard, but there are still 1 or 2 that I'm not convinced I know where the photographer was standing to get the shot...

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[Ozexpatriate]

... check out

 

http://binged.it/JeR6Dv

Zoomed out, showning both ends of the "passing track"

 

http://binged.it/Jc7Uje

Southern end, closest to the Mainline and Interchange, you can _just_ pick out the frog location, adjacent to the White/black/white set of 3 utes in the line of parked cars

 

http://binged.it/JeSczk

Northern end, closest to the 5th St intersection, turnout can be clearly seen next to the forklift and the white dot in the large circle (Helicopter landing pad marking?)

NB that this "passing spur turnout" is _south_ of the "Short Track" turnout, the Short Track comes off the Lead directly.

Attached below is a sketch of my interpretation based on what I made out (separately from the observations above), though largely with the same bing imagery. I couldn't really "see" the south end of the runaround, so the approximate alignment I have drawn could well be wrong. Please feel free to make suggestions/corrections.

 

Incidentally, I live reasonably close to Oregon City. If someone wants to go ahead and actually model this location, it is possible for me to drive down there and take photographs.

[Ozexpatriate]

Based on the datecodes at bottom right of the pimage, this is "Pictometry 2010 MDA Geospatial Services"

I think most of the aerial photographs are older than that. I live in a town some miles upstream and Bing imagery with the same datestamp shows leveled dirt where a restaurant was constructed and operating before February 2008 (Google Streetview shows the restaurant under construction in 2007).

 

The tree in the traffic management island in the intersection of Main St and 6th appears in two and disappears in one of the three Google map views. The Steetview data showing the tree is marked as 2009.

[dave1905]

I'm a bit confused about the notional 90° crossing. There is a 90° curve inside the mill - but this is a spur into a shed.

 

This is the end of the shunt (Main and 6th Street) where the google aerial view shows fresh ashphalt.

 

There was no 90 degree crossing, there probably was crossing. You are taking a schematic as a literal track survey.

 

FOG, Bing 1, Oz 0. 8-)

[Ozexpatriate]

There was no 90 degree crossing, there probably was crossing. You are taking a schematic as a literal track survey.

Actually, I never thought there was a crossing at all.

[shortliner]

Actually I rather liked the original FOG diagram and thought that it would make a "different" 5-3-3 + an extra siding Inglenook - the two 3 car sidings can be used as such, but also form the runaround with a hidden sector plate extension, that only the locos are permitted to use for running around cars - boxcars are not allowed on it. The 5 car siding is used with individual door spots, as is the vertical 3 car siding. This is what I thought might be possible, but it works out at 2 x 5 foot boards and a plug-on 3 foot extension - using a single SW1200 loco might shorten the requirement by a foot or so - The 90 degree curve is formed from Setrack components, including the turnout leading onto it

 

 

Note - the locos used in the XTrkCad diagram are Geeps, and slightly over-length - I didn't have an SW1200/SW1500 loco diagram to hand

Edited April 19, 2012 by shortliner

[Prof Klyzlr]

Actually I rather liked the original FOG diagram and thought that it would make a "different" 5-3-3 + an extra siding Inglenook - the two 3 car sidings can be used as such, but also form the runaround with a hidden sector plate extension, that only the locos are permitted to use for running around cars - boxcars are not allowed on it. The 5 car siding is used with individual door spots, as is the vertical 3 car siding. This is what I thought might be possible, but it works out at 2 x 5 foot boards and a plug-on extension - using a single SW1200 loco might shorten the requirement by a foot or so - The 90 degree curve is formed from Setrack components, including the turnout leading onto it

 

 

Dear Jack,

 

Loving the concept, and yes the appeal of the "left to go right" spur would be worth capturing.

However, I just measured my Athearn HO SW1500, and it's 155mm over couplers, ergo 2 of them fit in just-over 1'.

Are you sure the scale of the trackplan is correct? (the locos look a little long,

and the 2x SW1500 sectorplate could possibly be a bit shorter, maybe even mounted on a drop-leaf?)

 

Still working on the Google images here,... ;-)

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[shortliner]

Dear John - see the note below the diagram in the post above yours

Edited April 19, 2012 by shortliner

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear John - see the note below the diagram in the post above yours

 

Dear Jack,

 

My bad, shouldn't be trying to post coherrently or otherwise @ 0'dark-hundred...

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[shortliner]

I've redrawn BHIP - with SW1200/1500 locos (I knew I had one somewhere!). This lets us knock 6" off each end, bringing it down to 9' overall with a shorter sector plate too. All other details remain the same - and you definitely shouldn't be up and posting at such hours!

 

Edited April 19, 2012 by shortliner

[shortliner]

.......and then you start to wonder if you could save a little more space with a 3-way, or an assymetric 3-way? Or even if the sector plate is needed? Except to allow the train to "arrive" and "depart" with the locos on the head end? Maybe have a play later!

Edited April 19, 2012 by shortliner

[dave1905]

If you want to switch it prototypically you'll need a couple tracks about 8-10 cars long on the left. The switcher would go pull all the outbounds, shove them down to the long sidings that are on the left side of the diagram, pick up the spotters and go spot the plant.

[Prof Klyzlr]

If you want to switch it prototypically you'll need a couple tracks about 8-10 cars long on the left. The switcher would go pull all the outbounds, shove them down to the long sidings that are on the left side of the diagram, pick up the spotters and go spot the plant.

 

Dear RMWebbers,

 

NB That we already verified the position of the LH (SW) turnout of the passing spur using Bing's "Birdseye" view, the clearance point is approx 1/2 way along that "bulge" in the building below (SE) of the track...

 

Happy Modelling,

Aim to Improve,

Prof Klyzlr

[shortliner]

Inglenook+1 variation using PECO code 83 assymetric threeway brings the length down to 101". The Runround is removed to return the format to a standard 5-3-3 Inglenook+an extra spur. Truck loading blocks the "runround" to leave it as two x 3 car spurs. Note that to reduce the length, the 90 degree track no longer crosses the leg of the spur.

 

Edited April 20, 2012 by shortliner

[Scottish Modeller]

Hi all,

 

Someone's been looking in my drawings file!

 

One of the ideas I had for a Guilford layout in N was based on an inverted T.

 

Gradually I moved the upright vertical bar of the T further and further away from the centre.

 

Something like this.....

 

 

Grid is 12"

 

Loads of others as well - too many on paper and not enough on software - let alone built!

 

Thanks

[298]

Now RMweb is back I can show you the results of a quick play with a bit of stock, some Bachmann track (to try to place curves), and a box of leftover buildings. The base is about 4' long and about 17" deep, first up is an alignment 45 degrees to the City blocks, and the route entering from the right, crossing over the Main Road, then turning for some street running along the next road with a short spur. The idea behind this was to try to not have roads dissappear into the backscene, and the angle and limiting the viewing positions prevents this, even if it does hide alot of the buildings:

 

 

Then this is more of what I was initially thinking, even if the grid pattern isn't exactly square. The cardboard box in the Northwest corner is the proposed Walthers "Ravoli" Theater, I was thinking of Street Running and a 4-way light controlled intersection but having a Railroad RoW on the right and an access road to the industry might work out a bit better:

 

 

The Trolley Car shell on the roof of the Southeast corner building is a proposed "Old Spaghetti Factory" Restaurant, with a cutaway in the wall so you can see the Trolley inside

 

And here are some quick eye-level shots, I had to edit out the backgrounds to try to close the scenes a bit better....:

 

 

So what am I thinkng now...? As much as I like the prototype OC Inglenook, I still think a freelance single spur with run-thru traffic would be operationally better, but if all I want to do is model a railroad crossing a street scene, I might as well build a small module to RS Tower standards....

[shortliner]

Hey, Andy - do I detect a pinch of Peter Norths influence in there?