Modelling the ATSF in 1970 in HO

[Johann Marsbar]

7 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Interesting that this anecdote tells of chilled refreshments - in winter months heating would be the concern instead, so I believe that’s one reason older passenger cars were retained, as they might have their own heating boilers.  Elsewhere, passenger cars might be put next to the locomotive if that was the source of heating (I’m thinking steam era), in an exception to the more common rear end of the train.  I think that’s how it worked, Keith.

 

Different part of North America, but this gem from 1928 was sill in use on a mixed service out of The Pas, MB, when I passed through in 1997!

 

 

There still seems to be some form of mixed train service out of there today, using hired in VIA cars.

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 26/11/2020 at 10:54, long island jack said:

How you switch a multi spot industry , the same would apply to two industries

Thanks - I’ll have a watch later (from a quick first glance I note they’ve used the “Lance Mindheim” padlocks as part of it too).

Edited September 23, 2022 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Keith Addenbrooke]

3 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Found it! Operating session at the Jayville Terminal RR - YouTube.

 

While looking, I found lots of similar switching operations by putting "HO switching layout" into the YouTube asearch function.

Thanks - it’s back to work for me now, but I’ll check it out later.

[mdvle]

22 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Thanks Johann - good point about the passenger car at the rear: my understanding is that it would keep it clear from getting in the way of switching moves, and meant the passenger(s) would be less impacted by the routine bumps and taking up the slack on coupling / uncoupling moves.

 

Yes and no.

 

Yes, keeps it out of the way of switching moves.

 

But I doubt it mitigated the bumps of coupling/uncoupling very much - and consider that in most cases the mixed train only existed because some sort of passenger service was mandated and so the passengers were in no way a priority (see below for more).

 

22 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

In the UK mixed trains had to have a Guards Van as well for help with braking, but my understanding is that Cabooses didn’t fulfil this function so the Conductor would ride in the Combine.

 

Yes.

 

22 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Interesting that this anecdote tells of chilled refreshments - in winter months heating would be the concern instead, so I believe that’s one reason older passenger cars were retained, as they might have their own heating boilers.  Elsewhere, passenger cars might be put next to the locomotive if that was the source of heating (I’m thinking steam era), in an exception to the more common rear end of the train.  I think that’s how it worked, Keith.

 

No heating boilers typically, just a wood or coal burning stove.

 

And doubtful that the passenger car would be up against the loco - too much hassle for the crew, and likely some of the sidings would not be deemed safe.

 

The key thing to remember is none of this was for the passengers as mentioned above.  To take the link from the previous post, the web site has the timetable for the 1968 Wichita KS to Englewood KS mixed train.

 

Google tells us that the distance is about 180 miles and can be driven in just under 3 hours - yet this train is scheduled for 10 hours, giving an average speed of 18 mph.  1968 is well into the car era, and even if you wouldn't be able to do it in 3 hours it would still be much faster than the train to drive or take the bus if one existed.

 

So the passenger service was there because someone was forcing it, and thus likely few passengers - hence the typical lowly combine with little seating capacity.  Because the freight switching meant there was a lot of time spent stationary while the switching happened.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

Yes and no.

 

Yes, keeps it out of the way of switching moves.

 

But I doubt it mitigated the bumps of coupling/uncoupling very much - and consider that in most cases the mixed train only existed because some sort of passenger service was mandated and so the passengers were in no way a priority (see below for more).

 

 

Yes.

 

 

No heating boilers typically, just a wood or coal burning stove.

 

And doubtful that the passenger car would be up against the loco - too much hassle for the crew, and likely some of the sidings would not be deemed safe.

 

The key thing to remember is none of this was for the passengers as mentioned above.  To take the link from the previous post, the web site has the timetable for the 1968 Wichita KS to Englewood KS mixed train.

 

Google tells us that the distance is about 180 miles and can be driven in just under 3 hours - yet this train is scheduled for 10 hours, giving an average speed of 18 mph.  1968 is well into the car era, and even if you wouldn't be able to do it in 3 hours it would still be much faster than the train to drive or take the bus if one existed.

 

So the passenger service was there because someone was forcing it, and thus likely few passengers - hence the typical lowly combine with little seating capacity.  Because the freight switching meant there was a lot of time spent stationary while the switching happened.

...though I happened to note this morning that my average speed as calculated by the car’s computer for my driving over the last 19 hours of use has also been 18mph.

 

(slightly skewed at present as I’m only making essential local trips, of course)

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Thanks - I’ll have a watch later (from a quick first glance I not they’ve used the “Lance Mindheim” padlocks as part of it too).

Excellent!  Very enjoyable - relaxed (see 20.38 for example), but at the same time realistic.  Thank you for the link.

Adds a new Layout Planning Rule: by decree of the management all future plans must include a cup holder or beverage rest.

 

Relating to my plan, although there is a switchback, this one doesn’t impose an excessive constraint - and looks plausible.

[dave1905]

7 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

A rather basic question.

 

All the photos that I have seen of mixed trains in the US have the passenger accommodation at the rear of the train. From this, I draw the conclusion that freight stock in the US has always been fully braked. Is this correct?

 

Since 1906, when airbrakes were required in interchange service.

[dave1905]

7 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Thanks - I guess modelling a mixed train where any passengers had a caboose ride would only require me to pause the train with the caboose at the depot?  

 

 

A combine or coach would be more likely than a caboose for a 1961 mixed train service.  If you run a mixed train, you won't run a "local" train to do industry switching, because that's what the mixed train does.  You would see either a passenger train and a local, or a mixed train, but not both.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

16 minutes ago, dave1905 said:

 

A combine or coach would be more likely than a caboose for a 1961 mixed train service.  If you run a mixed train, you won't run a "local" train to do industry switching, because that's what the mixed train does.  You would see either a passenger train and a local, or a mixed train, but not both.

Hi Dave - agreed (I checked my earlier post on this and I wasn’t very clear).  The passenger service wouldn’t necessarily be a round trip every day either from what I can tell.

 

I think my options are, either: one daily freight train and an occasional (thrice weekly?) local passenger that connects with one of the remaining mainline passenger trains at the other end of the branch,

 

or: one daily freight train which is sometimes a mixed train (but not really advertised any more).

 

Before I forget, I hope it’s OK to pass on Thanksgiving good wishes to all stateside today.  Keith.

[Oldddudders]

4 hours ago, Johann Marsbar said:

 

Different part of North America, but this gem from 1928 was sill in use on a mixed service out of The Pas, MB, when I passed through in 1997!

 

 

There still seems to be some form of mixed train service out of there today, using hired in VIA cars.

 

And marshalled behind a Budd dome-obs. 

[Johann Marsbar]

1 minute ago, Oldddudders said:

And marshalled behind a Budd dome-obs. 

That was the train I was travelling on which was heading up to Churchill. The Combine had hitched a ride up to The Pas from Winnipeg and was detatched after I took the photo, the train staying there quite a while during which time the locos were refuelled....

 

 

Apologies for serious thread drift, but they are "proper" locos!

[DanielB]

Covered wagons are the quintessential American locomotive, without a doubt.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

26 minutes ago, Johann Marsbar said:

That was the train I was travelling on which was heading up to Churchill. The Combine had hitched a ride up to The Pas from Winnipeg and was detatched after I took the photo, the train staying there quite a while during which time the locos were refuelled....

 

 

Apologies for serious thread drift, but they are "proper" locos!

No apology needed - nice photo (and you rode on the train):  thanks for sharing it.

Edited November 26, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Johann Marsbar]

13 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

No apology needed - nice photo (and you rode on the train):  thanks for sharing it.

 

That old Combine was actually removed by these....

 

 

The HBR had taken over the lines in the area a matter of months earlier and the VIA service to Lynn Lake was actually hauled as part of an HBR operated "Mixed" service.

 

 

To get the thread back on track, you can have another Santa Fe loco passing through Independence, Kansas, in December 1981...

 

 

[F-UnitMad]

2 hours ago, DanielB said:

Covered wagons are the quintessential American locomotive, without a doubt.

Had to agree - but then I would, wouldn't I..??!!   

[pH]

Atlas Model Railroad Company used to have a modeller’s forum, which was closed down in 2012. A regular contributor was modelling Santa Fe activity for one day in a single place in one of the Southwestern states in the diesel era. He had lots of information on train makeups. I’ve had a look to see if any of that forum still remains online - it doesn’t. And I can’t remember enough detail to see if he carried on posting somewhere else. Does anyone else remember anything about this model/modeller? (I seem to remember he was a reverend.)

 

The current ‘Atlas Rescue Forum’ was set up after the official Atlas forum was shut down. I don’t think it contains anything copied from the official forum, though it’s possible information was re-posted in it.

[webbcompound]

If you are looking for a not very expensive heavyweight passenger car for your mixed service the Rivarossi "combine" is a Rider Car (2602-2608) originally built for the ATSF Fast Mail (LA to Chicago). Just needs a bit of strip along the sill to replicate the ATSF girder (?) sill. I don't know how long these were in service. A very similar car, which was 5' shorter than the Rivarossi, but otherwise pretty much the same was combine 2548 which lasted until 1971 in coach green 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, webbcompound said:

If you are looking for a not very expensive heavyweight passenger car for your mixed service the Rivarossi "combine" is a Rider Car (2602-2608) originally built for the ATSF Fast Mail (LA to Chicago). Just needs a bit of strip along the sill to replicate the ATSF girder (?) sill. I don't know how long these were in service. A very similar car, which was 5' shorter than the Rivarossi, but otherwise pretty much the same was combine 2548 which lasted until 1971 in coach green 

Thank you - I’ve never attempted a rolling stock conversion, but it would be a worthwhile project to try (I’d only need one).  Interesting to note there’s an example that lasted until 1971: a link I found from an old atsfrr.org page in response to this suggestion confirms this and also refers to pictures in the book on Santa Fe mixed trains, so this is all helpful material.  Thanks, Keith.

[dave1905]

Local train service is usually  a set pattern.

• A turn - same crew, same tour of duty (16 hours on duty before 1974) run from A to Z and return to A.  Crew runs at least 5 days a week and possibly 7.
• Tri-weekly service - Crew runs A to Z on Mo-We-Th, gets rest at Z and next day, Tu-Th-Sa, runs Z to A.  Off Su.  Typically runs 6 days a week.
• Double daily service - Basically 2 tri-weekly crews on opposite legs.  Crew 1 runs A to Z Mo-We-Fr and Crew 2 runs A to Z Tu-Th-Sa. OR crew 1 runs A to Z on even days, Z to A on odd days, Crew 2 runs A to Z on Odd days and Z to A on even days.  Trains run 7 days a week.

 

It was common that train service jobs were designed with no days off.  Crews would just work as many days as they wanted and then "lay off " and their jobs were covered by the "extra board" a pool of workers that covered vacancies (sickness, vacation, jury duty, etc.)  It was common that old heads might work for months straight with no days off,  7 days a week.

 

Passenger service would be scheduled and have a timetable schedule so would have to run on set pattern and nominally run on a schedule.

Local service crews are bulletined (they hold a job that has a fixed work pattern and work/off days) and are paid for the days they are scheduled to work (whether they run or not).  If the train is a 6 day a week local and you only run it 4 days, you still pay the crews for 6 trips per week.

 

Later, in the 1980's and 1990's local service dropped off enough that branches were often paired, where the crew would run on one branch on Mo-We-Fr and another branch on Tu-Th-Sa.

Edited November 27, 2020 by dave1905

[F-UnitMad]

6 hours ago, dave1905 said:

Tri-weekly service - Crew runs A to Z on Mo-We-Th, gets rest at Z and next day, Tu-Th-Sa, runs Z to A.  Off Su.  Typically runs 6 days a week.

An interesting bit there, that we tend to overlook in the UK with our short distances. A 'branch line' in the USA may take a couple of days or even more to travel one way. Here we tend to think of branch lines being a short trip off the junction with the main line that might take a couple of hours at most, one way. 

Our perspective on distances is one of those fascinating differences between US & UK Railroads/railways!!!

[Keith Addenbrooke]

2 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

An interesting bit there, that we tend to overlook in the UK with our short distances. A 'branch line' in the USA may take a couple of days or even more to travel one way. Here we tend to think of branch lines being a short trip off the junction with the main line that might take a couple of hours at most, one way. 

Our perspective on distances is one of those fascinating differences between US & UK Railroads/railways!!!

With perfect timing, the digital edition of BRM is out today and has quite a branch line theme - with John Ahern’s Madder Valley and Lydham Heath from the Bishop’s Castle Railway, built by Barry Norman and now in the care of another well known S-scale modeller (whom I’ve never met but who I understand has US S-scale interests too).

 

For me, Lydham Heath captures the essence of the British Branch Line concept perfectly - prototype UK ‘short line’ almost permanently in Receivership, fleet totalling just two locomotives, mixed trains, basically left out of the 1923 Grouping (as I understand it),  etc. etc.

 

Very good write up of the layout for anyone interested.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Regularity]

5 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

basically left out of the 1923 Grouping (as I understand it)

The GWR politely declined overtures made to them...

[Keith Addenbrooke]

1 minute ago, Regularity said:

The GWR politely declined overtures made to them...

Nicely put!

[dave1905]

8 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

 A 'branch line' in the USA may take a couple of days or even more to travel one way.

 

Those local types are not confined to "branch lines".  I had numerous territories that operated tri-weekly locals and were bona fide "main lines" (two main track, CTC, passenger trains, heavy freight).  But the amount of local switching was small enough that it didn't warrant switching everything every day, but was too much with the overhead traffic that the train couldn't make a turn  (out and back) in 12  hours.

 

The local type was chosen based on the amount of work and the time it took to do it.  Plus there were other labor agreements that entered into it.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 26/11/2020 at 10:45, Joseph_Pestell said:

Found it! Operating session at the Jayville Terminal RR - YouTube.

 

While looking, I found lots of similar switching operations by putting "HO switching layout" into the YouTube asearch function.

I had a watch of this last night.  Having also watched the Switching video suggested by @long island jack on ‘SoCal Scale Models’ with its DCC Sound, I found the background music a bit of a distraction on this one - but that’s really an advert for DCC sound - not a criticism: the Jayville Terminal is a very nice layout.

 

(I did wonder where they got the HO Scale drone to film the video?)

 

In terms of track planning, urban Industrial Switching Layouts seem to get away with far more straight track and parallel sidings (wherever possible), compared to all the efforts we go to introduce gentle curves into UK branch line designs, reflecting the US grid approach to town planning.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke