Gulf, Atlanta & Eastern - into the second decade

[Barry Ten]

Have you got a dremmel? (other makes are available!)

With a carborundum cutting disc, you wouldn't need so much pressure....

Mind you, the ensuing smell of burning plastic can be pretty awful

 

Cheers again

 

Yeah, I should have said cutting disk in the post above but obviously there are limits to how small a cut you

can do with a Dremel type tool.

[Barry Ten]

Number 11, the Southern's only RS-11, works the steep siding down to Woods:

 

 

 

A quiet moment near the switch off the mainline.

 

 

A driver picks up a ticket as the RS-11 passes through on its way to its next duty.

 

 

This is an Atlas model which I've only just got around to weathering. Perhaps more than some other liveries, the black and white scheme can look a little toylike unless toned down. If you look through the books the Southern obviously took pains to keep its diesels clean, but a light dusting of road dirt seems inevitable.

[trisonic]

Very nice work, Al.

The only thing I would suggest is more roadside grot!!!!

 

I'm thinking of trying a modern n gauge, North East , CSX/NS layout due to your thread.....

 

All the best, Pete.

Edited December 9, 2012 by trisonic

[Adrian Wintle]

Very nice work, Al.

The only thing I would suggest is more roadside grot!!!!

 

I'm thinking of trying a modern n gauge, North East , CSX/NS layout due to your thread.....

 

All the best, Pete.

 

There are a fair number of good CSX and NS locos available RTR. Modern rolling stock availabilty is a bit more variable.

 

Adrian

[Barry Ten]

I've found progress to be very slow this year, partly because of distraction by other projects, but also indecision ... it's easy in the early stages of a layout to just push ahead, especially when you're starting out without a detailed plan and you seem to have plenty of room at your disposal. Later on, though, as the layout begins to fill out its available space, the options for future development start to narrow down and each decision then becomes more critical.

 

To be honest I made a rod for my own back by including a locomotive servicing terminal, since these facilities take up a lot of space. At the time when I purchased the turntable and roundhouse kits, though, I felt that I probably wouldn't get a chance to do an equivalent scene in any other scale, so it was now or never. The problem was that, having found a space for the terminal (not too hard) I then came to the belated realisation that such a facility would be unlikely to be located anywhere other than in close proximity for a yard ... and I hadn't allowed for one. Much scribbling and rejection of plans followed, with a life-size template of the terminal being moved around from area to area. In the end, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I settled on the idea of the yard being on the detachable peninsula, rather than parallel to the running lines as it would be in real life. It's far from ideal, as the yard is only accessed from one end, and trains can only depart heading east, back to the storage yard. It also won't be big enough to handle the longest trains that run on the mainline.

 

None of that is a dealbreaker, though. The addition of a reversing loop at one of the ends of the dog bone - for which there is plenty of room - will allow trains going in either direction to enter and leave the yard facing the right way, making it functionally equivalent to a proper double-ended yard even if it isn't. If the longer trains run right through on the mainline, the yard can still handle the shorter freights which will do all the switching work anyway.

 

The other complication is that, in addition to the yard, the peninsula must also accommodate a high-level spur running off the branch, which in my plan will eventually service a couple of light industries. The problem with the spur was twofold. First, although I laid the track several months ago, I found I couldn't live with the curvature off the branch:

 

 

The problem was not so much the tight radius, although it was tight, as the difficulty in maintaining consistent curvature. I tried various fixes including laying the curve using Atlas Code 55 set-track, but then I ran into a second problem, which was getting a smooth transition between the Atlas and Peco track at the branch turnout.

 

In the end, though, I bit the bullet and relaid the entire peninsula spur at a considerably shallower curve, although (typically) it's hard to convey this fairly subtle change in a photograph:

 

 

Why didn't I just do this originally? For a start, it involved ripping up and redoing some roadways. It also took the track closer to the left-side of the peninsula than I'd originally thought wise but now that I've done it, it isn't the problem I imagined. As I said, it's not a dramatic change but it no longer offends my eye as looking incongruously sharp compared to the gentle curves elsewhere. As a bonus, there's now a lovely, gentle reverse curve as the spur straightens out.

 

However, as late as last week as I have second-second thoughts, as it were. Perhaps the high-level spur was a bad idea, cramming in a track too far? It created a visual separation between the servicing terminal and the yard, whereas as I'd have liked them to be one entity, with more than one access track between them. Now there is only a single lead feeding both the yard and the terminal, so movements will be restricted.

 

On the other hand, I told myself, the high-level spur looks cool, curving around over the main, and the addition of a couple more industries will offer a great deal more play value. This area is supposed to be more urban so it can legitimately be more "busy". Also, I liked the way the mainline was forced to dive into a short tunnel, breaking up the visual impression of trains and making them look longer. The conflict between the loco terminal and the yard isn't a big deal, either, since 99% of the time I doubt anyone will be operating the layout but me. It would have been nice to have another lead into the terminal but functionally it works.

 

So - after yet more indecision - the high-level spur remains. And with that decision "ticked", I can move onto developing the scenery, both of the peninsular (or rather the stump of it attached to the main layout) and the city scene behind the running lines and over the storage tracks:

 

Here's a shot of where the mainline dives underground (kind of a cut and cover deal, I think) and with the turnout for the branch spur just ahead of the RS-3. The control panel for the storage yard is here - it was a temporary job done in white board markers, until I did a "posh" one but it's still there three years later.

 

 

Wider view of the same area. I hope no one is offended by the "Jesus Saves" sign but it seemed to help emphasize the deep south feel I was going for.

 

 

Thought this shot was fun because it shows the juxtaposition of the S&D "winter module" right over the N scale layout. I have had to be careful doing the snow on the high module because I don't want it snowing in Georgia. (It does snow there, though!)

 

 

That's it for now, hope this was of interest and offers an insight into some of the less straightforward decisions you end up taking when you build a layout on the fly. On one level I would love to be able to press the reset button and go back to a clean drawing board, so I could think about yards and terminals with no prior constraints, but on the other, I've got a really good appreciation now for how long it takes to build an N scale layout and I'm in no rush to do it all again! For the future, though, there's plenty to keep me happy even though I'm under no illusions that this is a realistic slice of American railroading, just a kind of impressionist exercise with a bit of play value.

[trisonic]

Al,

Very interesting - I like the way you have depicted your rationale! My experience of the real thing over here is that there is a prototype to everything so I wouldn't worry too much.

 

I have driven from Charlotte to Atlanta in showers of snow, fairly rare but a better proposition than the dreaded southern "Ice Storms" - which are truly awful to be in (precip falls as super-cooled liquid then instantly turns to ice on whatever it hits).

 

Best, Pete.

[Barry Ten]

I took this snap to check the alignment of the bridge piers as the glue set - it's really hard to see whether they're vertical and parallel by eye alone. I tweaked the right pier after looking at the picture and will have another look later today before the glue totally sets. I've also done some more ballasting and scenic work on the branch.

 

 

One annoyance which may be a blessing in disguise is that I've run out of the correct shade of blue card I've been using for the sky backing. I thought I had enough but of course the layout has grown a bit since my original plans. I kept back a small piece for comparison purposes but none of my local art supply stockists now have the right shade of blue. This may be a good thing though is that I've been thinking about adding a couple of inches to the sky for some while now, and this could be the push I need to redo the whole backscene. I have a huge roll of Pendon sky which should do the whole layout, and it won't take long to repaint the distant hills and so on.

 

[Barry Ten]

One drawback of a double-deck shelf layout is that you can't easily take low-angle shots without the upper level intruding into the view ... here I've cheated a bit by Photoshopping in a sky, but I hope that the increased height backscene will improve things a bit. I'll never get close to this kind of shot but it should be slightly more forgiving with low-angle views.

 

 

 

[Supaned]

I really like that low-angle shot - if you aged the photo to look like a 50s/60s transparency (like you see in Trains magazine) and put in some trademark ALCO clag it'd look pretty much like the real thing.

[TT3]

Have to say this is a great layout for a couple of selfish reasons. Firstly, I am also trying to fit in a n scale layout into a similar space.  Mine proposed N layout is my first venture back into N since 1986 and is US prototype. I am or will be  modelling PRR coal so slightly different than the Southern.

 

However the 2 deck nature of the layout is of most interest. I figured the only way to get the TT layout and N scale one in the room is double deck so was happy to find somone else doing it. 

[Barry Ten]

However the 2 deck nature of the layout is of most interest. I figured the only way to get the TT layout and N scale one in the room is double deck so was happy to find somone else doing it. 

 

Have you started construction? One thing I'd do differently now is not use brackets fixed directly to the wall, but instead use those bracket rail systems. The main reason is that to support a decent width of layout, the brackets need to be quite sturdy, so the longer ones tend to have diagonal bracing which can be a pain when you are working on two levels.

[trisonic]

Ai,

To further my long term plans for a modern N layout Trainworld are advertising GE ES 44AC by Kato in CSX for $70.00. DCC ready. I once had a Kato NW2 in HO and was never able to get the body off!

You had any experience with Kato locomotives in N?

 

I'm also looking into ME code 55 track.

 

Cheers, Pete.

[TT3]

Still in the planning stage as I have to wait for a house move to actually begin building but the planning has been a bit intensive. Only recently decided to go with multiple decks as I will not have access to a 20 x 30 foot garden shed for a while.

 

I will use those bookshelf rails, I actually used them as intended in the living room and office as was surprised at the stength of them and the width between shelves even with the brackets.

 

The current plan is looking interesting, have been reading abit more about prototype operations thanks to kalmbach and Father Christmas. Current idea is from highest to lowest

 

Deck 2 coal branch on the top deck around all 4 walls with central penninsular but mostly only 8 inches wide joined by heilx in the built in wardrobe to deck 1B

 

Deck 1B exchange yard for coal trains and the 'main line' - similiar to your current plan with a depo to give the trains somewhere to run off the branch - wider to 2'6" max at the curved ends around 3 walls

 

Deck 1a oval roundy S&D TT layout based on Shillingstone - one side of the Deck 2 Penninsular is the fiddle yeard other is a handy workbench - around 12" wide for station with removable end loop to get in the door. 2 walls and penninsular

 

Deck 1c - well more just a lower staging sidings level deck 1c

 

Doing it this was should mean no more than 2 decks on any one wall.

[Barry Ten]

Ai,

To further my long term plans for a modern N layout Trainworld are advertising GE ES 44AC by Kato in CSX for $70.00. DCC ready. I once had a Kato NW2 in HO and was never able to get the body off!

You had any experience with Kato locomotives in N?

 

I'm also looking into ME code 55 track.

 

Cheers, Pete.

 

Hi Pete - I have a good few Kato diesels and they all run superbly. I've only (so far) managed to put a decoder into the E8, though. That was a relatively simple job and the body comes off easily. The installation involves removing a few clip-on bits, wrapping some supplied Kapton insulating tape around some pickups, and reassembling with the new decoder board in place. Bish, bash, bosh - job done.

 

if only the next one had gone as smoothly. I ran into problems with the Amtrak P42, despite the design being virtually identical to the E8. I could not get the decoder pads to make good contact with the pickups, so (rashly) attempted to make a soldered connection. All seemed well but after a few minutes the loco stopped responding with lights on - a classic sign of a short somewhere. I don't think I did enough damage to ruin the decoder or the loco but I thought the best thing at that point was to de-solder and send the whole sorry lot to Digitrains. They've been pretty good at sorting out my botches in the past. While I was at it I sent all my other Kato locos since I am clearly clueless when it comes to decoder installation.They still have that batch so I am keeping my fingers crossed about the P42.

 

That's been my only real gripe with N, to be honest, other than inconsistent coupler implementations. Even the drop-in decoder installations are a fiddle, since you have to loosen the two chassis halves, and then reassemble while keeping about half a dozen bits (motor, gears etc) in perfect alignment. And of course a lot of stuff out there is still not "decoder ready" by any measure.

 

But if you are modelling anything other than a short line, at some point you'll want to run consists and DCC is obviously the way to go for speed matching, controlling lights etc. The Kato stuff runs very well on DC, though - superbly silent and smooth.

[Barry Ten]

Sounds like a great plan, TT3! I am very happy that I decided to squeeze another layout into the same room, even though the 4mm one was originally just going to be an L-shaped test track with minimal scenery - ha!

[TT3]

I tried to draw it all up to post but had to give up as it was getting way too complicated and didnt want to hijack your topic. Goint to be alot of trial and error to get it right as there are so many details to work out but, If it works it will be great.

 

Aim to have multipe operating modes for 1 and 2 man operation (if I find any friends) so can do a point to point mine run, end to end mine to yard and back to mine - mine - yard then switching for a mainline freight, and a potential great mine terminus return run of almost 100 feet. Also using an NCE powercab, a great side benefit is I can take it to a mates HO layout and use it there as an extra cab.

 

TT is less exciting to run in a standard tail chaser but the running and shunting standard of Triang based mechanisms is best suited for the simple. But I am also planning on making the TT layout portable for exhibitions so that will make the benchwork a real challenge for the lower level.

 

BTW you wouldnt be interested in a Bachmann Southern heavy mountain with digitrax DCC? I bought it for the chassis to build a PRR M1A but the paintwork it is too nice to cut up.

Edited December 28, 2012 by TT3

[trisonic]

Thanks, Al - Vital to have consists. I want to take advantage of the smaller scale to run longer inter Modals. They will be passing through, the main thrust of my plan will centre on the real life interchange between NS and a a New Jersey shortline.  

I understand that there is a DCC "guru" at my local store, The Model Railroad Shop of Piscataway.

 

Best, Pete.

[Barry Ten]

 

BTW you wouldnt be interested in a Bachmann Southern heavy mountain with digitrax DCC? I bought it for the chassis to build a PRR M1A but the paintwork it is too nice to cut up.

 

In N? That'll be the light mountain, just to be pedantic :-)

 

But yes, drop me a PM with details? They are useful engines and I only have one Southern example.

[TT3]

In N? That'll be the light mountain, just to be pedantic :-)

 

But yes, drop me a PM with details? They are useful engines and I only have one Southern example.

 

PM sent and yes it would be a light mountain, it would be an early Bachmann one but runs well enough an it will be a while before I start cutting up all the Trix K4s.

[Barry Ten]

PM sent and yes it would be a light mountain, it would be an early Bachmann one but runs well enough an it will be a while before I start cutting up all the Trix K4s.

 

I do love the Pennsy stuff, I guess the grass is always greener etc. It's that Tuscan red, I think - looks great.

 

There used to be a kit to convert the Kato USRA Mike into a Southern prototype but it's seemingly very scarce - not to mention that the Kato Mikes are not

DCC friendly (or easy to get hold of). I'm not sure I'd have the nerve to go cutting up a good model, though.

[Barry Ten]

I popped into a rainy Pontypridd this morning and stocked up on enough blue card to redo the entire backdrop - and still have a lot left over for unforeseen changes of plan. A few hours work saw all the removable scenic modules taken off and the sky increased in height by 2" all around the layout. Why didn't I make the sky as high as possible to begin with, you might wonder? The problem was the brackets supporting Shillingstone, which by nature of their design flare out from the wall the higher they get. I ran the MDF sky backing up as high as it could go without beginning to be distorted by the brackets, but that was still a bit lower than desirable. I felt I could live with it at the time but it is one of those things that has begun to bug me over the years, since it strongly limits camera angles. I find that the eye is very happy to "edit out" extraneous details but the camera is much more unforgiving.

 

To get the increased height, I've fixed new card onto the old all the way around, but with an additional 2" on top which is effectively unsupported. Obviously it is fragile but in a home layout environment, where it isn't going to be moved around or poked, I don't anticipate that being a major problem, and I know from 4 years experience that the card is stable enough to hold its rigidity well. The new card is a bit bluer than the old, but at least it's a consistent shade all around the layout. The sheets I've used this time are also longer, so fewer joins, and since the foreground scenery is mostly done, I've been able to decide the best places to put those joins, rather than having to work around them.

 

Just before my camera ran out of battery, I grabbed a shot to show the kind of low-angle view that is now possible:

 

 

Still not as much sky as in the Photoshopped example, but better than what I had before. Now all I have to do is repaint the background hills in a few areas but I was not entirely happy with the original treatment anyway, so I don't really mind redoing that.

Edited December 29, 2012 by Barry Ten

[trisonic]

Al, That's the Atlas c55 track right there? Looks pretty good once ballasted...

 

Best, Pete.

[Barry Ten]

Al, That's the Atlas c55 track right there? Looks pretty good once ballasted...

 

Best, Pete.

 

Hi Pete - no, Peco code 55 throughout except for a bit of Atlas code 80 in the hidden turnback loops.

[trisonic]

Al,

 

The reason I asked is that I couldn't believe it was Peco - it looks rather good!

 

Can you see the extra depth of rail from the side and be extra careful when ballasting?

 

Best, Pete.

[Barry Ten]

Al,

 

The reason I asked is that I couldn't believe it was Peco - it looks rather good!

 

Can you see the extra depth of rail from the side and be extra careful when ballasting?

 

Best, Pete.

 

Pete -  I do ballast quite deeply but a lot of the final effect is dependent on lighting and camera angle as much as anything else. Sometimes the rail height is more obvious than at other times. For me the trade-off is acceptable - the Peco is easy to obtain, easy to work with, everything runs through it and most of the time it doesn't look too chunky. The track won't ever look fully American but for me the track is only about 10% of the big picture...

 

Edited December 31, 2012 by Barry Ten