2996 Victor

So I'm not entirely convinced that my track layout meets with general approval? Even with my suggested improvement with two separate running lines and a link between? I'm working on a revised version of the drawing appended above, but the lack of a (working!) home scanner is a slight issue when it comes to posting images..... I do wonder if perhaps I'm thinking too big/too specific, although I happen to think the general premise offers good operational potential. I would value thoughts..... Best regards, Mark

This afternoon, I took a few photographs of the formation of the ALR where it once crossed the A61 to the north of Clay Cross by means of the famous Pirelli Bridge. The embankment and brick bridge abutment to the west of the road are still intact, as can be seen, although the brickwork is deteriorating. An upended sleeper stands just to the north of the abutment. Sadly, the entire formation to the east of the A61 has been removed, and no trace of it can be seen from the road. And a period photo culled from the internet showing the bridge in all its glory, viewed from the Clay Cross side looking northward: Cheers for now. Mark

Thanks for that - I've tried to introduce inspiration from prototypical references into what is most definitely a fiction, for instance a hint of Whittaker in the spurs (although at Whittaker they fan out rather than being parallel). However, I think in my haste I've overlooked one aspect, which is the likelihood of the G&ERRR and the C&O sharing a section of running line. In the UK, the industrial and common carrier lines would usually be parallel with a (trailing) cross-over connection. I think in the US, the obsession with trailing cross-overs is not so prevalent, but nonetheless I suspect there'd be complete separation of running lines with a connecting link for interchange of stock. Thoughts, please! Cheers, Mark

It's been quite a while since I posted anything here, but the focus of my attention has been directed toward my West Virginia logging project based on the Greenbrier & Elk River Rail Road. But, wonder of wonders, the baseboards for the Ashover project have at long last been ordered! They're a special order from Grainge & Hodder, whose modular, laser-cut baseboards I found on eBay: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Model-Railway-Baseboards-Precision-Engineered-Modular-Laser-Cut-Base-Boards/382254203301?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649. G&H have extremely helpful accommodating my requirements, and I'm looking forward reporting on the assembly of the baseboards when they arrive. Happy days! Unfortunately, I'm still stuck in a quandary over which track to use, as I want it to look as lightweight as possible. If only Peco did their OO9 "main-line" track with code 55 rail..... Onward and upward! Mark

All good questions! Space available: the maximum is determined by my lounge - 25' x 12', although I expect it will be slightly less than that with the scenic area somewhere in the region of 15' x 2'6", although the final dimensions will depend on an accurate plan; Track: I haven't decided yet whether to use MicroEngineering track or to build my own - I want something that looks relatively lightweight; Minimum turnouts: #6 will be the minimum; Minimum radius: 24" I've decided that in the case of this project, I'm going to be constrained by squeezing the layout into a pre-determined space. Rather, I'm going to see how big it is and build the boards accordingly. Of course, I shall keep a close watch on its size, as I don't want it to be like Topsy! Cheers, Mark

So, at long last, here is the proposed track layout for my G&ERRR project: I'm looking on this as the semi-finished draft! In other words, it's not yet written in stone so of course I'll be interested in any thoughts and comments about the layout. To give some more detail, there are effectively two through lines, one belonging to the G&ERRR of course, and one belonging to the Chesapeake & Ohio, with interchange of lumber products and stores taking place. Looking at these lines, the C&O runs on the level from left back to right back, where the line effectively just disappears into the landscape. The G&ERRR runs at a down-grade from front left, where the logging camps are situated, to front right alongside the river which is the road to the lumber mill. Felled trees are transported from the logging camps to the mill for processing, and board lumber, woodchips and pulp etc are brought back to the interchange yard where the C&O lifts the finished products and transports them out onto the main rail network. There is a small locomotive facility with a shed - probably open-sided - and a coaling bank and water tower. The spur at front is a sort of dumping ground for allsorts, what we'd call a mileage siding in the UK. The plan is obviously not to scale, but I'd envisage the shortest spur in the fan to be capable of holding five 40' flats, which should hopefully give a sense of proportion. Anyway, there it is! (Awaits flak!!!) Cheers for now, Mark

Prof: thanks for the info and links. I was looking at a nice copy of the Shays book last month, but ran out of budget! The Cass Collection sounds very useful, especially Vol.2. Dave: that's very kind of you - I'm definitely interested! I'll send you a PM, if that's okay? Cheers, Mark

Max: I've just noticed you're in Somerset - small world!

Max: superb modelling isn't it? That's what I shall aspire to emulate when I build my Barnhart (the one that I haven't bought yet.....). Prof: excellent idea - a Keystone Locomotive Works model on a siding ostensibly awaiting attention would make a nice cameo scene. I think I've arrived at a more-or-less finalised layout, which includes a spur that, in the UK, would known as a "mileage siding" - effectively a dumping ground for equipment in need of repair or ultimately, scrapping. I'll try to scan the plan at work tomorrow, and then post here for general ridicule/amusement/constructive criticism Watch this space! (Or not!) Mark

Dear Prof, many thanks for your answers! Good to know the Keystone Barnhart is a good representation.....do tell about the issue of its weight when atop a flat car! I wouldn't mind scratch-building one, to be honest, but will see how I'm fixed for time as things progress. I'll see if I can hunt down the article(s) you mentioned. I think that, from what you and Regularity have said vis-a-vis the Kadees, I'll give them a go and see how I get on. There seem to be at least a couple of UK model shops that stock them, so if for any reason it should prove an abortive experiment (and I can't see why it should), at least it won't have been an expensive blind alley! Onward and upward! Cheers, Mark

Many thanks for that! I'm not sure that I have entirely made my decision regarding couplers but, even though I'm new to US-outline modelling, Kadee is a name I'm familiar with. I know they're well-thought-of, but its always good to hear the opinions of others. Cheers, Mark

Does anyone have any experience of and thoughts/comments on the Keystone Locomotive Works Barnhart Loader kit?

Hi, thanks for your reply and apologies for not responding sooner. I expect to do quite a lot of switching, and the current draft of the track layout has a fan of three spurs for that purpose. So I'll want remote, hands-off (as far as possible!) uncoupling. Obviously, shuffling back-and-forth to get a delayed action coupler to uncouple isn't ideal, but it really amounts to just how much is involved before it starts to look ridiculously unprototypical - admittedly, something that's pretty much unquantifiable at this stage. I'm happy to spot magnets under the track at suitable locations. The Sergent couplers certainly look good. However, as I'm looking for a scale-ish appearance with hands-off operation, unless I'm missing something I think that one of Kadee's magnetic delayed-action coupler might be better-suited for my purposes. #5 or #58? Might I experience issues with bogie rolling stock? And are the "whisker" self-centring versions worthwhile? Any further thoughts would be appreciated! Cheers, Mark

Question: Which sort of couplers should I go for. I want reliability and as near a scale appearance as possible. Recommendations, please!

Here are a few of my stock of kits and bits: All of these came from Kingston's Models and Toys in Taunton, sadly long-since defunct, and from JC's original shop on The Bridge which he left a good twenty years ago. If memory serves, they were bought between 25 and 30 years ago. The Cooper alternative van ends were faded like that when I bought them, so who knows how old they actually are, while the relative prices of the van and opens, bottom-left, is indicative of the rampant inflation in the late 80s/early 90s!!! Cheers, Mark

Dear Prof, once again, many thanks for your thoughts, comments and pointers - they are greatly appreciated! As regards the underframing, I think I may try one of each, so-to-speak, to see how obvious is the difference, and also to see how much time it takes to "retro-modify" a single car. But unfortunately, modelling time will be a bit limited over the next few weeks as I'm tinkering with vintage MG gearboxes! By the way, I have watched the Cass/Mower video, but only once so far. I definitely need to watch it again, making notes on the most pertinent parts, and then watch again paying particular attention to them! Hopefully, before too long, I'll be able to post some photos of my efforts! Best regards, Mark

Hi Prof, many thanks for your message! I think you've hit the nail on the head, so-to-speak, as I've definitely been tying myself in knots over the whole "correct-looking flat car" issue! So much so, that I've considered giving up the whole concept (well, perhaps not quite, but if I had any hair I'd have been pulling it out ). Which is all a bit silly, really, considering that this is hobby and it's supposed to be enjoyable! I think this has shown me why I've done so little modelling over the last few years - I've been too busy looking at minute details and saying to myself, "That's not right!". So I think perhaps a vote of thanks is in order for introducing a little perspective! I was going to assemble one of my Tichy flats "as-is" to see how it looked, and perhaps finish in it C&O livery. While I think it would in all truth be impossible to determine wood grain in the structural components of an HO-scale wooden car, its more the structure itself of the car that belies it's method of construction, and as such I was also wondering whether it would be feasible to replace the kit's steel underframe detailing with something more "wood-like". But we'll see how that goes when the time comes.....in the meantime, I'll follow your advice and build one "from the box" and give it a coat of box-car red (red oxide?). In the meantime, I understand what you mean about allowing your eyes to do the comparing. Your logging cars definitely look the part - I particularly like the one with the woodchips! Can I ask which of Tichy's models they are, as they look like they would have 12 stake pockets if all were installed. Are they #4021s? They certainly pass muster! May I ask, what did you use to add the "rails" for the loading crane? The kits I've got are #4040s, which are low-sided gons that can be built as flats, and have ten stake pockets (although extras are included in the kits). I got those as they had an earlier build date. I think on reflection that I need to get some #4021s though. Thanks again! Time to get busy..... Best regards, Mark

So I e-mailed JV Models, and their car kits are generic rather than models of a specific prototypes.

Those precious shots of G&ERRR flats being loaded: The first shows the Company name clearly, in the second and third it's more difficult to discern, but it's visible. The cars were presumably an off-the-shelf design, but finding suitable representations in HO scale is proving troublesome. Yes, I could scratch-build, but quite frankly, I don't have the time. Edit: Information that has come to light more recently suggests that the cars were the American Car & Foundry 40' design. Among the information referred to in Post #53 are some splendid and invaluable drawings of a batch of GC&E flat cars to an AC&F design, but with wooden-plank queenposts, which had been bought second-hand from the United States Navy in 1918. However, the cars in the photographs above, which being lettered for the Greenbrier & Elk River Rail Road are earlier, have what looks like steel queenposts. Interesting!

So, has anyone had any experience of JV Models kits? Web address: http://www.jvmodels.biz. They do a 40' truss rod flat car that might suit my needs, item #9205.

Having studied the photos more, the G&ERRR flat cars are (or all appear to be) wooden-framed, which is not really surprising as the photographs date from 1910-1920, and they have twelve stake pockets along their sills. I may of course be able to adapt my Tichy 40' flat cars, which are a USRA steel-framed design, but ideally I'd prefer to find a 40' wooden-framed flat car in kit form!

My copy of "On Beyond Leatherbark: The Cass Saga" by Roy B Clarkson has arrived at last, as recommended by Prof Klyzlr in one of the above posts. Although I've not yet had an opportunity to delve too deeply, there would seem to be a wealth of information to be gleaned. Being, I suppose, a bit greedy, I was rather hoping for a few more photos to depict the actual railroad and its rolling stock. There are quite a few photographs with trains of flat cars, which show useful detail, but invariably the locomotive is the focus of the picture. However, there are several which are good detail pictures of staked flats, one of which is a gem: a flat car being loaded which shows in remarkable clarity the company name and running number stencilled on the sill I just need to find a model which is tolerably close (hopefully my Tichy 40-footers will do!). On which point, can I say "thanks" again, Talltim, for the additional pointers. I've had a look at the Funaro & Camarlengo, Westerfield and Owl Mountain sites, but I'll need to go back and study them more closely! Unfortunately, I haven't yet got my head around the Series numbers, so it's a bit confusing..... Cheers, Mark

Hi, Many thanks for your message! Being new to US-outline model railroads, the gap in availability of rolling stock for the period around 1910 was my reason for migrating my era to around 1920 (for the time being, at least - ideally, I'll revert to 1910 in due course). The Tichy Train Group USRA flats and box cars from the late WW1 era are a case in point. So, many thanks for the pointers to other suppliers. Some of the later items from Bitter Creek, for instance, would have survived into the 1910s, and maybe to 1920 or so, and I'll be getting a few of those as they'll be of use for both time frames. I've got their 1890s box car on order as it looks to be a fairly suitable match for the boxcar in the photo above, which would probably have been a second-hand piece of former mainline stock for the GC&ER. Any other suggestions would be gratefully received! Cheers, Mark

James, not off topic at all! You make excellent points - it's such a shame that the WD wagons weren't produced with a little more thought - they look like they have great potential, apart from being significantly under width, that is! As I mentioned (somewhere) above, I've seen some 3D printed rolling stock that looks absolutely superb, which is why I had a bit on "Oh!" moment when these arrived. I've had a quick look at your link - it's most interesting, I must say. I'll be back, to coin a phrase! Thanks for your compliment, as well - hopefully it won't be too long before I make some tangible progress Cheers, Mark