Jump to content
 

Once Upon a Time.... in the West


2ManySpams

Recommended Posts

Fifty years ago, this type of layout might well have been as common in the U.S.A. in HO scale, as the Great Western branch line terminus was in the U.K. But, nowadays you don’t see as many layouts featuring the time period of the rapidly developing railway networks of North America and very few of them are on this side of the Atlantic. So that’s how the project began, or did it?

I imagine that 50 years ago, (thinking 1960), the 'clichéd' American layout would feature tailchasing streamliners like the Superchief or the iconic Pennsy GG1. (I would think the GWR BLT had it's apogee around 1980.) I don't think the old west has been modelled that much - other than narrow gauge mining layouts in the Rockies which are approaching the GWR BLT in their ubiquity.

 

Curiously Bachmann recently released a series of 'modern' American 4-4-0s suitable for the first part of the 20th century - as built by Baldwin and Richmond.

 

There are occasionally magazine stories about modelling this period. The Yosemite Valley Railroad is often used as an archetype of the period. Also in California is the Railtown 1897 State Park, home to a lot of movie filming over the years.

 

The ATSF had very distinctive architecture in New Mexico which was very Spanish in heritage (as opposed to the wooden depot common to Westerns) but I imagine you've done your homework and something like this would fit the bill nicely.

 

Good luck with your project. It sounds like fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

 

The ATSF had very distinctive architecture in New Mexico which was very Spanish in heritage (as opposed to the wooden depot common to Westerns) but I imagine you've done your homework and something like this would fit the bill nicely.

 

Good luck with your project. It sounds like fun.

 

Funny you should say that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Initial thoughts were that there was far more scrub and ground cover in the photos than we expected. I think we all had a mental picture of wide expanses of sand and cactii :lol:

 

Something else to blame on those spahetti westerns. :D

Where you do find the Saguaro (the tall catus with arms) there is usually also a lot of very spiny scrub. It is the case in southern Arizona. The ATSF mainline travels through northern Arizona via Flagstaff. Northern Arizona is surprisingly lovely in the spring when the wildflowers bloom. Arizona is comprised of two very different climates - a high altitude climate in the north, and the Sonoran Desert (with the Saguaro) in the south.

 

The classic westerns directed by John Ford feature the mesas of Monument Valley, which I believe is on the border between northern Arizona and southern Utah.

 

It's easy to think of "the West" as a homogenous place but the latitudes vary from approximately Belgium to Tunisia and cover a comparable range of climates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yes I'd agree with the climate / topography / vegitation comments. Once you get your head around how big our chosen area of New Mexico is, it's the variety of the scenes that grabs you. Looking around the 'local' area on Streetview gives some idea but I'd love to visit. I suspect altitude plays a big part in the variety of climates too. Unfotunately there's only so much you can 'see' remotely from a tiny island on the other side of a big pond.

 

Closest i've been was an arc from Las Vegas to Bodie to Yosemite to San Fransisco - none of which are that close! But driving that way gives an insight to some very interesting countryside.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you get your head around how big our chosen area of New Mexico is, it's the variety of the scenes that grabs you. I suspect altitude plays a big part in the variety of climates too. Unfotunately there's only so much you can 'see' remotely from a tiny island on the other side of a big pond.

I understand the problem well, it's similarly challenging modelling the UK from here. New Mexico is far away even for me. Other than an unscheduled landing in Albuquerque I've never been there.

 

It's hard to get a sense from maps of how high up much of 'the West' really is. The Grant County Airport close to your chosen location of Whitewater, NM has an elevation of 5,446' (1,659.9m) so it's in the range of other 'mile high' locations like Denver. Altitude will definitely be a factor in the climate. I was in the Denver area a couple of weeks ago and despite staying well hydrated, the altitude really got to me on that trip.

 

There's lots of nice pictures from the nearby Gila National Monument online. More relevant is probably the even closer City of Rocks State Park. There are lots of online pictures of interesting rock formations.

 

Santa Fe, NM is much higher at 7,260'. Santa Fe has the distinction of being the highest in elevation, and oldest settled but still occupied, state capital city in the US.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi, folks............of course, if a Sergio Leone-inspired railway is the objective, then the products of the likes of Electrotren would be more suitable than any B/mann items..eh?

 

That 0-6-0 with its 4 wheeled tender is a spit for a Bourbonaise?

 

Being a long-time reader of NG&SL Gazette, pre-tinternet....one of the most frequent observations by authors of articles concerning the US past, is that the 'scenery'...especially vegetation, that surrounded many railroad subjects has changed dramatically from when pictures were taken...or prior to the arrival of the railroads.

 

In the space of a very short time, whole areas surrounding places like mines, and other,newly sprung-up industrial sites, would be denuded of trees, ie de-forestation, as local supplies of timber were rapidly used up for building purposes, etc.

 

These sites today [long abandoned, most of them] look very different , from a vegetation viewpoint, to the turn of the century.

 

An example of this hit me when reading about the Georgetown Loop...then and now....

 

 

The era I have for a long time aimed for with my US modelling has been around WW1...and somewhere in the west-south-west....not far from Mexico....plenty of dust and wood rot, not too much rust..?

 

Would I be right in thinking, that to set the 'location' of my stock in general terms, steamers with Vanderbilt-type tenders [like those seen on the SP?] be appropriate?

 

When did oil-firing start to become popular,compared to coal? [tenders easy to convert.....]

 

Are you all really gonna embrace ''lincoln pin'' couplers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting local vegetation right in the South West is problematic depending on the elevation of the site.

If you've ever driven from Phoenix to Flagstaff you'll see what I mean. Going "up the hill" (+6,000 feet) to Flagstaff the Saguaro's soon disappear to be replaced by Ponderosa pines around Flagstaff - then head out towards Winslow and it changes again.

 

You're right about changing vista's - I live in New Jersey and it is almost impossible to match up old photos with today because of the regrowth of forest wood.

 

Best, Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the space of a very short time, whole areas surrounding places like mines, and other,newly sprung-up industrial sites, would be denuded of trees, ie de-forestation, as local supplies of timber were rapidly used up for building purposes, etc.

 

These sites today [long abandoned, most of them] look very different , from a vegetation viewpoint, to the turn of the century.

 

And that's a general comment for everywhere. I model the Eastern US in 1900 and the vegetation there in 1900 was much sparser than it is today.

 

Would I be right in thinking, that to set the 'location' of my stock in general terms, steamers with Vanderbilt-type tenders [like those seen on the SP?] be appropriate?

They started showing up on NEW engines around WW1. If you engines are new they would have Vanderbilt tenders. If they are older power, and your era is around WW1 then they would be more likely to be square tenders.

 

Are you all really gonna embrace ''lincoln pin'' couplers?

 

Its "link and pin" couplers. A single link coneects the cars and is held in place with a pin on each car. They put you back to around pre-1905 (they were banned in interchange in 1906), probably more 1880's 1890's or earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right about changing vista's - I live in New Jersey and it is almost impossible to match up old photos with today because of the regrowth of forest wood.

 

While visiting a museum in Lincoln, NE, I saw a 360 degree panoramic picture taken from the highest building in Lincoln back when it was first founded in the late 1800's. There wasn't a single tree in the picture, as far as the eye could see. Nothing but grass and prairie.

 

You can Google Lincoln today and see its covered with trees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the old west has been modelled that much - other than narrow gauge mining layouts in the Rockies which are approaching the GWR BLT in their ubiquity.

 

The majority of narrow gauge layouts aren't "old west" themed. Most of them are set in the 1930's.

 

Curiously Bachmann recently released a series of 'modern' American 4-4-0s suitable for the first part of the 20th century - as built by Baldwin and Richmond.

The prototypes were built in 1901 and the models are detailed for engines from the late 1920's to 1940's.

 

There are occasionally magazine stories about modelling this period. The Yosemite Valley Railroad is often used as an archetype of the period.

 

Jack Burgess' Yosemite Valley railroad is set in the 1930's or 1940's also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

 

Its "link and pin" couplers. A single link coneects the cars and is held in place with a pin on each car.

 

yup, I know.....read an interesting bit of tattle in NG&SL Gazette the other day on these...and the issues facing crews in the days of 'conversion'....before standardisation was totally in place...where knuckles [Janneys] were slotted and drilled to accept link & pin couplers...[try that with yer kadee?]...and the uses of 'bent' links due to vastly different coupler heights of L&P's...seems whilst the big railroads were onhte ball [in fact, initiated most of the standardisation]...the poor wee shortlines were in many cases [cost?] somewhat lagging behind...

 

not to mention that, during the change-over period, freight car ladders weren't always where they ought to be expected...'great' if working in a horizontal blizzard?

 

All smacks very much of the RTR OO world until recently?

 

[oh...even the 'gauge' issue was a gauge issue back in the US days pre-standardisation....didn't the might Pennsylvania actually use 4 foot 9 inches? And very much heavier rail than all the others....? Maybe the old Wrenn fibre track wasn't so far adrift after all?]

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of is determined by when you think the "old west" was. My definition is roughly 1870 to about 1910. The US transcontinental route wasn't completed until 1869 and by 1912 all the lower 48 states had recieved statehood.

 

If you accept those dates, there a quick and dirty way to tell if railroad equipment is "old west".

 

On engines, if the engine has an electric headlight, its a good bet its not "old west" (they weren't common until the 1900's). If you look at a freight car with ladders on the corners and they are steel, its probably not "old west". If there are horizontal grabirons on both the sides and on the ends and they line up with each other, its probably not "old west" (the law requiring that took effect in 1910). If its a boxcar and has steel ends, sides or side stakes, its probably not "old west". Those tests should be right about 80% of the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yup, I know.....read an interesting bit of tattle in NG&SL Gazette the other day on these...and the issues facing crews in the days of 'conversion'....before standardisation was totally in place...where knuckles [Janneys] were slotted and drilled to accept link & pin couplers...[try that with yer kadee?]...and the uses of 'bent' links due to vastly different coupler heights of L&P's...seems whilst the big railroads were onhte ball [in fact, initiated most of the standardisation]...the poor wee shortlines were in many cases [cost?] somewhat lagging behind...

 

Air Brakes and knuckle couplers were required in interchange service after 1906 (Power Brake Law). A narrow gauge line that didn't interchange cars would be exempt, a short line that did would be covered. So after 1906 the only standard gauge cars with link and pin couplers would be some work equipment.

 

not to mention that, during the change-over period, freight car ladders weren't always where they ought to be expected...'great' if working in a horizontal blizzard?

 

That was resolved by the Safety Appliance Act and took effect after a couple delays in 1910.

 

[oh...even the 'gauge' issue was a gauge issue back in the US days pre-standardisation....didn't the might Pennsylvania actually use 4 foot 9 inches? And very much heavier rail than all the others....? Maybe the old Wrenn fibre track wasn't so far adrift after all?]

 

4 ft 9 in is only 1/2 wider than "standard" so is negligible. The real variation in gauge was pre-civil war with everything from 2 ft to 6 ft. Many of the southern roads were 5 ft gauge. After the civil war they were all changed to standard gauge as were many of the other odd gauges. The legislation that authorized the building of the transcontinental rai line specified that it would be built to standard gauge. Trolley lines continued to have odd gauges for years. The western narrow gague lines were built on the assumption that it was cheaper to build and operate narrow gauge lines.

 

The sizes of the rails varied all over the place (still does today). Eastern roads that had a lot of heavy traffic traditionally had heavier rail. Lighter used lines had lighter rail. As the rail wore out it was replaced with heavier rail and the lighter rail was cascaded to lower capacity tracks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

We're very interested in this great information you've got - keep it coming, we've obviously a lot to learn. I'm sure John will be posting questions in the next few days. Out of interest, does anybody know about typical rail lengths in our chosen period?

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 ft was the standard until sometime in the early 1900's, then it went to 39 ft. Pre civil war rail was probably shorter still.

 

When I worked in Van Buren, AR (across the river from Ft Smith, AR), there were some old (OLD!) industrial tracks that still had some 75 lb rail in them. That would be rail from the same era as the trains in the new movie "True Grit".

 

OBTW, as far as I can determine, based on the opening sequence, the girl would have been riding the Rock Island into Ft. Smith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris - I was going to send you a link to Harold Minkwitz Pacific Coast Airline RR site that had a whole heap of stuff on modelling that area, that would be useful - but all his sites have been taken down. A friend on another forum has all the articles available as PDFs - see his post here http://www.railroad-...?TOPIC_ID=32150 and let him (or me and I'll pass it on) have an email address to get them - if you contact him direct, tell him I sent you

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

33 ft was the standard until sometime in the early 1900's, then it went to 39 ft. Pre civil war rail was probably shorter still. .

 

I believe the lengths were decided by the length of a gondala, when 40 ft became the standard freight car length the rails could be increased to 39 ft to just fit inbetween the ends of a gondola, (Gons were prefered at that time as they prevented rail loads from sliding forwards or backwards unlike a flat)

 

 

I believe it is set on a particular day in 1939, which is modelling on a very brave concept to my mind.

Well I suppose if you have a good set of photos from that day, as someone photographed it extensively on a visit, at least no-one can quibble about the accuracy as such and such was only correct until approx 1938!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the lengths were decided by the length of a gondala, when 40 ft became the standard freight car length the rails could be increased to 39 ft to just fit inbetween the ends of a gondola, (Gons were prefered at that time as they prevented rail loads from sliding forwards or backwards unlike a flat)

 

Chicken or the egg question. Were the rails 33 ft because the gons were 34 ft or were the gons 34 ft because the rails were 33 ft?

 

If the length of the gon determined the length of the rail, by the 1920's the typical length of a mill gon was 46 ft. How come the rail didn't grow to 45 ft? By the 1950's the typical length of a mill gon was 52' 6". How come rail didn't increase to 51 ft? 8-)

 

It stayed at 39 ft until about the 1980's when it was commonly shipped in 78 ft lengths and shipped on 89 ft flatcars.

 

It might have something to do with how the rolling mills were set up also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...