Greetings! I am hoping to build an HO layout in a portion of my basement. It will be free-lanced, but based in part on the old Conemaugh Division of the PRR. It will be a water-level route along the Kiskiminetas River. The room I have in the basement looks like this: For those who are interested, the door at the bottom leads to a 15' x 30' crew lounge with pool table, dart board, poker table, TV, etc. (The people I live with insist on calling it "the family room"!) As you may have noticed, the layout room itself already includes a closet and the "crew head." (And, yes, we must share space with the laundry over in the lower corner. It will be covered with floor length curtains when the train room is in use.) Two pieces of info I have available include a PRR trackplan of the Kiski Yard: and a small map of an area I find of particular interest, which includes the yard and AJ Junction: Era: I would like the setting to be summer 1957. My power includes GP7s, GP9s, SD7s and SD9s, with SW1s for the yard. The yard operated as both, local and through, receiving and dispatching yards. At it's height (in 1937), it had 23 tracks, 990 car capacity, with 2,000 cars passing through daily. It also had a small engine facility. In my layout, I wanted to include both the yard and the junction, but operations would focus on the Schenley Branch and the Main Line south (towards Conpitt). That is starting to look like a large bit of real estate (in HO terms). Industries: Schenley Distillery, several coal mines, PPG glass plant in Ford City, USS Steel (rolling mill), an oil refinery, and Wean United Foundry (since my dad worked there). I can live without the steel mill. I am interested in putting up "false walls" in the room so I can do a shelf style layout. I would like an option for contiuous running (gotta keep the kids happy), but I am really interested in switching operations (especially the yard). The "north" branch of the junction goes to Pittsburgh, as does the "west" branch of the junction. This could simply be staging for through trains (assuming I have an operating junction in place). (And I just love both of those bridges coming out of the junction!) I know I have too much in mind for a single layout, but I was wondering if anyone has come up with a satisfying way of depicting a fully-functional junction that doesn't eat up a lot of real estate? Also, can someone suggest a way for me to "boil down" the yard to a manageable size, yet still retain the "flavor" of the thing? Last bit of info for now: I would like the Main Line (PGH/Conpitt) to be double-tracked, and the branches (PGH/Oil City and Schenley Branch) to be single-tracked. However, if you think it would be operationally more interesting to skip the double-track main, I am open to that. (This will all be "dark" territory.) Being a shelf layout, the operators would always be standing in the river, if you get my drift. Questions? Please ask! Suggestions and recommendations? I have two ears, no waiting!
Wow... you have a nice space for a layout. :thumbs_up: Yes, I am jealous. :tb-biggrin: Have you considered doing a multi-level layout so you can get all the scenes you want while still keeping a "distance" between them. Also on a multi-leveled you can have one that you would be willing the kids to operate on while you use the other level for what you want with out having to worry about your kids. (Don't know if they would be a problem... just throwing the idea out there.) Do you have any ideas how you want to lay it out in the room?? With a shelf layout, you might want to consider a peninsula down the center of the room and then divide it in half with a scenic divider. Just doing a rough calculation it looks like you probably could have 2 peninsulas in the room. That's my 2 cents... hope it helps a little. Do you have some rough sketches with some different ideas of what you have come up with so far?? Cheers
I have sketched a few ideas on paper, but they are really "nothing to write home about." I have been so caught up trying to figure a way to model the junction without eating up too much space. As for CAD programs, computers and I don't get along all that well (I know what size hammer to hit it with to get it to spit out a sermon or a bible study, but that's about it). And no one would ever accuse me of being a Picasso! I think the junction would be fun during operating sessions...sending the ocassional through train past the operators, just to keep them on their toes. If absolutely necessary, I will let the junction go in order to get a decent yard. I would then concentrate on the Schenley Branch and the main line beyond the yard...just deal with locals. That would be fun as well, I think. I have really been taken with the way Hytec is building his benchwork: http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?t=93903 A second deck would be nice, but I don't want to deal with a helix, plus there is only so much "spreading around" money (don't we all know that song!). But I was thinking I would use the brackets like Hytec, then mount a second set (upside down) 18-24 inches above the layout to hide whatever lighting I use. A shadowbox effect. I figured it would be easier to put up a couple stud walls to hang a shelf layout than to build a ton of benchwork. As for the kids: I have belonged to a model railroad club for a little over ten years now, and all three have helped run that layout during open house (they are 19, 14, and 12). No fear of "little hands" anymore. I just started to learn Xcadtrk. Perhaps I will fixate a while longer on the junction while playing with that program. If I don't go completely nuts, I might get something I can post soon. Thanks for the imput!
Well, I sat down today to do my "givens and druthers" list. Here are the givens: 1. Railroad Name: Kiskiminetas Railroad 2. Scale: HO 3. Gauge: Standard 4. Prototype: Freelanced road based on the Conemaugh Division of the Pennsylvania Railroad. 5. Era: 1957 (not sure of season yet). 6. Engine Roster: First-Generation Diesels (I already have these) GP7s (6), GP9s (6), SD7s (2), SD9s (4), and SW1s (4). 7. Room Size: Approximately 26’ x 29’. Entrance Door, Bathroom Door, Closet Door, and Laundry area cannot be blocked. Ceiling is too low for any kind of “mushroom” design. (see post 1 above for sketch of room) 8. No duckunders (I have four herniated discs in my lower back). I am working on the "druthers," a much lengthier list I'm afraid...
Well, at least you have space, but the multiple doors make the majority of the walls unusable. And that junction is going to be tough. No, I'm not saying to eliminate it. It's such a great centerpiece. But a "grand union" is hard to fit in any plan. EDIT: And here's my first rough idea: http://www.majhost.com/gallery/SpaceCaptain/Other/grandunion.jpg Your space is actually almost perfect for this configuration. No continuous run, but loop to loop to loop to loop... None of the four arms is really large enough for what I'd consider a major yard in HO, though.
Just so you know: I saw your post, Triplex. I am currently cogitating. (Perhaps you smelled the smoke...!)
Thought it might be of some use to post a ZTS map of the Kiski Yard. Unfortunately, this is dated 1984 (Conrail) and is several decades removed from my proposed layout, but it's the best representation I can find: Track assignments were as follows: 203 and 204 Mainline 237 Kiski Dump West Lead 238 and 239 Kiski Yard Lead 240 Kiski Dump East Lead 241 D A Storage 501 Kiski Yard Shop 551 Kiski Yard Clean Out 565 Kiski Yard Tail Track 631-636 Kiski Dump Tracks #1-6 638 Kiski Yard Local Track 639 Kiski Yard Old Main 643-649 Kiski Yard #3-9 In the era I am modelling (1957), there was a complete engine facility at this yard. Many of those features will have to be reintroduced and the whole thing brought down to a manageable size. But I love switching! (My favorite thing to do at the railroad club I belong to is just switch the yards.) Just some more grist for the mill!
One last bit of information...at least for now. Thought some of you might like a frame of reference for what I am trying to model. The following is a 1941 map of the Conemaugh Division of the PRR: In my revised history, the West Penn line (west-east route) would end at Blairsville instead of extending all the way to Conpitt Jct. (This would also remove the Indiana Branch from my railroad.) The Valley line (south-north route) would continue beyond Franklin into Oil City. For those of you who have made up maps of your routes, what type of program do you use? Is there a way for me to "update" this map to accurately reflect the parameters of my free-lanced road?
I saw the following track plan on Michael Hampton's Nashville & Southern RR thread (and, with his kind permission, print it here): Michael is modeling in N scale. I will be modeling in HO. Question: If this were built at the end of a penisula with a wall between the yard and the junction, how deep would this scene need to be in HO? I see some possibilities here for modeling Kiski Junction, but do not yet have the skills to manipulate this drawing myself. Comments?
Hey! I know that junction! This sounds like a great subject to model. I'm not much of a layout designer so I'm without much opinion in that regard, but I will be interested in hearing about your progress.
William - A very "rough and ready" upscaling from N to HO is to increase dimensions by about 15/8 , or just slightly less than twice. Most of the time it works - but sometimes the length of available turnouts will need further adjustment so the trackplan shown would be about 146" x 57" in HO scale
I have been rethinking the use of a helix on the layout I am trying to design. Given a double-deck format, I have imagined two benchwork configurations to consider. The first would make use of two existing walls (the "top" wall and the "right" wall in the space map I drew above in post 1) plus require the construction of three new walls from which to hang the decks. (Think of an "E" formation with the open ends pointing toward the access door at the bottom of the drawing.) It would also require me to reduce the aisle space to 30-36". This would give me a total run of 356 feet over two decks. The second design would use none of the existing walls, but would involve the construction of four "false" walls in the center of the room, again in an "E" formation, but allowing me to have a four foot aisle around the complete layout and four foot aisles between the "fingers" of the "E." This would give me a total run over two decks of 276 feet. Is an extra 80 feet worth the loss of "people space"? Plus, with a double-deck, it would seem to me you need a little more room to "back up" from a scene you are viewing to get an adequate view of the overall scene. One also must consider the time and resources required to scenic that additional 80 feet of layout. When is "big enough" big enough? Thoughts? (BTW, in case you are wondering about my rethinking the helix: It seemed to me if I did the Kiski Junction to Blairsville branch on the lower level, I could use the turnout to the Oil City branch to access the helix and use the top deck to model the Kiski Junction to Oil City branch. 'Twas just a thought...)
The following drawing would be along the lines of what I originally had in mind: It had always been my intention to build a shelf-style layout with penisula's (ala Jamie's CSX Dixie Line, which I admire a great deal). In fact, when I finished the walls in this part of the basement, I installed outlets every six feet, three feet up from the floor, assuming I would be plugging the electricals for the layout from a shelf approx. 18" up from the outlets. However, several issues that I thought I had resolved have reared their ugly heads. There are only two windows in this part of the basement (ceiling height, glass block style) and, of course, they are set into the upper wall and the wall on the right. The electrical box for the house is on the upper wall. And so on and so forth. Also, when presented two sets of hypothetical plans for the use of the space, the Bureau of Land Management (aka, "the girl of my dreams"), said she prefered an island style layout with aisles along the walls, rather than building on the walls. With access to the bathroom and other obstacles in my way, I think the island approach will serve better in my situation. (Also, as far as my carpentry skills go, it will be far easier for me to construct four "fake walls" and then hang a shelf layout than to build a ton of benchwork...the floor in this part of the basement is quite off level.) Consequently, the drawing above is a rough idea of what I am contemplating. I am looking at using 2" foam with a quarter-inch sheet of luan on each shelf. Hoping to do 2' x 4' modules (the dotted lines), although I may revise that to 2' x 8' depending on how I find the weight. Thought I would use the little "offset" in the upper left corner for a work table / dispatcher's desk. This configuration would give me three foot aisles on the left, top, and right, with four foot aisles between the three penisulas and along the bottom. Since I am planning a "diorama" style with the valence, I can easily hide the ends of the penisulas (and their approx. unprototypical 24" radius curves) with removable panels. For the most part, there would be one operator...me. However, my children are all interested in trains and I wouldn't mind being able to host 6-8 people for a genuine operating session. I had been thinking about a double-deck to incorporate all the items I originally wanted, but cost, time, and ability enter into the picture (don't they always). Since I am free-lancing anyway, I can just "rearrange" whatever industries I decide to keep! Another thing was the space a helix might take up and the potential "pinch points" it may create. I considered a no-lix, but one of the reasons I like this particular prototype is that it was a water-level route (max grade .4%) and if I ever have to relocate, I wanted "level" modules so I could tear down and rebuild in whatever space I have available. If I am not mistaken, this configuration would give me 148' of shelf space. This would give me approx. 2.4 scale miles of track, minus the yard. If I put a yard along the top or one of the sides, I could do local operations, making trains go out and back. Or I could use the continuous loop and allow the yard to operate as two yards (point-to-point) depending on which direction a train enters the yard. I am not sure I would want to use up the space available by placing two yards in it. A double-track main line would be nice (especially when just watching trains go round and round), but a single main with lapped sidings might be more interesting for operations. Considering the longest stretch on this would be about 20', my train length would probably only be 12-15 cars (plus one engine and a caboose). I am also trying to limit train length due to the space available for the yard. I also see the possibility for several "loads in, empties out" with this configuration. I know some of you with more experience may find this drawing rather "lame," but I am no artist, and certainly no track planner! That's why I'm here picking your brains! I consider planning out the benchwork FIRST as being part of the process of defining what space is available for a layout. (My father used to say "you can't put five pound of sh** in a two-pound sack"...therefore, I will allow the benchwork configuration to define the actual track planning. I need to know how big my "sack" is. Guess it's just the way my mind works.) I am also a fan of "good enough" and the KISS principle. I will make a list of the actual industries that I found to be of interest on the real Conemaugh line in another post, and perhaps you folks can help me "whittle it down to size." In the meantime, I would appreciate constructive criticism and any ideas you have to help me along with the "creative process."
I am liking this free-standing approach too. It is a good idea. The nice thing I see about it really is you aren't dealing with solid walls like in a shelf layout. You can vary the depth of your surfaces by moving the backdrop, without affecting aisle space. Of course you lose/gain depth on the opposite side, but you just adjust your scenery/industries accordingly.:thumbs_up:
Chris, just noticed you're in Adamsburg. I'm originally from Vandergrift, and also spent 12 years at a parish in Greenock (Elizabeth Township). I also belonged to the McKeesport Model Railroad Club. Ever been there for open house? I may have given an incorrect impression: As for the "false walls," they will be full stud construction from floor to ceiling, but I will use 1/4" drywall instead of 1/2" drywall to save some money. (I am also debating using 2 x 2s for the studwork instead of 2 x4s. Opinions?) Although I love Jamie's free-standing benchwork, my floor is just too "crooked" to try dealing with getting all the cross-members level.
Not yet, I just kind of got back into this hobby for the first time, if that makes sense. Ive always wanted to build a layout but didn't have the resources or room as a child. Now I have a small corner of my bedroom and steady income. I have heard the McKeesport club is a good group. Ah, well if you are building full height walls, then my idea won't work, lol. Still a fairly decent amount of real estate either way. You might have a hard time finding decent 2x2s for framing. I had a heck of a time at Lowes finding enough nice ones for the bottom legs of my benchwork. I ended up having to change my leg design to use what I could find.
Guess I might as well go for the whole shootin' match while I am in the mood to post. The following industries were on the real Conemaugh Division in 1944: As you can see, an interesting collection of industries to choose from! I am originally from Vandergrift, so I would like to include at least a representation of the four items listed here (plus a fifth: a Railway Express Office was located with the freight station). My father worked at the United Engineering & Foundry as a machinist, so that is a "must have." Of course, I need lots of coal mines. I find the dynamite plant of interest (how many of you have one on your layout?). I also would like a distillery and an oil refinery. Eljer would be nice (picture a flat car loaded down with newly crafted toilets! A joke.). The scrap yard would lend itself to a variety of hopper cars. So much to choose from, and so little space! What do you find of modeling interest in this list?
I know what you mean about the dearth of good quality dimensional lumber. Some of the stuff I have seen should have been left in the tree. Indeed, you will find a great bunch of guys at the MMRC. Tell them "the Rev" sent you. They are currently rebuilding a large portion of the layout (it is located in a 40' x 80' building owned by the club). You can check them out at www.mckeesportmodelrr.org Since I moved to Beaver, I have not been an active, dues-paying member. (I was a trustee and then the treasurer. As a "going away" present they made me an Honorary Member...no longer have a key to the building, but I can still go down when they are open to the public and run my trains. I still try to get down during the holidays to help with Open House.) They are open Tuesday and Friday evenings from about 6:00-10:00 PM. Regular members have their own key and can run trains anytime, 24/7. You really have to go check it out! (Speaking of dues, for $25 a month you can join as a full member and run trains to your heart's content! A great way to "learn the ropes" and run your stuff on a large layout the likes of which most of us can only dream about at home.)
