 |
| Moderated by: |
Page: 1 2 3   |
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Welcome to my thread showcasing the construction of my Ow5 layout in a 8m x 6m space in my shed - that's roughly 26ft x 20ft for the metrically challenged. I won't make a habit of converting numbers to imperial measurements, instead I am going to bestow superpowers upon you with these magic numbers, otherwise known as 'conversion factors': 304.8mm = 1 foot, 25.4mm = 1 inch, 1meter = 1000mm = 3.28 feet, so that you can work it out for yourselves if I don't have time to do it.
This thread will hopefully get some new material added to it reasonably often. I will try to check in with something new at least once a week but I'm not going to make any promises; my health is not the greatest and I can be very up-and-down, so progress will likely be intermittent at best. I don't mind if anyone gives me a prod, helps with motivation if I know people are interested in what I am doing.
I got clobbered in a car wreck 25 years ago, which left me with damaged nerves in my neck and upper back that cause chronic pain in those areas plus referred pain in my hands and arms. The amount of pain is directly linked to my level of physical activity, and it is also ridiculously easy to trigger a major episode lasting days just by turning my head a wee bit too far, so yeah, sucks to be me some days but things could have been much worse; at least I was able to walk away. With a bit of help I have been able to live a fairly normal life in many ways, so I count every day as a blessing. No expressions of sympathy needed, lets just get on with what keeps me sane: Model railroading and all the wonderful people to share it with.
If you care to do some 'net surfing, you will find a bit of information here and there about the South Pennsylvania Railroad - it really existed, and a lot of money was spent on construction in the 1880's before the plug was pulled. Running roughly 330km/205 miles between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, it was bankrolled by the likes of William Vanderbilt (of New York Central fame) and Andrew Carnegie (steel manufacturer in Pittsburgh) to name a few, and the intention was to break the monopoly on transport and therefore freight rates that the Pennsylvania Railroad held over the Pittsburgh area. This is a very simplified summary, but suffice to say it was one chapter in a wider turf-war going on between the NYC and the PRR around that time.
The reality is that the huge cost of construction over the Allegheny Mountains that separated the two cities eventually scared Vanderbilt off and without his money, the rest of the investors could not continue. The formation was sold to the PRR, and then in the 1930's it was sold to the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, that built the I-70 Turnpike along much of the formation.
I am imagineering an alternative reality, in which the South Penn was completed and expanded by purchasing another railroad between Pittsburgh and Lake Erie. In my case I am not doing this so I can model specific locations - I would need a much larger shed for that - but so I can bash or build locos and rolling stock that are based upon, but not identical to, New York Central equipment, plus some locos that were never part of the Central's stable of thoroughbreds but would have been right at home on the South Penn's mountainous line. My chosen era is pre-WW2. I'm not a big fan of diesels, and I love the wide variety of freight cars that existed up until this point. Fair warning to rivet-counters - keep your heart pills close by, 'cos you're likely to see things like billboard reefers alongside AAR 1937 standard steel boxcars ;-)
Paul Woods
Whangarei, New Zealand.
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here's a view of my layout shed - can't call it a room. For starters, there's a very large wood post smack-bang in the middle. Eight meters in the direction this is looking, six metres left to right. I've got a crazy plain in my head for avoiding problems with the personnel access door that is just out of view immediately to left of camera - the piece of timber between center post and wall hints at what I'm planning to do....
Second pic is taken facing more or less in the opposite direction to the first photo. You can see the black broom handle leaning against the wall beside the P.A. door, that also shows in the first photo at extreme bottom left corner.
I'm really looking forward to using up all the materials I have been accumulating for years....the shed will be so much tidier!
|
|
|
David Istvan
Registered
| Joined: | 5 Mar 2022 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 87 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Paul!
I will enjoy reading through this thread and watching the images (maybe videos, too?)
|
|
|
2foot6
Moderator
|
Hi Paul, can't wait, looking forward to seeing your thread and plenty of pics as David suggests......Peter
____________________
I aspire to inspire before I expire.
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Thank you both for your words of encouragement 
Yep, teaching myself how to shoot and edit videos at the moment. I was disappointed to discover that my super-fancy Canon camera lacks image stabilisation - almost gave myself motion-sickness  while viewing my first attempt at a walkaround of the layout room - but fortunately my cellphone has a very good suite of cameras on board and it IS stabilised.
|
|
|
Bob D
Registered
|
Paul, I feel your pain. I got rear-ended back in 1976, only eyewitness said an un-marked cop car hit me doing 90mph. Bent my 1970 Opel GT at a 90 degree angle and knocked both of us out. I felt fine for 2 days but on the 3rd day couldn't get out of bed. Still have the occasional back twinge but it's mainly gone now, after almost 50 years! When it happens I can stand in front of a mirror and see that my hips are shifted to the right or left away from my torso. Usually laying flat for several hours and even walking around the neighborhood seems to help.
Hey, if you build an around the wall layout that pole in the center can be used as a back support, something to lean on as you run trains!!! 
____________________
BobD
O-SCALE BPRC
|
|
|
Reg H
Moderator
| Joined: | 19 Oct 2014 |
| Location: | Shelton, USA |
| Posts: | 1235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Paul:
Definitely a model railroad from scratch. I envy you your space.
My health isn't what it used to be either. But that is because I am 74. I can't blame anything but some less than ideal life-style choices.
I am an amateur machinest. I am always converting between imperial and metric. My magic number is 25.4.
Reg
____________________
Reg
|
|
|
Steven B
Registered
| Joined: | 13 Aug 2015 |
| Location: | Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 570 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Wow Paul, nice space. Looks like you have some work to do. I can relate. Looking forward to seeing where you go with it.
____________________
Steven B.
Humboldt & Toiyabe Rwy
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Folks
Thank you all for your interest in my wee project. Today I spent some time marking out the positions of all the baseboards on the floor, in the process discovering that the internal dimensions of the shed are slightly smaller than what I was led to believe by the builders' plans. The difference is not enough to force me to alter the general location of the track, but plenty enough to require corrections to my structural drawings. Bollocks! 
I am creating a fairly detailed working drawing, mainly to assist in figuring out what materials I need to buy and the most efficient use of same, but also to have something to show you what I am trying to achieve. Oh well, hopefully delaying its release by a few days won't cause too many riots....
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here's a tentative track plan - sorry if the image size makes it difficult to view. The text wasn't legible at any lower resolution.
There is a lot of detail still to be added, particularly all the spurs serving industries that I would like to have. At this stage, I'm only interested in making sure I could fit a decent double-track circuit while keeping to a reasonable minimum radius, 1.52m/60in., and not be too steep where the track climbs to cross over itself - 1.5 percent or 1 in 66. I think I might make that a little bit steeper so that the level portion of the elevated track is longer, to allow more space for turnouts to industrial spurs serving a coal trestle, for example. I have marked the extent of the grades with white arrows between the tracks; increasing the grade from 1:66 to 1:60 results in the distance run being shortened by 900mm/3ft. I am intentionally avoiding locating turnouts on grades, too difficult to hold a train in place while the locomotive is switching cars.
Total run around the outer and inner loop respectively is 32.6m and 31.4m - roughly 105ft. each. It was quite important to know these figures at this stage because I didn't want to have to buy any more rail, so whether I went with double or single track hinged upon how much rail was required; I am pleased to inform that I have enough to cover double track plus as many spurs as I am likely to ever build. 
If I may draw your attention to the lower left corner of the image, you will see what looks like a door magically opening through the layout - your eyes do not deceive you, but the door is actually UNDER the layout. The underside of the layout is to be at 2.1m above the floor with the aisles 1m above the floor. The dash-dot-dot green lines shows where stiffeners are located under the raised floor, just my way of figuring out quantities, and I left them in this view to make the aisles easy to tell from the layout itself.
Building the layout high off the floor may seem like a huge amount of effort to go to, but broadly speaking, the only extra structure that is required for being elevated, is the platforms to stand on. In any case, if I go with a conventional layout on the shed floor, the need to leave an accessway from side door to workshop area would eat up so much real estate that the layout would be very cramped, perhaps to the point of being impractical. Besides, with my back problems I can't cope with the duckunders that would be necessary. With the layout 2.1m above the floor, access is by short ladders, represented by the closely spaced solid green lines at the ends of each aisle. While still not a perfect solution, it sure beats crawling on hands and knees!
|
|
|
slateworks
Registered
|
What a luxurious space Paul, something I could only dream of! I was wondering how your dodgy neck would cope with ducking under to get inside the layout but you've described fully how and why you're building at an elevated level. This will be most interesting to watch.
For those like me who are ignorant of much more than On30, what is Ow5?
____________________
Doug
|
|
|
Reg H
Moderator
| Joined: | 19 Oct 2014 |
| Location: | Shelton, USA |
| Posts: | 1235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
You are blessed with space.
My one regret on my layout is that there is no provision for continuous running. In order to include what I wanted and exclude complexity, the only option was point to point.
I see you have a metal shop. Me to.
Reg
____________________
Reg
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
slateworks wrote: For those like me who are ignorant of much more than On30, what is Ow5 Doug, the 'w' in Ow5 stands for 'wide', because the 1.25" gauge scales to 5 feet, i.e. wider than the prototype's 4ft-8.5inches. I did consider using accurate P48 fine-scale standards but the extra layer of time and expense to convert equipment was just too much.
Regards
Paul
|
|
|
corv8
Moderator
| Joined: | 13 Nov 2018 |
| Location: | Vienna, Austria |
| Posts: | 794 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
The high floor design would have the additional virtue that it would be possible to store plenty of things underneath, or repair trains, motorcycles, lawnmowers and much else there.
- Display cabinets would be another idea that pops up...
____________________
Gerold
|
|
|
David Istvan
Registered
| Joined: | 5 Mar 2022 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 87 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Have you considered putting a yard also, to add some more switching ability, etc?
|
|
|
slateworks
Registered
|
Thanks Paul. Unusual gauge to say the least and it will certainly make an interesting project.
____________________
Doug
|
|
|
Reg H
Moderator
| Joined: | 19 Oct 2014 |
| Location: | Shelton, USA |
| Posts: | 1235 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Paul W wrote: slateworks wrote: For those like me who are ignorant of much more than On30, what is Ow5 Doug, the 'w' in Ow5 stands for 'wide', because the 1.25" gauge scales to 5 feet, i.e. wider than the prototype's 4ft-8.5inches. I did consider using accurate P48 fine-scale standards but the extra layer of time and expense to convert equipment was just too much.
Regards
Paul
There are times when the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Prior to my current HO layout I was working in On30 leaning on 36" gauge prototypes. With all the Bachmann equipment available, which could be re-gauged, the juice just wasn't worth the squeeze.
Many years (decades?) ago I modelled in 1/4" scale standard gauge on O gauge track, which also scales out to 5-foot gauge. I tried a short stretch of proto track (4' 8-1/2") and the visual difference just wasn't worth the work.
Reg
____________________
Reg
|
|
|
Paul W
Registered
| Joined: | 10 Feb 2017 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 63 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
David Istvan wrote: Have you considered putting a yard also, to add some more switching ability, etc? Replying to David and Gerold in turn,
David: Oh yes, I've thought very carefully about yards, loco facilities and passenger stations, particularly the operational opportunities they present compared to the real estate they require. After making a list of my must-haves and nice-to-haves, I realised that I am into railfanning more than actual operation. That said, I do enjoy switching cars in and out of spurs, but I made the track plan a continuous loop so that I can just watch a train roll by while I'm working on scenery, and I made it double tracked so I can still watch a train roll by while I'm shoving freight cars around on the other loop.
I'm very glad that you asked the question, David, because it got me thinking; I have always planned to scenic the staging yard, but it has only occurred to me this minute that because it's all above head height I do have scope to add another loop running from the far end of the staging, around my metalworking shop to connect to a switching branchline at low level. However, since it would have to pass under the high-level tracks, 'twould be very wise to include an underpass during construction. I'm loosely basing my railroad on Pittsburgh, and the other end of this loop could represent an interchange track with the Pennsy or B&O, but that can be 'Phase 2' - I think I will have my hands full just building the plan as it stands right now.
And now to Gerold's comment; the value of the additional floor space gained by elevating the layout cannot be overemphasised. The widths of the baseboards have been selected to give enough room for me to easily walk past 310mm-wide kitset steel shelving that I bought in bulk for this purpose. I have a pin-a-tail-on-it-and-call-it-a-weasel cunning plan to maximise the utility of the 'ground floor' but I want to keep it as a surprise until it is built - watch this space! Now I am going out to the shed to construct a large box-beam that is key to my plan.
|
|
|
corv8
Moderator
| Joined: | 13 Nov 2018 |
| Location: | Vienna, Austria |
| Posts: | 794 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Paul W wrote: David Istvan wrote: Have you considered putting a yard also, to add some more switching ability, etc? Replying to David and Gerold in turn,
David: Oh yes, I've thought very carefully about yards, loco facilities and passenger stations, particularly the operational opportunities they present compared to the real estate they require. After making a list of my must-haves and nice-to-haves, I realised that I am into railfanning more than actual operation. That said, I do enjoy switching cars in and out of spurs, but I made the track plan a continuous loop so that I can just watch a train roll by while I'm working on scenery, and I made it double tracked so I can still watch a train roll by while I'm shoving freight cars around on the other loop.
Its your layout, and it makes sense that it has to fit your preferences. Others may drool about switching, point to point operation and other concepts... I also thought, "what do I really want to do? What is possible with my space/ money/ skills?
what came out are two ovals - similar to your concept, but I designed it as two independent mainlines, not double track - with a few yard tracks to park some trains. No industries, no switching, no roundhouse, no coaling - this all is "around the corner", out of view. Only extravagance I allowed are two turning loops so I may reverse a complete train, back and forth.This fits my ideas what I like most - like you, I want to watch my locos/ trains roll by, in various configurations.
____________________
Gerold
|
|
|
Current time is 01:05 pm | Page: 1 2 3 |
|
|
|
Hi Paul...your warning ... Fair warning to rivet-counters - keep your heart pills close by. reminds me of a sign that was at the front door of my shed , it stated ... RIVET COUNTERS DON'T LOOK FOR RIVETS, THERE ISN'T ANY...it's not there now, a rivet counter pinched it?.....Peter.
