looks great

Will be following along

John

I like the overall concept

but 3 Nits stand out:

I'm not wild about your interpretation of Montecello.  I know you are trying to make a u-shaped prototype go linear, but it feels like your plan leavse something out . . 

Also, it looks lik e Crosset and Pile yards could be longer.  Even if you don't need the capacity fo ryour operations plan, I'd think about stretching them to give yourself switching and storage capacity on line.

Thanks, John. And thank you,

N scale CF7s?

Dear Tad,

Do I recall correctly that AD&N ran CF7s? Have these distinctive beasts been offered in N?

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Prof, Randy offers a kit to

Swing Gate

Hi Tad,

I've had a curved drop down gate on my N scale layout for 10 years. 

Here are some recommendations based on my mistakes:

-100 track and solder the outside of the rails to brass nails, screws or printed circuit board to keep it aligned.

Put a slight curve on the gate to allow rail/wood expansion.

Install electrical and mechanical interlocking to protect trains.

Paint all surfaces of the gate and approaches to seal out humidity.

Use high quality hinges.

Build the approaches and gate from the same sheet/piece of wood.

Good suggestions!

well since you asked

Montecello lost its piggyback yard.  Yes I know its small, but I think it would add some operational variety.  Plus I think you are missing at least one interchange . . .

Funny thing about Monticello...

The funny thing about Monticello is that the real one looks more like a model track plan than the model track plan!  

That place would be perfect at the end of a peninsula.  

Randy

Piggyback Yard

Phil,

Actually, it didn't lose it. I moved the interchange and the piggyback yard to the south side of the wye in the corner.

I didn't think that I would have enough space for the length of the interchange if I put it on the east side in it's prototypical location.

Looking at it though I can try a different version and move it back. Maybe adding another track to the interchange would fit and give me enough capacity for the MoPac local and the AD&N local to interchange and exchange trains, because that is basically what they did. I would prefer to have it like it really was.

I'll look at it tonight and see what I can come up with. If I can rework Monticello to make it more prototypical, I definitely will.

I doubled the wye so that the AD&N local crew would have to switch Monticello in the same manner as the prototype crews did. There is a "Railroad You Can Model" article in the Feb 1981 MRR by Terry Holley that describes the AD&N ops really well. I also have spoken with Mr. Tedder, the former AD&N Superintendent, about the AD&N's ops to try and do this as best as I can.

Thanks for your thoughts and comments.

Tad

More Better?

Does this look more prototypical for Monticello?

Changes to 1st level.

Eliminated one of the west (left) loops at the mills.

Moved Tissue Mill, Paper Mill #2, and the Recovery Boiler.

Added a double ended track to Pond Yard.

Changed track to Kraft Mill.

See if y'all think it's better.

Updated Monticello

Did a little more work on Monticello.

Any thoughts?

My thoughts...

The way I approached my track plan was to try to replicate the movements of the trains, so that a trailing point switch when heading West was a trailing point switch when heading West on my layout, etc.  

What I see immediately in just a quick glance at your plan is that the warehouse is a trailing point switch when a train is heading South on your prototype, but you have it as a facing point.  I would turn that around so that my trains operated at the warehouse the same way the prototype would have.  

Similar situation with how you have moved the rice elevator.  On your prototype plan, it looks like the train would have passed the Rice spur, then backed into the spur to work it.  You had it that way, but now you've moved it to the end of a spur which will be worked in a completely different way from what the prototype would have done. 

None of this may really matter to you, I don't know.  It depends on your goals.  My goal was to model the operations of the prototype as closely as possible, so having the tracks oriented correctly at each industry is important for me. 

I hope that makes sense, and maybe helps in some way. 

Randy

You're right & it does matter to me

Looks good from here!

I was wondering where the N scale AD&N had been....

The design looks good. I'll be watching the progress!

Consulted a different historical map

Thanks,

Art

I went and looked at a historical topo map from 1966 that I downloaded here:

http://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=262:1:0::NO:RP::

and then there was actually a spur that went in between two buildings at the elevator.

So it was actually more like this:

 Maybe better?

Tad

That looks like..

a better switchback because now you don't need to pull the cars at the elevator to work the other industries.

Looks better!

now you don't need to pull the cars at the elevator

but would have to pull cars from farmer's supply and texaco to work the fright house? Is there a missing run around track there? or did the railroad eliminate tracks as traffic declined?? ......DaveB

Lumber Company

What's the lumber company doing way back there on its own spur?  

Shouldn't it be kind of across the tracks from the rice elevator?  Was it rail-served, it doesn't appear to have it's own trackage?  On your prototype map it looks like it was located on the way to the rice elevator.  

It also looks like if you're modeling the older rice elevator that it should be about where you have the lumber company now.  It looks like trains would've had to pull past the spurs to either the old rice elevator or the cotton seed mill, and then back into their respective spurs. If you put the rice elevator where the lumber company is now, you will be replicating those moves.  The 'new' rice elevator looks to be on the way to those spurs, but would be on your left as you head down the track to do your reversing move so should be on the opposite side of where you have it now.  

Randy

Here's my intepretation

Its your railroad and you should do whatever you want.  But when I look at your prototype plan, this is kind of what I come up with.  Bear in mind, this is me quickly drawing with my lunch in the other hand at the office, and I'm no fancy track planning guru, but you get the idea.  I try to put myself in the cab and have the industries and tracks appear to me as they would on the prototype, even though this is a mirror image of the prototype I try to keep it consistent throughout.  

Randy

Monticello

This is a historical topo map of Monticello in 1966.

This is the map from the Feb 1981 Model Railroader.

I was thinking  to not do two Rice Elevators in such close proximity to each other and have the Lumber Company as a different type of rail served industry since it once was.

Lunch is over and I have to go to a meeting. More later.

Thanks, everyone.

Art & DaveB

I appreciate you taking the time to look at my plan and comment on it.

 Randy,

Thanks for taking the time to make that sketch.

You have given me some ideas and things to think about. I'll look at it more closely this weekend when I have some more time.

Tad

Randgust.com CF7 Kit

This is what you get in one of Randy's CF7 kits.