I always liked that plan

In fact that is the article and plan that inspired me to move away from roundy roundy type plans and think more prototypical track arrangement. I still like the end of branch theme, especially for a smaller space....you only need staging at one end.

Blessings

Bill Michael

A great plan

As far as outsourcing, I think it is a great idea. I have used the hive mind of this site to fine tune my plan but going to a pro is certainly a good idea too. I look forward to see what he comes up with and your final plan.

Downside is this has caused me to go to the MR Archive to look up the plan once again and that lead me down a trail of browsing old issues. 

The original track plan

Here is a link to the original track plan on Byron's web site.

http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/data/500/sperandeo_san_jacinto.jpg

Paul, Just browsing through Byron's different plans I really like his San Jose Shelf Switcher layout.

http://www.layoutvision.com/gallery/id25.html

Just might have to add this little Gem to my list of possible layout projects.

I'm looking forward to your San Jacinto layout build thread.

San J in 1:64

Great choice of plan!

I think this is one of the most ground-breaking, yet under-appreciated, published plans of all time. Andy's original article explained how prototype operations could be the basis for a small yet satisfying layout - quite a departure from the typical "train-set" mentality of the era.

You mentioned my re-interpretation of Andy's plan in S scale. Here's the link for those who are interested.

San J in 1:64

Cheers!

- Trevor

Thanks for the feedback . . .

. . . everyone, and especially to Trevor and Rich for posting the links. I wrote the initial post late last night (well, late to me, who gets up at 4:25 a.m. to be at my shop in Seattle at 6 a.m.) on my Blackberry and was a wee bit lazy about pasting in links!

I've already found that membership in the  Santa Railway Historical & Modeling Society and participation on the Santa Fe -- All the Way list to be rewarding and educational. 

With the exception of one, all my previous layouts were based on the idea of "That would be fun to model," whether that idea be driven by appealing equipment, road name or locale -- British Railways, Appalachian coal haulers, the Central Vermont, the SOO Line, Rio Grande narrow gauge, the Milwaukee Road, et al. And there's not a thing wrong with that. 

Except now I'm working from the premise which Tony Koester, in his book Realistic Model Railroad Operation, points to: a layout that's fun to model and fun to operate. I'd not given the latter as much consideration as I should have in the past. Many of you have "gotten" that idea a lot sooner than I have. Probably why in many cases you have had the same layout for years. 

And when it comes to a layout that I thought would be fun to model and operate, and which appealed to my design sensibilities, well, the San Jacinto fits the bill. It always appealed to me as "fun to model." Now I'm champing at the bit regarding the "fun to operate" side as well.

Good choice

 I also have always admired that  plan.  One of my friends is modeling the nearby Surf Line.

Yep, Dave

Is that Steve Dolezal's layout by any chance, Dave? I believe Keith Jordan is rebuilding his Surf Line layout as well. A popular theme -- and rightly so -- it seems.

As Andy Sperandeo said in his closing sentence about his Cajon Pass layout in the 2012 Model Railroad Planning, I think I'm going to have a lot of fun "going Santa Fe all the way."

And as Bryon Henderson noted in his remarks about the San Jacinto, "When the student is ready, the track plan appears." 

'Course, he and I had known about Andy's track plan for years, decades even. But knowing of something and then grasping its full import and application sometimes takes a while. 

San Jacinto District

Paul, What happened to the San Jacinto District layout? I saw you just posted a new trackplan for a N scale version of the Meeker Southern?

Has the N scale bug taken over and you just can't go back to the Horribly Oversized scale (ha ha ha)

@Rich

Speaking of Updates

Hi Paul, What is the latest word on your layout? Are you keeping the Slate Fork Branch or starting over with the Meeker Southern? I'm guessing the San Jacinto District layout has been scrapped?

@RichS

Yes, I decided a month or so ago to keep the Slate Fork and have it up and running in the train room. I built an L-girder support for it, and it is now a base 54" off the floor, a good viewing height for me.

Next is lighting (LEDs) the current 36x80-inch layout with a suspended valance design and extending the right of way on new self-contained 1x6-foot sections.

The Meeker Southern and the San Jacinto came close to meeting some of my goals, but 1) staying N scale seemed a better choice at this time, 2) I'm just too darn fond of Appalachian coal haulers and 3) I want to finish what I started.

Also, I think I needed to take a break from any more around-the-walls layout construction for a while. Island-type are not ideal for everyone, of course, but I seem to have more fun with them if past history is an indicator.

Slate Fork Branch layout

Paul

The layout plan won't load for me on the MRH layout data base. Can you repost the plan? Also any photos, and a bit more or direct me to post where you go into why you decided to keep the Slate Fork and not build San Jacinto.

I get the attraction of Appalachian Coal Hauler railroads. 

Bill Michael