Depends on what you want to do

Gumstump and Snowshoe is a viable plan if you're OK with short trains and a logging or mining theme. My layout is very loosely based on it and I actually have a 4% grade. It's a compromise I could live with because I wanted dramatic scenery in a limited area and a combo of logging and mining was exactly the theme I wanted.

Doug

Can we hit you up for a few more details?

What kind of layout is it? city/industrial, mining or logging or?

What kind of locos are you using and who made them?

Did you stretch the plan to cover all 10' of one of your L's?

Jack

Trackplan?

Yes, Jack is right, do you have a trackplan you could show us? Here's mine that is very loosely based on the Gumstump albeit much bigger. Like I said, it's a compromise, 4% grade which I hid and lot's of tight curves but I run small steamers and logging engines and short rolling stock. The tracks running off the baseboard outline are staging.

Gumstump and Snowshoe

Hi,

yes, there are moments when starting over feels like "absolutely necessary"... Bonus points for modifying an existing layout and re-using parts during the "starting over."

I do think the G&S is a very good design for an operations-oriented small layout. One of the very good things about it is the fact that it has a lot of potential for adapting it - bigger terminal stations on either end, longer switchback, ...

At the same time, I think in the light of "TOMA" and sectional approaches, the G&S allows for up to five scenes built as separate sections:

• lower and upper terminals
• lower and upper switchback "station"
• connecting track, with (or without) bridge and scenery

If you go to the effort of modifying your existing layout, it may be worth a thought to make individual sections replaceable for future adaptation.

Obviously, the general design still works if you get rid of the bridge and change the grades. It depends on your vision and on your rolling stock, I guess.

Have fun and stay healthy

PS: if I were to start over, the G&S would be the basic design. For now, I'm sticking to what I have

Current trackplan, comments welcome

Here is the current trackplan, the problems are the steep grades at the main curve, all that rise copies the Gumstump X-over and allows future expansion to the next room, the arrow wandering off into the distance.

• two curved run-around tracks, 2 percent grade (bad to have grade on run-aorund, I know)
• a takeoff to the switchback, 3 percent grade
• an entrance to the “city”, 2 percent grade with X-over

The swtichback simulates a run from Amherst, a backing move to Palmer, then to the city of Springfield. Yes, Amtrak really had to back up for passenger service. Aside: I am happy with the odd-looking "G" section. Curves are 26" min radius.
 

Possible fix:

If I abandon the X-over inspired by Gumstump, and drop the expansion, then the curved run-around can be level, and the switchback can rise an inch or two. Scenic blocks of trees can make it look separate and longer.

 

Cross over or no

Hi,

looking at the track plan, I see no reason why the crossover could not be replaced by a standard zig-zag without the bridge. Just switch the tracks over.

Actually, just switching the two tracks involved with the crossover, just due to abandoning the bridge and crossover, you'll have more track space for the grade. This may reduce your grades from 3% to 2%? However, that's just a guess from looking at the track plan.

In fact, I'd expected the crossover to be closer to the three-way-turnout of the "springfields flats" scene. Probably as a tunnel rather than a bridge. Again, just to make more track space for the grades.

Have fun and stay healthy

Thanks for the plan

Now also tell us more. What kind of equipment are you running or planning on running? Do you have a theme or era in mind? As I said, switchback plans like the Gumstump tend to be suited to logging and mining. They are also pretty era specific. Many were never anything but temporary and have been ripped up over the years as logging and mining played out.

era, theme, operations

The era is 1900 to 1936, small trains (3 to 5 cars + caboose) bringing raw materials from the rural areas to the city, and manufactured items to the country. Also a daily passenger train or two, 2 heavyweight cars.

Every industry has a source and destination.

The farmers' grange puts out milk cans in the morning. The early morning mixed milk/passenger train picks up 1 or 2 refrigerated cars and a passenger car and delivers to the city dairy. A train picks up gravel and delivers it to the dealer, taking empties back to the crusher. A rural brewer takes in grain and exports refrigerated beer to the city. During the day, the dairy car is washed out, iced. and sent to the grange in the morning. Armour Provisioners  takes in sides of beef and exports various huge cuts to rural Haggis Packers. A tall cold storage facility moves LCL and the occasional ice car. Sometimes heavy equipment is sent to the Grange. Sometimes one coal hopper or one tank car is offloaded at the rural kerosene and coal dealer. Throughout the day 2 or 3 commuter trains interfere with all the freight, which needs a run-around. And the Grange has Pickle tanks.

forgot to add - the switchback represents Palmer MA. You really do need to back from Amherst all the way to Palmer, then go forward to the city Springfield. The Springfield pass. station is 30 ft above street level with huge cut granite walls. Even a little elevation and some stone walls gives the suggestion of the Springfield station.
 

So what is the actual problem

So what is the actual problem you are having?  Did I miss that?  You say what you are thinking about doing and eliminating by i didn’t catch why.  I run a 6% grade for a short distance in my logging branch.  But that uses shays and short trains (and oddly enough is less then the prototype). I had to flatten the grade between the switchbacks as it was getting to tall not to steep.  So I do a section of 6% at the switch backs to show the fast elevation change then flatten it out in between so as not to gain to mush height.

So steep grades are doable.  Depending on equipment.

-Doug M

Thanks for helping me think this through

sharp grades are OK for geared locos, I don't use them, The x-over is a very difficult reach for scenery.  The passing track is on a grade, cars cannot be dropped off.

Thanks all for listening and helping think through it. I'll make these changes, rigid foam makes it easier:

• raise the lowest part 1" and drop the runaround 1", the runaround will be level.
• It is annoying to drop the runaround because the entire "G" will also need to be dropped. I can split the glued rigid foam with a long blade and patience
• I will exchange the switchback tracks not to pass over each other.
• Drop the highest part from 4" to 2", it is simply propped up on rigid foam columns,
• The scenery will be MUCH easier, no tracks will be hidden in a cut or underpass.

Fortunately, all the switch machines are surface mounted, concealed in 1" deep wells in rigid foam. Thin steel wire pushrods are invisible on the surface of the foam.
 

.

Gum Stump & Snow Shoe Layout

Doug,

Here's the original drawing of the layout.

Bernd