David Stewart

A layout plan to come below.

Reply 0
David Stewart

 Track Plan

Track plan for the Ferrego, Falming and Fantouche Railroad (pronounced FAIR-ago, FALM-ing and fanTOOSH), a fictional HO scale 30" narrow gauge line interchanging freight and passengers from a standard gauge railroad with ferries (rail car and passenger) serving the Casterneen Islands, a group of coastal islands with the main ones being Golabi (go-LOB-bee) Island which is large, with its own 30" railroad, the "Golobi Line", and Frascastoria, a beautiful resort destination. A few small industries are also served along the way.
 
Operating System: NCE Powercab DCC. A swing arm mounting system located below the Ice House-Sugar House-Cider House (the peninsula) area will allow the cord to reach the whole layout. Length of power bus runs has been figured out and will stay well below 30'.
 
Track: Atlas Code 55 N-scale turnouts and flex. All #5 turnouts, except for two #7's at the crossover in Fantouche. No grades except for the spur at the marble quarry and small ones on the interchange tracks to bring the narrow gauge cars level with the standard gauge cars. Turnout control will be over center spring and Frog Juicers, with the turnouts activated by flipping them with a finger between the rails.
 
Operations: Strictly a one man show; perhaps some formal operation involving car cards and waybills, perhaps not. Almost purely sequential as far as the time aspect goes.
 
Benchwork: Yes. Still kicking around ideas here. Layout height will be around 52"-54". For sure, on top will be 2" foam insulation. Three potential reach problem areas have been identified: I have a long reach and have devised the means to make it even longer; scenery installation has also been accounted for.
 
I have attached a PDF file and an Xtrakcad file for those who want a closer view.
 
Below are some jpegs showing the overall layout and the three main areas.
 
Comments, criticisms and questions are sought and welcomed.
 
Thank you,
 
David Stewart

Reply 0
Geared

Track Plan

David, it looks like you've done your homework. I like the free flowing aspect of this plan. Lots of room for scenery. One thought for Ferrego. Have you considered using a wye there instead of a turntable? It looks like you have enough room to extend one out into the aisle a bit. Could add some more operating interest. What kind of engines will you be running?

Roy

Roy

Geared is the way to tight radii and steep grades. Ghost River Rwy. "The Wet Coast Loggers"

 

Reply 0
David Stewart

Wye

Roy,

I hadn't given a wye any consideration. Never occurred to me as I was so focused on fitting everything onto that narrow shelf. Go the other direction for more space? Duh. I'll give your suggestion a good looksee. I like the idea of more variety.

My motive power currently consists of a 2-8-0 converted from a Bachmann Spectrum model, a gas railcar running on an Atlas mechanism, a six wheel diesel that is a Roco 009 shell on a Bachmann MDT mechanism and a cute little four wheel diesel being pushed by a Halling mechanism that will be covered by a work car shell. I also have a an AHM Porter shell awaiting an MDT mechanism and have the basic mechanism parts to bash a Baldwin 2-6-0 on the order of the Puffing Billy locomotives. Already too many engines.

I neglected to mention earlier that my minimum radius is 12". These engines all easily negotiate the 8.5" radius of my test track. Also, car lengths will be around 3.25 real inches, excepting passenger cars.

David Stewart 

Reply 0
David Husman dave1905

Layout Plan

At Ferrengo the transfers between standard and narrow guage wouldn't be through interlaced tracks, they would be across docks because the foor heights of the two gauges won't be the same.  You might want one standard guage track and replace the other std gauge track with a dock.

The interchange would have an overhead crane (a la EBT) to transfer the stone works output.

I would put a run around at Fantouche, for example adding a switch in the creamery track and extending a track parallel to the lead back to the main.

Question: where does the car ferry go?  It implies that there is another 30" gauge railroad on someplace else, another island.  Is that reasonable or would there be wharves at Fantouche and the goods get transferred again to coastal steamers or barges?

The ideal arrangement (from a transportation efficiency standpoint) would be to have the standard gauge interchange with a packet steamer and then the packet steamer interchange with the narrow gauge on the island.

It is a nice plan, I would put another siding on it and an anchor industry.

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index

Reply 0
David Stewart

Dave

Thank you for your careful look at the plan. My thinking on the tracks at Ferrego was to have the narrow gauge tracks elevated (up a quick grade) for transfer purposes; I was really only expecting to interchange with the longest standard gauge track with the idea of being able to off-load to either side. The shorter standard gauge track is there to serve the warehouse ( which does give a more involved interchange opportunity). It would perhaps be better to not elevate the narrow gauge track in back of the longest standard track and just use that just for makeup and storage. 

I had expected to put a crane of some type to transfer heavy loads but, due to lock-step thinking, had never thought of an overhead gantry crane. Thanks. I will soon be off on the internet to research East Broad Top cranes.

My operational expectation in Fantouche was to pull a train onto either of the Arrival/Departure tracks, break the engine off and run around the train on the other Arrival/Departure track to break the train down. (Same essential approach in Ferrego.) This has less to do with how the real world works and more to do with the fact that, as a one man show, I can foul the heck out of the main knowing that there are no more trains on the way. This means that to spot a car at the creamery, I would have to run back up and around a car(s) to get the right orientation. I will give your thoughts a try in XtraK; a more realistic approach can't hurt.

The car ferry supposedly goes to Golobi Island where it connects with a 30" narrow gauge line there, thus giving me an excuse to letter some cars for that railroad. This connection is essentially my justification for the railroad and constitutes my anchor industry. The packet ferry is represented by the big ferry up at the station. This would serve the "other" islands, chiefly Frascastoria. Reasonable? I'm not sure, but I am quite willing to resort to a fictional philosophy of magical realism to justify it. I realize that my islands couldn't be very far offshore and would have to rest in the Extremely Pacific Ocean for this to be at all plausible.

Thanks for making me think.

Roy: I have been fooling around with your wye suggestion and all I'm getting is a funky mess. How would you go about this? I may be too enamored with my plan to see the obvious.

I am loving the help.

David Stewart

 

Reply 0
Geared

David, here's the idea that

David, here's the idea that came to me. I'm not very expert at Xtricad, so please forgive my clunky attempt. I just couldn't get the curves to work the way I wanted them to go. Even if the tail of the wye allowed for an engine or an engine and one car, you might be able to fit the wye in and eliminate the turntable without using very much aisle space. The one leg of the wye could likely also come off the top track at Ferrago or even the turntable lead, not sure. Anyway have fun discyphering the thoughts.

Roy

Roy

Geared is the way to tight radii and steep grades. Ghost River Rwy. "The Wet Coast Loggers"

 

Reply 0
David Husman dave1905

Purpose

Does your plan have a particular commodity involved that is the reason for its existence?

Is it lumber?

Minerals?

Stone?

Coal?

Why do you have to rail it, ferry it, then rail it to a transload? Why not just rail it to the port of an island and ship it directly the standard gauge?

If you are hauling some raw material (lumber, minerals, stone, coal) then you could put a processing plant at the standard guage junction.

So the narrow gauge (NG) carries logs, rough cut lumber to a finish mill and the standard gauge (SG) carries out the finished lumber, millwork.

The NG carries raw minerals (gypsum or ore) to the junction and the SG carries out refines minerals or products (drywall or taconite).

The NG carries the mine run (coal, stone) to a breaker at the junction and the SG carries out the cleaned and sized material.

That gives the NG more of a reason for being, you can't just put the product on a boat and skip the NG altogether because of the processing step and makes the NG viable longer. The EBT had a similar operation (hauling coal to a breaker at the SG junction and gannister rock to a fire brick works near the junction) which enabled it to remain viable into the 1950's. What really killed the EBT wasn't so much that it was NG, but more that the demand for coal dropped off. Because the change for NG to SG occurred at a point where the products were going to be unloaded, processed and reloaded anyway, there was little or no increase in cost to have the NG railroad.

If you decide to incorporate something like that it might require some changes to the junction track arrangements, but will make a stronger story to explain your railroad's purpose.

The NG was built by a whatever product magnate back in the 1880's, with a railroad on the mainland and ferry service to 3 islands. When the father tragically died in a freak cricket accident in 1903, the railroads where split among the 4 sons, with the eldest getting the line on the mainland and the other three each becoming superintendent of a division on an island. The daughter got the ferry service, but soon tired of being stuck on those dinky islands and sold the ferry and packet steamer line to one of the brothers, took the money and went to Paris where she later married a Duke. Gradually the 4 brothers squabbled about how the railroad should be operated and they ended up splitting the railroad, with each brother creating his own railroad with its own name.

(substitute whatever number of brothers you want and name the packet steamer after the daughter and the tugboat after the father.)

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index

Reply 0
David Stewart

Sorry for the delay

 

 
in responding, but sometimes a person's got to do what a person's got to do.(How's that for a politically correct bowdlerization of the phrase.)
 
Today I had first to get over my knee-jerk reaction to what seems to me to be a somewhat pontifical tone.
 
Two deep breaths.
 
My conception of the beginnings of this railroad runs more to the precedent of such roads as the Bellevue and Cascade, the Wiscasset Waterville and Farmington, and the Bridgton and Saco River, which were founded mostly to address the desire of the local citizenry to connect with the outside world rather than as a specific response to access an exploitable resource.
 
In my admittedly half-formed imaginings, this desire was seized upon by an individual who saw the potential for the island of Frascastoria as a resort destination (and real estate
boondoggle) and realizing that he needed a way to get people from here to there in an efficient manner, championed, spearheaded, and generally cheer led the railroad into existence by taping into this desire of the people of the region. No mustache twirling in my story, though.
 
Simple economics and geography can be employed to explain why the islands are best accessed by these means.
 
However , this little revue does point up the fact that I have failed to connect the township of Fantouche to the railroad in a way that would satisfy its citizens beyond passenger access.( I have deliberately kept the various "towns" as implied just off layout). And my song and dance for the island of Golobi is , let's just say, still evolving.
 
Thanks for the stimulus. 
 
Dave Stewart
Reply 0
Cuyama

Realism is an option

Quote:

 

Today I had first to get over my knee-jerk reaction to what seems to me to be a somewhat pontifical tone.

I didn't read Dave H.'s response that way at all. He is simply explaining the real-life economics that would drive a similar narrow-gauge railroad linked by water in the real world.

For a knowledgeable viewer, too many unusual combinations of circumstances that aren't economically viable make a layout seem less realistic. To a less-knowledgeable viewer, these issues would often go unnoticed. As Dave noted, some freelanced layout builders create elaborate backstories to justify and explain the economically unjustifiable.

It's always the layout-builder's choice whether to make a freelanced railroad realistic or not -- and to what degree.

What Dave told you is based on his extensive knowledge of real-life railroads. It was delivered in a direct manner, but not rudely or arrogantly, in my opinion. You are always free to ignore it.

Many forum posters seem insulted by any advice which questions the choices they have made. It's the main reason I stopped offering folks advice on their own designs on forums. But why else would one post, if not to get different viewpoints and opinions?

Reply 0
David Stewart

Byron, thank you for your

Byron, thank you for your observations. I had intended for my response to indicate that very defensiveness to which you refer as an initial response; I am sorry that I didn't make clear that it was just that and not a display of rational appreciation.  Two deep breaths to get over myself and try to look at things rationally.

What I found a bit didactic was was the section of his post where he deliniates the NG this and the NG that. He isn't wrong; his observations reflect the motives for the establishment of most narrow gauge railroads. But not all. And his post doesn't seem to reflect that possibilty. Why are my examples unrealistic? And I mean that question in an unarguementitve way.

I don't see my backstory as particularly elaborate in getting a connection to my imagined islands: a populace feels the need to connect to the greater world. Fantouche is part of that populace. An "entreprenuer" sets up a ferry service, after having flogged that perceived need of the populace to get the connection to the outside world that he needs made, so as to access the islands for developmental purposes.  The standard gauge doesn't come close enough for a more direct connection and doesn't deem it worthwhile to put in a spur to accommodate the areas desire for greater access. Again, not meant to be argumentitive, what is elaborate or unrealistic here?

Now, when it comes to the car ferry serving Golabi Island, I'm in trouble and I admit it. Its because I want a car ferry, not because it is realistic. My rationale for Golobi is mainly agrarian: sheep to provide wool for the woolen mill and goats to provide milk for goat cheese production at the creamery. (And, oh yeah, I've got an elaborate and fairly ridiculous story to expain why the creamery is on the mainland rather than on the island.) So why the heck does this scenario require a car ferry? So far, I've got nothin'.

Byron, my main reason for posting a plan was in the hope that people would point out untenable, idiotic or unnecessary track planning elements or suggest variable approaches to that aspect of the planning. As I declared that it was a fictional railroad, I guess that I was unprepared to have someone point out that the whole concept was untenable, idiotic or unnecessary.

Dave Stewart

Reply 0
LKandO

Is It Real or Is It Memorex?

Dave, I too have had discussions with Byron about what makes sense and what does not on my layout. Byron is certainly a wealth of information and quite obviously takes his railroading very seriously. But for me personally there needed to be a balance of "what should be there" versus "what I want to be there". Much the same as your situation. Byron understands this well. It really is about where does any one individual place their comfortable balance point.

The moment anyone begins to analyze any layout for rational, protoypical, fully explainable construction and layout the argument will fall like a house of cards. Why would any railroad build a line across a distance that could be walked by a scale human in 10 minutes? Enough said. The analysis has ended.

You want a car ferry then you should have a car ferry even if it is parked beside a bridge spanning the same waterway. Yes it is nice to have a believable layout but unless you have a 10,000 sq ft. space any attempt regardless of back story will not hold up in court.

Love the island hopping theme. A nice new twist.

Alan

All the details:  http://www.LKOrailroad.com        Just the highlights:  MRH blog

When I was a kid... no wait, I still do that. HO, 28x32, double deck, 1969, RailPro
nsparent.png 

Reply 0
Cuyama

Your choices, after all

 Dave,

Ultimately, these are all your choices, so of course you should make them as you wish. I think Dave H.'s points on why real-life economics may make the transloads possibly less realistic are clear enough, so take them as you will.

Passengers may be a different matter, since they perform the transfers themselves. But most real-life narrow gauge lines had one or more freight commodities that drove their construction (as Dave H. pointed out), not solely passengers. 

As I said, fictional freelanced railroads can adhere to real-life economics and practicality to any degree their builder decides -- even not at all. If you're happy with what you've come up with, by all means go with it, and you owe no one any explanation. Best of luck!

Reply 0
David Stewart

Understood.

It was from the first. I named it the Ferrego, Falming and Fantouche, the F,F and F, so that I could always smile and say, "It's my effing railroad" as explanation to any objections someone might have as to its efficacy.

I didn't engage in that attitude online because a mischievous sparkle in the eye and a wry smile don't translate well to text (and I have an irrational antipathy towards emoticons). And for fear that I would receive the kind of admonition I got anyway.

But what I'm not getting here is why, after I stated my concept as fictional and my willingness to adhere to a philosophy of magical realism, the subject comes up at all. There is still plenty of material left to analyze: too many or not enough tracks, turnouts too close together, what criteria did you base your track separation on ( I think they are too close together), this is an aesthetically lousy arrangement of curves, etc.,etc. Those too are reasons why one posts ones track plan for review here.

I guess what I'm whining about is that I don't think a bias towards realism in layout design should be the first look that a posted design gets, particularly when a design is fictional in its conception.

That and the fact that Byron didn't say that, given latitude for unrealistic elements, it is an otherwise brilliant plan (insert emoticons here).

And Alan, thank you. I have had a similar reaction to the limitations of realism: would a railroad build in your basement?

Dave Stewart

 

 

Reply 0
LKandO

Helpful Folks Here

Dave,

There are many helpful, talented people on MRH so have patience. Critique of the type you seek will come. Myself, I am not skilled or knowledgeable enough to offer the suggestions you want. It is this very reason I ended up soliciting Byron's help.

I found many answers at the NMRA standards web site. If you have not already you should familiarize yourself with the material.

http://www.nmra.org/standards/sandrp/consist.html

Alan

All the details:  http://www.LKOrailroad.com        Just the highlights:  MRH blog

When I was a kid... no wait, I still do that. HO, 28x32, double deck, 1969, RailPro
nsparent.png 

Reply 0
steinjr

 Dave S --  First you tell

Dave S --

First you tell people that you want formal operations, with car cards etc. You want interchange. You state that "comments, criticism and questions are sought and welcomed".

When Dave H suggests some modifications that would make things more realistic, you thank him for his suggestions, mention that there are things you have not thought about, mentions that you are "not sure" whether parts of your reasons for your layout are reasonable, and writes "thanks for making me think".

When Dave H a few posts later offers further background and suggestions for making things realistic, and asks more questions, you go ballistic and in effect start whining about how everybody should have grasped immediately that the key part of your 30-line or so previous post were the words "I am quite willing to resort to a fictional philosophy of magical realism to justify it", and that they should have interpreted that statement as "STOP! Do _not_ even try to offer me any suggestions based on realism or probability - it offends me no end".

In other words - that "I am quite willing to" should have been interpreted as "I am only willing to", and "questions are sought and welcomed" should have been interpreted as "some questions are okay, but if you question the rationale behind my railroad, I will be very insulted".

Are you sure that it is Dave H is the person acting unreasonable here?

As for the theme of your railroad - I don't really care why trains run on your layout. If you are happy with it, you are happy with it. Good enough for me.

I just did not particularily care for the way you reacted to the constructive suggestions Dave H offered.

Stein

Reply 0
Benny

Where's the imagination already???

I don't see this lack of purpose one bit..it's clear at least to me that this railraod exists in a place where there's a micro economy not big enough to bring in the large railraods outright, but not small enough to discourage a tough or rich mogul from attempting to make a go at it.  30' gauge should be enough of a signal to emphasize the nature of this railraod - it's not even a full 3 feet!

The number one commodity on this railroad would appear to be seafood.  You have a lobster house on one end and an iceing platform ont eh other - htat's clear enough.  But it is obvious to me that this is not the initial reason the road was built - it's a business that developed on the side and perhaps even over tok the original purpose!!

Number two is the stone quarry.  I'd bet my money the stone quarry would have been the initial spark that started the railroad - shipping the stone downhill to the harbor [complete with a loop for a quicker elevation drop at one point], where the stone was then moved perhaps via float to a more developed area where the offloading could be accomplished by more developed means of transfer.  Heavy loads down, light loads up, and all the heavy lifting done somewhere else.  In this time period, you'd be looking at small locomotives and perhaps even horses being the main means of locomotion on the road.  The initial time period would perhaps be around the 1850s...

Now once the connection to the standard guage was built, it's possible that the road then expanded beyond light operations.  Stone could now be hauled uphill to the standard gauge interchange, where the elevated tracks would assist in transfering stone [along with any other production] to the standard guage - the narrow guage cars would probably sit a foot lower than standard guage cars, I'd think.  The peroid represented as drawn, would suggest that the time period is now a bit later than 1850s - perhaps 1880s, perhaps even the 1920s or as late as this road would have been able to operate before trucking became big enough to take over the main work of moving cargo to the nearest mainline. 

The part of the standard gauge represented here would be nothing more than a siding [like an industry siding!] off the mainline itself.  That's not the end of the mainline, the narrow gauge just terminates as another industry services by a couple spurs off the mainline.

The carfloat suggest other possibilities, such as the local islands putting their freight directly onto the cars fromtheir docks [cars being horse drawn in some parts] or there being another part of the system recieving shipments from this port.  Passengers would all be moving by boat, of course - so this could also be a "quicktrip" for people eagar to get to the ocean.

One popular activity in the 1800s-to early 1900s was picknicking - that was when people form the city would go out to the coutnry for day, usually get very drunk, and behave in crass manners throughout the system.  You could say peopl eback then were not relaly much different than they are now, you just don't read much about the ne'er do wellers.  But they were around back then, in large numbers.  In the Pacific Northwest, these passengers made up the weekend crowd - and this same crowd could probably be found in these parts of the nation as well.

I don't see it necessary to have much more reason for a railroad to exist than this...I do feel it gets kind of convoluted sometimes, when things are taken to such academic extremes.  You might not need so many car cards though, to be honest.

--------------------------------------------------------

Benny's Index or Somewhere Chasing Rabbits

Reply 0
David Husman dave1905

Inhale - Exhale

Lets all take a breath here.  No need for everybody to pile on anybody here.  Its all good.  If Dave wants to use my suggestions, fine, if Dave doesn't want to use my suggestions, fine.  That's why they are "suggestions" and not "requirements".  They are disposable.

The only further suggestion I will make is to consider adding a lodge/resort/hotel and/or a picnic grounds.  They were popular at the turn of the century, the rich went to the resorts for the summer and the more middle class went to the picnic grounds for the day.

A recent magazine from railroad historical society had an article on a group of railroad empoyees who rode a standard gauge line to a junction, then boarded a narrow gauge line to ride to a resort for a veteran's convention on a lake where there were excursion boats.  Sound vaguely familiar?  You said you wanted to empahsize passenger service, adding resorts creates passenger service well above what the local population can support. 

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index

Reply 0
Benny

I'm not sure if you need any

I'm not sure if you need any "defined" picnic grounds in this time period.  Especially when the definition of a picnic ground is a basket and a blanket, capable of being thrown down ANYWHERE the picnickers so decide to throw down.

--------------------------------------------------------

Benny's Index or Somewhere Chasing Rabbits

Reply 0
David Stewart

Exhaling

 

Dave, let me first apologize to you. I am the last person who should be trying to draw inferences as to the tone of other peoples comments when it is obvious that I can't successfully strike one myself.
 
I think I blew it, as well, by not arranging and presenting my story, its precedents and its evolution in the first place. I failed to set the scene; partly because I haven't settled it yet and partly because I find formalizing it to be a bit boring and imagine that others would find it be so also.
 
A fine example of why this would have been valuable is your latest suggestion. I think this idea is brilliant, especially because I thought of it too! A large resort hotel set on the island of Frascastoria is what I always imagined. It creates a need for passengers and for supplies. It needs a railroad to get these to Fantouche and a ferry to get them to Frascastoria. Did I make this clear anywhere? Nope.
 
And, as I am sitting here typing this it occurs to me that on the far side of Golobi Island (which I have envisioned as sitting within sight of the mainland) and much to the chagrin of my original entrepreneur-who built the hotel on Frascastoria -let's say that three even larger resort style hotels have arisen and flourished and they have constructed their own little railroad to hasten the supply line and to speed up and smooth out their incoming guest's travel. Hence, the car ferry and the passenger only ferry. And the goat milk and the sheep wool are facilitated in their journey towards the standard gauge as well.
 
I meant it without rancor or irony the first time and I say it again: Thanks for the stimulus.
 
Dave Stewart
 
 
 
 
Reply 0
Russ Bellinis

Dave, I'm looking at your station tracks in Ferrego.

I notice that the station is at the very end of the tracks.  How does the train get there?  What does your typical passenger consist look like?  I guess my basic question really comes down is how do passengers get on and off of the train, and where is the locomotive when passnegers board or deboard?  It looks like the locomotive needs to pull the train into the station track, uncouple and run around to the back of the train and then push it into the station.  It would then go to the turn table to be turned and serviced for the return trip.  I'm thinking that either a long platform or a long narrow station with a platform on either end will be needed to service your passengers.

In Fantouche, it appears that you might have a redundant station.  You have a boat & ferry dock, a railroad & ferry station, and a car ferry.  I think the boat & ferry dock are redundant.  If you eliminate the boat & ferry dock, and enlarge the RR & Ferry Station it would seem to work better.  The freight loaded at that station would be package, express, and passenger baggage.  Car loads would come on and off the car ferry.  At that location you could have a platform to transload from standard gauge cars to narrow gauge, or narrow gauge cars could go aboard the car ferry. 

The third possibility that I'm thinking of would be to forego the car ferry entirely.  The narrow gauge railroad would be completely land locked on the island.  Put a freight dock in place of the car ferry, and tie up "tramp steamers" or coastal sailing ships depending on era and transload freight from the ships to the freight cars or vice versa either with long shoreman with strong backs or by crane and cargo nets.

Reply 0
David Husman dave1905

Designs

No problemo.

I come into these discussions with a bent towrds prototype operations.  So i try to rationalize the operations or figure out a "prototype" reason for the operations.

I also find if a hoot to try and formulate a model "history" to explain the railroads.  If you look back my stories are tongue in cheek (such as the part about the owner dying in a cricket accident). 

But I do have some perspective on how real railroads operate.  I have found that in many cases the difference between a prototypical explanation for something requires very minor tweaks to the story (or the layout).  If a layout has a reasonable story then people buy into the concept and it becomes "real" for them.  The trick is to come up with a premise that people can go, oh yeah that makes sense.

Once again not trying to change your basic concept, just throwing out  Ideas that might give you options. 

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index

Reply 0
David Stewart

New Ideas.

Russ, thanks. Your analysis of how I expect to spot passenger trains is, well, spot on. I have an older DPM Freight Station that I was planning to  use here, but as a ground level building without a platform. The passenger trains I was planning on running would consist of of an about 35' passenger car with a 24' or less baggage car. I have a whole fleet of one of these passenger cars currently. This arrangement seems to fit next to the station okay with enough room left over for engines to run around. I did have to go Googling to see if my impression that ground level stations were not unusual was correct; it seems I am okay there, but I did notice that my track was way too close to the station. So I'm working on trying to fix that. Does this sound feasible?

I am also trying out variations on your observations about Fantouche; it will probably be a few days before I have anything to report there.

As to era (another omission of information on my part), I am trying to push things as far as I can into the 1930's, whilst mumbling as much as I can about exactly when I am, for two reasons: 1) I like the Jordon line of scale vehicles and want to use them andb) I have some cute little critter type diesels I would like to run and want to press the era as close as I can to their entry into the scene without losing my ability to run steam or to render the Jorden vehicles obsolete. Pushing too hard here?

Dave, if I replaced, on the penisula, the syrup, cider and ice scene - which are all charming and everything, but honestly would barely keep my rail car lightly engaged - with say, a paper mill and brought in pulp wood on the car ferry from my island (Russ, I'm afraid the car ferry is going to prove to be hard to kill), would that help? Or am I now putting too much strain on the terrain of the island? I could also throw in some trucks hauling in pulp wood to tie it into the surrounding forests and to serve as a little harbinger of the unpleasent (for railroads) future.

Getting better or worse?

Dave Stewart

Reply 0
David Husman dave1905

Options

Here are some alternatives to the island concept.  Imagine a large river or lake with a river exiting it, with a series of waterfalls or rapids as it passes over or through an escarpment or ridge.  The standard gauge (SG) line in on the lower end of the "falls" and the narrow gauge (NG) line interchanges with it.  The  NG line owns the land for the only pasage over or through the escarpment/ridge.  Fantouche, the "port" is above the falls on the main body of the large river/lake.  There are several other towns around the lake, some of which have rail lines radiating out of them.  The ferry/barge service connects them all.

This scenario give the NG line exclusive access to the area around the water and the falls contain the ferry operation to the lake, keeping any direct interchange or passenger service out.  The rationale then becomes that the NG line is the "portage" around the falls.  That also funnels everything the towns along the lake need through the NG railroad (at least until paved roads are made and that probably won't happen until during or after WW2.)

Having several branches served by rail car ferry is entirely prototypical, the CP had such an operation in British Columbia that operated several branches around a lake using a car ferry.  There have been several articles on that operation published in railroad and modeling magazines.  It lasted well into the diesel era, with a FM H-20-44 as the switcher ferried around between the branches. 

Dave Husman

Visit my website :  https://wnbranch.com/

Blog index:  Dave Husman Blog Index

Reply 0
Russ Bellinis

Dave I had forgotten about "ground level" stations.

When I sent to other post I forgot that many stations, particularly on branch line or short lines used ground level stations where the conductor would set out a portable step when boarding or disembarking passengers.  I should have remembered, since I am a member of the Orange Empire Railroad Museum here in So Cal and that is the method they use for boarding and disembarking passengers from the train on their main line towards downtown Perris, Ca.

Reply 0
Reply