Still very excited from the experience many hours ago, I would like to write down some observations I made from the Operating Session I was fortunate to participate in on a very large privately owned model railroad.
HUMAN RESOURCES
From the “Human Resources” side of things it will be essential to be virtually guaranteed a level of commitment from the model railroaders in the area I live will want to be involved with such an endeavor. I need to seriously take this factor into consideration, as I observed needing over 30 persons to have the railroad function, would I have this level of support? The answer to that question will be determined if the area modelers like a 1950s era railroad, running with the traffic control system I design and use for the railroad, with the type of traffic that it will primarily be handling.
I would think the answer to the question of Era would be a Yes. Most of the modelers in WNY that I know either model or have an interest in the Steam to Diesel transition period, so there shouldn’t be an obstacle with that.
The type of traffic control system I still intend on using is Timetable & Train Order. However I need to make sure potential operators are willing to commit to the level of “study” required to successfully run a model railroad using such a system. There are ways to simplify TT&TO to make it work, so it is my hope the answer would be yes. The interim P&A currently under construction (though delayed because of issues with the foundation wall in the basement, becoming ill during a couple weeks this past month, and needing to replace the basement stairs which were falling apart) will be a good test for this. I may have to go with CTC, and keep TT&TO on the back burner. There might me a way to configure and design the layout with the possibility of returning to TT&TO in the future, though I would prefer not to have to make the huge investment required for CTC. Again, the Interim P&A will help determine all of this.
As for the type of traffic, though there will be a class 2 industrial switching railroad, a shortline railroad that has steep grades and sharp curves, more or less a small railroad that was once narrow gauge, that was standardized in the early 20th Century that has light rail and goes into the mountain countryside to serve some remote towns in western PA, and a coal branch, the primary purpose of the layout is to run traffic from the interchange with the NYC and NKP just west of Erie, PA to either Pittsburgh or Harrisburg (East Connellsville, PA is the end of the modeled portion for the Ultimate P&A Layout). There will a couple locals, but most trains on the mainline will be “run through” with some having some work along the mainline picking up and dropping off cars for interchanges with other railroads. There will be a heavy predominance of Coal Traffic. So the next question on the Human Resources side of things will be will the group want to come out at least once a month to operate such trains? I can not create this on the Interim P&A Layout exactly, because of the lack of space, but hopefully, I can find out if what I have started there is sufficient interest, and expanding on it would be warranted.
GIVENS AND DRUTHERS ON ACTUAL LAYOUT DESIGN
I would put most of this in the “GIVENS” Category. First off, NO DUCKUNDERS! Though there were only two duckunders on the layout I was just at, one was on the mainline, and even for someone who is only 37, it became a literal pain very quickly. Banging one’s head on the benchwork is not a good experience. There might be some “Nod-Unders” where some of the more taller operators (taller than 6’) might need to nod their head, but if it can be arranged in areas where the track needs to cross over the aisle, the goal will be to have a distance of 78” even if this means having a ramp to lower the floor underneath where this needs to occur, and with a WYE in the trackplan being needed in at minimum one location, this situation will occur.
Another Given is to have the Track Plan absolutely sincere, with the aisles following it at all times. Because of needed redesigns of the layout I was just at, there is a location one must traverse at least 75’ of aisle through a maze of aisles to reach the other side of a wall the mainline punches through. This really distracts from the experience of running the trains like the prototype and railfanning, which are two high priorities of mine. I consider it a major defect to the layout which the owner himself and most of his regular crew to accept, however, I would find it a major negative where I to have such a design on what I am going to be building. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but it is something I want avoid like the Plague!
Not having the trains disappear into complicated track directions is something I observed, even some of the regular operators on this layout had an issue with. “Now where does this track go to again?” was a questioned asked by many. Some who have been operating on this layout for over 10 years! Having as much track not only out in the open, but having it run from town to town in a manner that is easily to conceptualize in one’s mind is essential, especially on a very large layout with a very long mainline.
Having a long mainline run is something worth doing. One of the big reasons I had asked to be a guest to work on this railroad is to find out is having such a long mainline going to be worth the effort. My conclusion already is “YES! ABSOLUTELY” Though I only was able to take one train for the longest of runs from the Northern most point to Southern on the layout, even the shorter runs I was the engineer for with the long run was something I really liked. It did feel like a real transportation system that we went somewhere! Though the owner actually advised me were he to do it over again, he most likely would reduce the length of the mainline because the amount of work required to keep the railroad going is quite a mammoth task. However, I am concluding because of the different, what I would call styles” in layout design, I don’t think I will face the same type of challenges for several reasons.
First, the mainline is double tracked for most of the way. The P&A is a single track railroad. Second, though the mainline runs through towns where there is switching off the mainline, in most places there is trackwork from branchlines, industrial railroads, etc that occupy the space in many places, where the mainline just runs in the back of the scene to get to the next town where it has work. Nothing wrong with that, but it is not the type of design I plan on doing. There might be some locations where that happens, where I am attempting to model two railroads that serve the same town, but I would say a good 60-70% of the mainline will be single track with nothing but scenery with benchwork that is 6-12” deep. The only other layout that I am aware of that “stretched” things out like I plan on doing was the Batavia Model Railroad Club before it was dismantled many years ago. Having such open space for the mainline crews to operate over will make things easier, such as doing all the TT&TO work. It also, as long as I schedule to number of trains properly, will allow trains to run efficiently, and though there will be some challenges in terms of making sure your work is down at a town before a superior train comes through on the mainline, the having people sit and wait for 15-20 minutes before they can move again will hopefully be avoided.
That’s another observation I made. Fidelity to the prototype is, though important, not as essential as I first thought. On the prototype, train crews could sit for hours in a siding for many different reasons. Though prototypical, that is certainly not fun. I know of some people who don’t mind that, as they consider it replicating what really happened, and if they enjoy that cup of tea, great! But I for one did not care for it that much, and if I don’t like it, why should I expect anyone coming over to my layout to enjoy that either. Will it happen from time to time? Sure! Especially if the Dispatcher makes a mistake! But not flooding the railroad with trains where it always creates gridlock should be avoided so that for most of the time, train crews are enjoying watching their trains go by. My perspective on what is the primary focus has changed over the last several months. I still want to replicate many things from the prototype, but since I can’t be reduce 1/87th in size trying to replicate many aspects of what the real train crews did, is rather ridiculous. I know there are some who do, and again, that’s great! I say go for it, and if you can find a group of dedicated people to run things that way, the more the better. But I am starting to draw the line a bit more closer to the railfanning side of things. If I’m going to have things bet bottled up and gridlock, what is the sense of having a very long mainline run? It’s just more chances of getting aggravated and impatient and never coming back. This is something that is essential for the interim P&A as well. I might not want to have 24 trains staged in either direction for one Op-Session. Regardless of what Fast Clock Ratio I use, 48 trains in 3 or 4 hours seems rather insane the more I think on that. But that is something I will need to work out after I start to run things on the Interim P&A starting October 8, of next year!
Back to my observations and conclusions concerning the Givens and Druthers of the Ultimate P&A, having sufficient aisle width is an imperative. Most of the aisles were 4’ wide, and there were many times I felt like I was in a submarine. Not that I’m claustrophobic, having to negotiate my way through the aisle, I wasn’t able to enjoy watching my train while it traversed the mainline. After all, that was what this is all about isn’t it?! Well, at least for me it is! So for the Road Crew Aisles, 6’ is going to be the standard and minimum. I might keep that width even for Yard areas, because the Yard Crews will have their own 4’ Aisle. Since there will be fewer Crews using the Yard Crew aisle, 4’ should be sufficient. Because of space limitations, the Interim P&A has 5’ aisles, but no yards (other than staging) so having the situation with Yard Crews and Road Crews occupying the same aisle won’t happen. I might find 5’ is sufficient for just Road Crews, and if so, I could reduce aisles for the design of the Ultimate P&A Layout. Determining aisle width is essential as the size of the building is directly impacted by that. I had, before this evening, started to use 5’ wide aisles as the standard, which saved over 1200 square feet of building space. Reducing the width of the building from 40’ to 36’! Again my goal isn’t to have the “biggest private model railroad ever”. Or the biggest building either. It is to accomplish the operating goals, and since this is now my life’s work, I want to have something I will enjoy, or else I might as well sell my entire collection!
The other major factor that is going to impact the size of the building is train length. This is one that won’t be settled tonight. And once trains are running next year on the Interim P&A, though I won’t be able to have trains of this length operate during a normal Operating Session because they can’t fit into the siding, testing train lengths will be something I will be doing before coming to a final design for the Ultimate P&A. Even with the huge space available, train lengths on the railroad I was just at was about 25’ long. Though the era being modeled was mid-1960s to early 1970s, so the car lengths were typically 50’, so this definitely had a visual impact as 20’ of 50’ and 60’ cars looks shorter than 20’ of 34’ cars. Especially the hoppers. I want to have trains that look appropriate. Having three GP’s pulling 30 – 50’ hoppers just seemed out of place. There was not sufficient tonnage behind that train, even traversing mountainous scenery to make it look correct. Having longer trains, aside from the mechanical issues, which there are plenty of to begin with, having longer trains means longer sidings, bigger yards, etc. But perhaps having 1950s era equipment, 34’ and 40’ cars with some 50’ and 65’ (such as the Mill Gondolas) will look ok with such “short” trains. I have several A-B-B-A set of F Units I want to use. I also want to have a helper district, so it is important that a train look heavy enough that would require helpers. From a mechanical standpoint, having more than 20’ of train cars on the model might be all that the train can handle, I will have to take that into consideration as well. But in terms of just how it looks, train length is a key issue with me.
Another Given, which might be considered a Druther is having a significant helper district. With the length of trains I am considering using, a 2% Grade would require helpers. But this added activity for Road Crews was very interesting and is something I would want to add. I am even considering trying to add it to the Interim P&A plan but not sure it’s practical because of the various visual obstacles and one element that is key for having a successful helper district, is being able to keep a constant watch on the cars. We’ll see. But it is most definitely something I will include on the Ultimate P&A Plan.
HOW TO MANAGE PROBLEMS DURING OP-SESSION
One observation I keep making of layout owners who operate at the level/degree of having some level of fidelity to prototype operation is the layout owners do not have time during the Operating Session to actually run trains. THIS is my biggest concern. Do I want to build this very large model railroad and not being able to enjoy it with my friends while they are running trains on it?! Is it possible to chase away Murphy after a proper “shakedown” of the layout, getting all the bugs out so at some point I can enjoy what I will have invested so much time, money and effort into?! If the answer is no, do I want to pursue this still? I’m not sure how to answer those questions. I wonder how the Batavia Club managed things during an Operating Session. Or how the students at RPI do it during their Operating Sessions. Is it really practical to expect at some point where all the Gremlins are done away with, so all that is left are issues such as operator error, where someone else other than the owner handle such issues. Or will I always be stuck fixing problems during an operating session?
Building a smaller layout really will not have the desired results. But I am observing a larger layout won’t either because of the mechanical issues and with the larger size increases the chances of there being problems. Perhaps my experiences with the Interim P&A will help. If I am overwhelmed with handling issues during an Operating Session on that layout, I highly doubt I will want to create a larger layout because in the end, I wouldn’t be able to enjoy it.
CONCLUSION
In addition with the enjoyment of running on this magnificent layout, one of the primary purposes of being a guest was to have several questions answered. Some were, others are still pending, though the observations I gathered will be helpful in answering the questions. So now it’s on with getting the Interim P&A built and operational in the next 8 months!
Ken L.
