Naa, what I really mean is trying to fit a section of prototype into the room. I started out as purely freelanced, then as I learned more, slipped toward proto freelancing, and now trying to fit a section of the SR into the room. My goal is to model a single small town, but I can’t seem to reduce the tracks to fit without totally losing the relationship between them. It actually starts to look more like a freelance, made up track plan than the ones I actually did make up. Am I the only one who has this problem?
Most everyone has the same porblem, which is why "LDE"s alone aren’t the be-all and end-all.
Simple mathematical reduction only rarely results in a viable model track plan (unless you have a fairly large space for a fairly simple real-life configuration).
So the best approach is to try to “reverse-engineer” the prototype arrangment, figure out why it was built that way, then create a model plan that accomplishes what you need it to while appearing somewhat reminiscent of the prototype.
It’s more art than science and certainly more art than math.
Best of luck.
Byron
Byron’s right, you have to understand why they needed such a track arrangement. From that, you will be able to cut the fluff and find the essential.
I recently add the same problem when designing my yard and industrial track plan. I wanted to preserve the same track and turnout layout. Finally, I decided to learn the purpose of each of them. I came up with the plan in less than 15 minutes! (well, many days were used to search and analyze the prototype). In this hobby, less is more my friend.
Also, doing so will help you to understand how you will be operating the layout and building trains.
I think it’s a good idea to model a small geographical location with a sense of place. I had to compress a 2-mile long industrial spur in less than 30 linear feet around the wall and it was a real challenge (a compression ration of 1:4). However, it will gives you the opportunity to give a more realistic importance to your industries.
Matt
Rather than drawing a “trackplan” to scale, try freehand sketching the track arrangements as they sit, concentrating on theswitches and number and orientation of the tracks, not the length. Then look at it and decide what is the key elements, the signatures of the location. Is it a water tower next to the depot? Is it having a siding on either side of the main? Is it having all the industry at one end and the depot at the other? Identify that and try to keep those few (and I stress few) things in the plan, realizing the non-signature elements may have to be minimized or eliminated.
Once you have the “shape” of the track arrangement, then start sketching how it would be overlaid on the room space. Think of the track as a wet noodle and don’t be afraid to bend it ior slide it around on the footprint.
No you are not the only one. I’m trying to fit the Baltimore terminal of the Ma&Pa into a 40 ft long space, 2 1/2 ft deep. I need 60 ft and 5 ft deep. The depth is my real problem since I want to include the turntable and round house plus the tracks in front of it. As mentioned above, this falls in the “Art of Model Railroading” realm.
Enjoy
Paul
It seems to me that the ‘sense of place’ is established more by location-specific buildings than by accurately reproducing every tie and joint bar of the prototype. If the Jones Feed Mill was the major feature of Jonesburg, work on having a believable model of that, not the loooong passing siding that the mill spur connected to.
Likewise, the relationship of tracks to one another is more important than their exact length or compass orientation.
Unless we own a spare hangar at the airport (and a couple of spare megabucks) we have no choice but to compress and selectively omit things which are present in the prototype. In my own modeling, my specific track plans omit major chunks of trackage - I have pared them down to the minimum that will handle the operation. Still, I don’t think that anyone who has spent time in the places that I’m modeling will have any problem recognizing where they are, even though I’ve changed the names to protect the guilty.
Chuck (Modeling a selectively compressed approximation of Central Japan in September, 1964)
The concept is called “selective compression”, and is loosly defined as the art of deciding what needs to be a true, mathematically correct reproduction of the real world and what can be reduced more.
The most common examle of this is the distance between towns. On my layout, for example, the distance between Goodspeed Landing and Middletown is about 12 miles… which would require about 728 feet in HO scale. The actual distance between the two is about 3 feet, but around a corner and separated by a stream which helps to break up the scene.
Another example which I like to point out is a scale model of Mystic CT, built at about 1:100 scale (slightly smaller than HO) and on display at Mystic Seaport. It takes up an entire floor of a building – probably 10 x 30. The problem is, although I know everything is scaled correctly, it somehow looks, well, too spread out. Like there’s too much open space.
A model like that is great if you’re an architect and planning an office park, where you need to know EXACTLY what you can fit in a given space, but making your tracks or structures a couple of scale feet closer together than the prototype won’t detract from the appearance of your layout, and may actually make it look MORE realistic than a true scale model would be. It’s the perception that counts, not the true scale.
I build modular for reasons other than portability if I move, the two foot depth makes me concentrate on what is important and helps with key element determination at times. Lets just take the turntable and roundhouse, if you are in HO you know it is impossible to get both on two feet unless the roundhouse is small and it is orientated at the end (no through traffic. You are then left with few choices, first if you need the turntable it will take up more than half your 24". So you need a roundhouse with a cut off back against the back or an open back of a cut off one toward the isle. If you don’t really need a working table you can have part of the pit towards the front giving the suggestion of a whole other area with turntable, roundhouse and all other support facilities without actually showing them.
A lot of LDE can fit into an already compact modeling area of tunnel portals.
So, careful selection of a Layout Design Element to emulate while following Allen McClelland’s Virginian & Ohio rationale – To be just “good enough” is an admirable model railroading goal.
Gallitzin Tunnels (between Johnstown and Horseshoe Curve/Altoona) serve as prototype inspiration with pictures at the North East Rails website for CR&T’s helix tunnel-top at the community of Summit…
…with the railfanning bridge effect. but not necessarily exact bridge-type duplication – Meaning it should be just good enough. Here is the (right older) West Tunnel portal and the (newer right) West Tunnel portal (now a 2-track right tunnel with an abandoned left tunnel).
Also, note how the East Tunnel portals have different elevations plus sparse vegetation for its LDE inspiration at CR&T’s helix-bottom entrance, and; the unique leftover transition era steam blowers at the East Tunnel portals (see the MRR Prototype Forum thread about steam blowers).
P.S.: CR&T’s community of “Summit” is a small town to be
Depth of space is certainly one of the issues, to be able to incorporate some key structures that set the location and era. For a small town, in the middle of a single track main, there were a lot of industries to be workd. In a space of a mile and half or so, there were three cotton mills, two oil mills, three lumber yards, four fuel oil dealors, team track, a junction, one passing siding and two double ended industry sidings. This doesn’t count the RR service facilities, passenger and freight stations, nor the industries at the end of two branches served from this location. All this in a town of about 8000 during the mid 1900s. Now I can cut some of the duplicate industries and combine some of the tracks, but the end result always loses the flavor of the location. That’s the part I keep losing – the flavor.
Ten pounds of sugar won’t fit in a five-pound bag, no matter how long you try. Sounds like your prototype area is simply too large and/or too complex for the available space.
So you have at least three options. One is to allocate more space to this scene.
The second is to freelance a more achievable scene, leaving out things that are your lower priorities and take up a lot of room. Pick what you want most and don’t model the rest. Don’t model the branches, or just let them be represented by staging. Imagine that the RR servicing facilities are in the next town. Imagine a town that has fewer of each type of industry. It won’t be your original inspiration, but it also will be something that fits the space you have and allows you to get started.
A third approach is to select a more appropriate prototype location for recreating on your layout. I call this “compressive selection” – choosing a more modelable location nearby that has most of what you’d like but is of a smaller scope. For example, model one of the branches if it has similar features but is of a lesser scope.
Only you know your priorities, so only you can decide. I’ve seen many people stall out at this point for years, refusing to give up on their dream – and also never starting on something more achievable.
Good luck.
Byron
Thank Byron. What I’m currently building is a combination of options 2 & 3 above. Basically freelancing a branch with some of the key elements. I hijacked Sperandeo’s San Jacinto design philosophy (not the track plan), moved it across the country, and cut out 2/3 of the spurs. The good thing about a branch is I lose all those space eating engine service facilities. The bad thing is I lose all those interesting engine service facilities. [%-)] The current plan can duplicate the key movements, but not the volume of traffic of the area I’m modeling (Carolina Piedmont, 1950’s). I hope that when people see the finished scene it will strike that deja vu cord that they’ve been there before, but just can’t place it.
Perhaps you could model one of each, and represent the rest on the backdrop?
It’s hard to say exactly WHAT I did and in exactly what order, but one of the early steps was deciding how much of a train I could actually run in my space - the prototype may have had 50 car trains, but within my space limitations a 50 car train would probably occupy 3 or 4 towns at once. I settled on running approximatly 10 car trains.
Now I know how long the sidings have to be. Armed with that information plus various views of the actual railroad (much of the track is still in place and readily visible from Bing Maps bird’s eye views, although some has been changed from me chosen era). Both the modern Big Maps views and several historical topo map sites got me the track arrangments, and I adjusted siding and yard track lengths to match. My end result is essentially 4 LDE’s that join to create a fairly realistic but shrunken version of the actual C&F branch of the Reading.
In PA there is also the Penn Pilot web sit which has coverage of nearly the entire state in two aerial surveys, one from the 30’s and the other from the early 70’s. Other states may have similar resources. I find the Bing Maps bird’s eye views to be more useful than what Google Mas have, especially in more rural areas where Google can’t be bothered. For our purposes the Street View is often useless - the railroads ran in the backs of structures away from the street, and out in the country where the Google aerial views switch to satellite, you can;t trace current or former roadbed - but there are often bird’s eye views on Bing of that same area, taken close enough to follow existing rails or the ghost of a right of way through the trees and fields.
&
Fortunately USC (South Carolina, not the “other” one) has the Sanborn maps for the state on line. I have been able to match up current and former rights of way with the Google and Bing maps. They also have historical photos of some of the key buildings. I’ve gotten hold of SR timetables for several eras for the area as well some of the station plans. Also, many of the mill villages and the state have set up historical societies to capture the culture of these areas before they are all gone. There are times where I feel like I’m suffering from information overload.
But in the meantime, I’m continuing to build my proto-freelance branch. If I ever get the room to build the dream layout, I’d love to capture this area.
Just curious - which town is this?
Not so sure about that. Most people do not notice railroad “key movements”. They notice buildings and scenes. A few key buildings is more likely to make people go “I know that place” than a perfect track plan.
Smile,
Stein
The town in particular is Union SC, on the Columbia - Spartanburg line. If you google map it today, most of the industries are gone, just a big pile of dirt where they tore them down, but if you look closely you can still make out where some of the rail lines ran around town. The two branches worked from here include the old Buffalo-Union Carolina RR (it was actually an independent short line until the mid 50s) and the Lockhart branch. The BUC junction looks like something a model railroader would design with a switchback down from the SR mainline to a cut under the SR line right in the middle of town. You can just make part of this out on googlemaps. The junction for the other branch was several miles out of town and by the mid 70’s, was worked by a turn out of Spartanburg rather than Union. Buffalo, at the end of one branch is an interesting small town in it’s own right, while Lockhart on the other branch, would be a classic LDE.
Do you have a depression era route map, tried looking it up but found too much garbage in the way to sort out.
Let me give this a try. This is an overall map of the SR from the 20s. The route can be found between Columbia and Spartanburg.
http://www.railga.com/sr1917.html
This link should go to the USC digital Sanborn maps. You can search for the map of Union from there.
http://www.sc.edu/library/digital/collections/sanborn.html
The main rail line from Columbia through Union is still in place so you should be able to pick it out from Google or Bing. If you do Googlemaps in road mode, the rail line is shown. In street view the old station is still there, though what used to be four tracks crossing the highway is now one. Many of the old business are gone.
I think your answer is a little revealing. You say that your biggest concern is loosing the flavor of Union. Yet when you describe the place, what you describe is not flavor - it is route maps, track plans and lists of industries.
I had a quick look around - looked at the online sanborn maps at the USC (newest available was 1917) and some old pictures.
I also read though everything you have posted in this thread. Without knowing much about the town, it sounds to me like some essensials from Union would be southern railroad and cotton mill.
Looking at the 1917 Sanborn map (http://digital.tcl.sc.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/SFMAPS&CISOPTR=3024&REC=1), it seems like a reason