Ok so here’s the plan. The layout is actually 20x45 so the paper was a little small for what I was doing, so don’t mind the bench work touching. This is P48 O scale. Basically this is harlowton to three forks Montana mostly electrified (Except for staging. That’s mostly anything east) trains would swing up from staging (40 car trains ) and make a pickup or setout, depending on what’s made up in the train, while adding an electric for the climb to three forks. After the initial stop the train would be led around the layout making meets from trains coming back from three forks (Olympian Hiawatha or freights) The train would continue to three forks where setouts and pickups are made again. Power would be swapped (the only time the wye is actually used is for wying power at three forks. The train would be made up to go back to harlowton. Meets would be made once again keeping in check of the timetabled Olympian hiawatha and finally back to harlowton where the electric would be dropped off and back to staging the trains goes. All in all there would be three switch engines (staging, Harlowton, and three forks) two mainline freights and two Olympian hiawathas with timed stops. And a possible shover helper service. So I could keep 6-8 dedicated people going. Minimum radius would be 60" curves and minimum turnout would be #6. I had a friend recommend to me the NP mainline connect with three forks to make interchange (even though that never happened) but to me would ruin the scene near three forks where the Milwaukee crossed over the Missouri River and NP main, but that’s why I’m here, to see what you guys think. I drew this out with a straight edge, pencil and pen.
You mentioned the limitations of the size of the paper you were using, so I’m going to assume that there is ample aisle space at the end of the Harlowton lobe. I can’t see anything objectionable about the plan, but I do have some questions and observations.
-
Details about the staging area would be good to have. How much staging; how many tracks; is there a loop or wye for turning the passenger trains?
-
How long are your passing tracks?
-
Have you tested your P48 equipment, especially the passenger cars, on 60" curves and #6 turnouts? If they give problems on those curves, that would probably be a deal breaker. P48 scales out to 1/48 full size. Many of us think in terms of HO, which scales out to 1/87.1 full size. That means your 60" radius curves would be equivalent to 33" radius in HO. That would be fine for standard wheels, but I don’t know whether the P48 wheels would require a broader curve.
-
As for the N.P. connection, it sounds like you are more interested in representing the railroad as it actually existed, whereas your friend is suggesting something that would expand the operating possibilities. Both of these approaches are valid, but the final decision has to be what pleases you, and nobody else.
I’ve toyed with the idea of changing from HO to O scale as my eyesight has deteriorated with age. I’ve actually acquired a few O scale freight cars, and have given serious thought to P48. I’ll be very interested to hear about your progress. I hope to learn from it.
Thanks for sharing this.
Tom
An interchange could help make ops more interesting. I have two questions/comments.
Was there a relatively nearby interchange point on the MILW with the NP? Even though the actual location may be different than 3 Rivers, selectively compressing things to place it there does make a certain amount of sense. I’ve done that with several aspects of my layout.
If there’s no need to connect the NP “river track” ( I assume not) is it possible – because you noted you compressed the plan to fit the paper – for the NP to come in between the bridge over the river and 3 Rivers? Even better would be to have that line descend to staging, where one could start it from, have as a passenger origination/destination point, etc. If the corner behind the bridge and NP river track were coved, it could provide cover for the descending NP track to staging.
Thank you for getting back to me. To your first question, yes the aisle will be about three feet between the harlowton loop and the mainline. Plenty of room for people to get around. It was a cruch so I decided to just leave it as is. To the second question, I have not actually drawn those out but will be approximately 6 tracks going around with a passing on the outside for getting engines back to the head end. Two shorter tracks will be dedicated to the passenger trains and then the other three will be for bring in and making up mainline freight. I’ll have to draw it out and show that. To your third question, taking in the curves I figured the passing track would be around 30 feet long. And when you add in 30-40 40’ cars that comes out to be 20 to 26’ of train. So should have ample room there. A 10 car passenger train will be about 15’. As to your fourth question, I should clarify the curves. From the center to the outside curve at harlowton is 60". So the whole curve is 120" or 10’ feet across and yes I do keep to very tight p48 standards. And that will be the minimum radius. I have run passenger cars around that and it does work out pretty well. I equip all my cars with roller bearings so they roll with the breeze. So hopefully with a banked curve and some more calculations it will workout just fine. I could also make it a hair bigger if need be. The yard will have #6 turnouts and all mainline will be #10. So should have plenty of leeway for passenger trains. The Olympian should never have to enter the yard and I may add a setout track for certain passenger cars. Ya the scene where the milwaukee crossed the Missouri and NP is a very famous scene and garnered much attention when photographers were out on the Milwaukee. So I want to make it as realistic as possible and not change it up. I understand the operating aspect but I’m not so much for that since I have plenty anyway. I find O scale is so much more eye appealing and it truly makes people turn heads. You can buil
In the real world. The Milwaukee and NP were split by the Missouri River with one running the north side (milw) and the other running the south side. The interchange spot was actually at Butte mt. Another 60 miles from three forks. There was at one time a connection between the NP and the milw at that bridge but the connection was very steep and was gone by the mid to late 50s. There are a couple of photos showing the depots located at that point. When the videographers came in during the 70s there was absolutely no distinguishing the road bed, and both depots had been demolished as well. I can certainly try and figure that in and see what I can come up with. Thanks for the input!
james
16 Mile Canyon! Couldn’t have picked a better location to model. Of course Eagles Nest will be a highlight I hope?
As you may already know, there was an interchange with the NP at Lombard, you can see the old railbed from the satellite pic.
One correction however, The climb from Harlowton would be to the Loweth Substation…
then downgrade to Ringling…
all the way to the Mighty Mo’ and the bride at Lombard, which it then took a water level route along the Missouri to Three Forks.
Keep us posted on your progress, I have many pictures of the mainline in Montana posted on my blog listed below.
ah thank you geared steam! I am still learning the many names and areas! Eagles Nest. That’s what they called that. And yes it will be the highlighted scene on the layout. One of my favorite spots! I have seen photos of the interchange but for the area and space I would need to make that connection just isn’t possible at the moment. (Sigh) but none the less will still have a cool scene. 
and the loweth substation. I’m thinking that was station 1 correct? I haven’t seen of any photos of one at harlowton? And on google maps there is a photo someone took at ringling which
If the P48 min radius turns out to be the sticking point and it’s a freight-only interchange, this might be a place where you can fudge the min radius some since there will be no need to accomodate those magnificent passenger cars, etc.
Hey mike. Ya I’m thinking that was for freight only as some of the pictures I have seen have a freight depot in them. Being that it was steep I would guess that a passenger car would be way to big to fit down that line but I may be wrong.
James
Loweth MT. was #2, the Two Dot MT. substation was #1, which burned down and was replaced by a more modern substation until electrical abandonment in 1974.
I took the picture below in July 2013. I also brought home a souvenier brick from the old substation.
Eagles Nest Tunnel below, on a private ranch with no access unfortunately.
In the future I’m planning on modeling the northern Montana division from Lewistown MT to Great Falls. GP9’s and yellow grain hoppers. [tup]
This is completely unfamiliar territory to me, so I dug out an ancient Official Guide to get oriented. I don’t understand how you plan to handle through trains. I understand that westbound trains coming into Harlowton will pick up electric power; but I don’t understand how you plan to realistically change back to diesel or steam before the train heads back into staging.
The electrified territory ran west from Harlowton, through Three Forks, to East Portal. It seems to me that your trains ought to go all the way to East Portal for an engine change before disappearing into non-electrified staging.
I’ve been playing around with a design for a twice-around continuous mainline with the lower level set up as hidden staging. The footprint is the same. For orientation, I’ll use normal N-S-E-W orientation, with reference to your drawing. Trains would come out of staging into Harlowton, just as you have drawn. They would curve left out of Harlowton and go through the scenic area, which is moved to the north wall. Three Forks would be on the west wall, across the aisle from the end of the Harlowton lobe. Then the train proceeds to East Portal on the south wall, and disappears into the tunnel in the SE corner. After entering the tunnel, trains would run behind and under the north wall trackage and enter a staging yard under Three Forks/East Portal. They could continue to Harlowton or they could be broken down, switched, or reversed direction at the staging yard. Passenger trains could be turned by negotiating a loop under the Harlowton loop. That loop would be accessed via a subterranean wye along the east wall.
I know it’s not a good idea to mess around with another guy’s vision; and the problems I see may be imaginary, or unimportant to you. If that’s the case, then by all means build it the way that pleases you.
Tom &nbs
Tom
Not to pit nicks, but the catenary went through the tunnel to Avery Idaho, then the “gap” as it was called was between Avery ID to Othello WA. BUT to have the east portal modeled as the “end” of the western route on a layout would be good disguise.
Avery Idaho yard where the electrics were removed and the diesels added for west bound trains to Othello. East bound trains coming would often have a Little Joe put on point for the trip to Harlowton, leaving the original diesels on the train.
It’s obvious that I don’t know the area & the operations too well. This is one of those cases where the layout builder’s vision trumps any suggestions I might make. Which is as it should be.
Tom
I have looked this over again & realized something has gotta give. I am using regular N-S-E-W compass orientation here. If the room is 20’ wide, you can’t get 2 side-by-side 60" radius turnback curves in the available space adjacent to the east wall. Each of those curves has a diameter of ten feet, so they have to overlap, or they have to be built to a tighter radius. As drawn, the plan does not allow for overlapping.
oh you most certainly can. I’ve seen it done on ted schneffs layout in Chicago. Basically where the idea for that came from. The middle radius being 10’ across would allow five feet On either side. Basically the aisles would be 3’ and the railroad 2 feet. A 120" curave cut in half would be 60" from center to outside as that’s all you would be using on each corner. The bench work would follow the railroad itself so the aisle between the outer curve and the middle curve would be about 3 feet. Remember that the paper was too short so I had to scrunch it down so the aisles are narrower than should be. But I have measured it out and they do fit.
And the operation. Trains would come up from staging setout and pick up at harlowton (as well as pick up the electric) just imagine the “wye” not there as the only time it will be used is to wye power. The train would makes it’s way around the layout (meeting trains at the siding) and once it reaches three forks, the train gets mostly setout and what’s left probably switched into locals. The power will get swapped and a new train and power built to go back to harlowton. the electric will probably be the same so if need be it would then be spun (using the wye) the train would be made up and back around to harlowton it would go (meeting at the sidings) electric would be dropped at harlowton and any pickups that need to go back down to stagin
You say you’ve measured it and it fits. If that’s the case, then that’s all that matters.
Tom
FYI-Harlowton had a wye, as the Northern Montana Division (to Lewistown) left the mainline and went north (east of the station)
From the Hwy 12 overpass, the NMD roadbed as it heads north to Lewistown.
The Harlowton yard above.
Three Forks had a wye that went southeast to Bozeman, not much photographs on this area for me to share.
Geared steam. Thank you so much for the photo drawing. I knew the wye was there but had no idea that was how it was laid out! That will help me when I do decide to redesign harlowton. Where did you take the picture? And I will have to take a look at three forks again. Any evidence of a wye is pretty much gone as I certainly didn’t see it when I was looking at google maps. Of course with 34 years gone since the rails disappeared why would I!?
At the Harlowton Depot, it is now a museum, The caretakers (Irvin and Carol Naasz) of the museum live right across the street in a Milwaukee Road bungalow, he working for the “Road” until the end, once the PCE was closed, he purchased the bungalow from the railroad (he was an employee, track maint supervisor) The museum has an excellent collection of memorbilia, I would highly recommend a visit if you ever have a chance. I have many more pictures of the Harlowton museum at this link.
As far as the wye is concerned, there are still signs of them all over the area except for Three Forks, as development has removed any signs. I may have a track diagram or know where one is, let me look around.
https://www.facebook.com/MilwaukeeRRMuseum
http://visitmt.com/listing/categories_NET/MoreInfo.aspx?IDRRecordID=19043
I found a track diagram courtesy of Michael Sol’s Milwaukee Road Archive site here.
The wye to Bozeman is below right, the modern day picture shows one tail of it still exists from Google maps.
