Thanks to everyone who’s answered my questions on the N Scale Salt Lake Route. I was looking through the Jan 2010 Model Railroader. Converting from HO to N Scale, I would have thought that one would run long train lengths. But the article shows rather short train lengths. Is this just a matter of taste or the 4 x 9 layout? For those with this layout plan or similar ones, what length of freight trains are you running?
Good day,
Why are you converting to N scale, the plan is in N scale.
Scott
First, the model. On any small layout shorter trains make the layout look larger and simplify operation. The way freight only ties up one town, not both mains all the way out into the desert… My own layout is a double garage filler, but my longest trains are less than 2.5 meters in length because that’s all the track needed for two rather small locomotives and twenty four-wheel wagons, even in twice-N scale. Happily, that’s just about what my prototype was running over that route in 1964
Then the prototype. While trains on the present day LA&SL aren’t as long as those on the transcons, an N-scale model would probably completely fill the longer mainline loop, to the point that the front coupler of the lead loco would be beating the rear-end device to death. I know whereof I speak - the LA&SL mainline parallels I-15 about three miles east-southeast of my humble abode.
The usual standard - that a train is long if you can’t see both ends at once - doesn’t get much help around here. From the mountain just north of my present location you can see everything there is to see along about forty miles of LA&SL track. If you put plenty of view blocks on the layout, it might work there.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
The poster is converting from H0 scale to N scale. The track plan is N scale all along.
As for the original question - why are MR running trains of maybe 6-7 40’ freight cars (i.e about 2 1/2 - 3 feet in N scale) instead of trains of say 30 freight cars (10-11 feet in N scale), or 7-8 passenger cars (4 1/2 feet or so) instead of 15-16 passenger cars (8 1/2 feet) ?
Perhaps because they have a 9 foot long view block down the center of their layout, and do not want the front of the train reappearing from the left immediately after, or even before the tail has disappeared from the right ?
Also - if you want to put a train into a siding (on the town side of the layout), the train should be shorter than the siding.
On the other hand - if BNSF4ever actually want to run two long trains chasing their own tails around and around two parallel loops , he should of course feel free to do so - it is his layout.
Btw - I must admit to being a little mystified as to why BNSF4ever would choose just the Salt Lake Route layout track plan as the basis for his layout, since his vision for his layout seem to be very different from Dick Christiansen’s vision for the SLR layout.
But whatever - if BNSF4ever is happy, he is happy.
Smile,
Stein
Stein
Thanks for sorting out my question. I should stop mentioning conversion since it seems to confuse some.
The SLR attracts me because it will fit in the corner of my tiny apartment and it seems to have a good balance of just running trains in loops (always impresses the friends even if it bores the hard core) and a few things to switch out.
My last HO layout was a shelf layout in my last apartment (though it ringed my entire bedroom). I could run trains in loops but I also had a yard, and about four online industries to switch out. There was a lumber yard, a grain silo, a cement plant, and a cold storage warehouse. I had all the rolling stock to fill those industries out but it was a hassle getting it all out of their cases in such a small space. So my desire to have some operations really got too much. Much of my rolling stock sat in bins for the simple reason it was a tremendous hassle to get them out of boxes, onto the layout, and then back away when I was done.
So with the SLR in my vision, I can run well cars and Amtrak Superliners in loops, switch out intermodal cars in the yard, and in my vision, switch out a small Ethanol facility instead of the furniture plant. That means I can run well/spine cars, hoppers, and tank cars. It limits the rolling stock I’ll need to buy and store. It gives me a few thing to switch out and run trains in circles for when Mom and Dad visit. It seems like a good balance. And N scale rolling stock is so much easier for me to store.
So in summation, I’m not looking to build the SLR as featured in the Jan 2010 issue, I’m just conveniently taking the track plan and pack. Again, I have a lot of things going on in my life and I just don’t have the time to research countless track plans or like last time, freelance and end up with track spaghetti.
I hope this clarifies my vision as it exists right now. I do appreciate everyone’s comments.
Just curious - if you have a permanent layout up, why do you have to take your cars off the layout and store them in their boxes between every time you run trains?
Smile,
Stein
[quote user=“steinjr”]
Just curious - if you have a permanent layout up, why do you have to take your cars off the layout and store them in their boxes between every time you run trains?
Smile,
Stein
Stein, we have four cats who live with us, and I have found that keeping them from “visiting” my layout which is currently under construction in the basement is a seeminly hopeless task. At some point in time I am hoping to come up with a more permanent soultion (short of banishing the felines from the house on a permanent basis) but for now I too remove all my rolling stock after I run trains to minimize the destruction.
When I had an HO layout it wasn’t as much of a problem, but now that I am in N scale, I find that our furry friends seem to be amused by being able to bat the smaller sized trains around. So that may be just another reason to store rolling stock between sessions.
And oh yes, before anyone suggests closing the door to the train room to keep cats out, my situation does not allow for this as there is NO door from the main floor down our basement… kind of an open concept kind of thing. Oh the joys of cat ownership…[|(]
Frank B
Dorval, Canada
The OP had his previous shelf layout in a bedroom. Bedrooms often have doors. Shelves (or sections of shelves - or parts of stand-alone layouts, for that matter) fairly easy can be encased behind removable hatches or under removable boxes to keep kids or animals away from the layout. So I was just curious as to why it was necessary to remove all the rolling stock between every run.
Not important - I just got curious.
Smile,
Stein
To answer your curiosity:
-
To keep dust off rolling stock. I’d often go days between sessions.
-
Roommate’s cats. Yes, I had doors but there were times they still got in.
I have a layout roughly the same size as the SLR and I run grain trains about 15 cars long with 2 locos. I wouldn’t really exceed that on the SLR. I plan to expand my layout soon so I will be going to 25 cars and two locos.
Just a suggestion about protecting unattended models against dust and livestock - build a staging area with a low overhead clearance and (optional) guilloutine gates over the approach tracks. The top can be a hinged cover, and the staging area could actually be a working yard when the cover is raised to (or past) vertical.
I don’t have any livestock problems, but I do have dust. Most of my models spend most of their time in the netherworld, protected from most dust by other things overhead. At the moment, mostly removable foam lids. Scenery will come, eventually.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
okay, let me think back a bit here about this. IIRC it was implyied that the layout could be operated using the two-track main on the desert side as staging. In one of the pics in the series I do remember seeing a train with 12 to 15 ''grain cars" and a pair of modern 6 axle engines. Not that short, even in N scale. As for more realistically operation on the layout, there is the aforementioned furniture company that can recieve a few cars at a time, the intermodal yard which had 4 tracks and figure 4 cars per track (not very realistic but 16 cars could be an entire “intermodal” train). There is also the engine facility which did have the capabilities to drop off a car or two for diesel fuel and sand.
If you look at the plan the first sketches also tossed in a tank car facility in there were a few more cars could be spotted (I think it was a refinery loading facility). So between the existing spots, and having to contend with crossing over double mains and turnouts in every direction, there should be enough little switching there to keep someone busy for a while.
I won’t divulge in the post, but there are some suggestions I can share that would make it look a little more prototypical, but may or may not affect the switching duties.
Oh, and I forgot about all the through trains. Just going by the modeled area hi-priority intermodal unit trains, through coal unit trains, through manifest trains, through grain trains, and also (as depicted in photos in the series) Amtrak through trains can also contend for trackage, but again not enough storage room to handle all that.