joergK. - New layout discussion

[joergK.]

Hello All,

I did my introduction here and thought to give you a peak into my plans for the next (5-10) years of my model railroading adventure.

As mentioned, I will work with Marklin M tracks, since I have lots of them and a good inventory of rolling stock, 90% German looking, 10% Canadian.

Controls will be with Marklin digital via PC etc., blocks and so on.

I have been hammered over the head by several colleges of building the bench first and than the layout on it, so I have done some work on the layout first to get a feel what I can do about the bench(es).

I also mentioned that I like to integrate the Lethbridge Viaduct into my new model. This is rather complex, but I feel it can be done with prefab section from our 3D printer, something I will need to learn .

The bridge is (now the metric guy has to go imperial) +5327' long, and at its highest part 314'. I feel I can build it in 1:1000 scale and fit it on my layout, some working copies below.

Here is something to glance at.

Original, 1907 Bridge Plan

My 1:1000 layout, still in progress with details

This is the present bench plan

I hope this all makes some sense, if not I will try to explain.

Joerg

 

[RhB Michael]

My only question would be how you will integrate a bridge in 1:1000 scale on a 1:87 scale railroad layout.

 

[joergK.]

That is the big question, but I don't have 61 1/4' to work with, so the rolling stock would look out of proportion with my idea, right.

 

[RhB Michael]

Very much so.

 

[joergK.]

Site question: with my thought to solve the question or with any bridge/structure?

 

[Iron Horseman]

Site question: with my thought to solve the question or with any bridge/structure?

Selective Compression. Right through the center I see a set of 11 bents that look to be all identical. Likewise on the right side I see a very long lead into the deep part of the gorge. Instead of having 11 have 2. Instead of the lead taking 10 reduce it to 4. Make the first dip on the left with only 2 instead of three. I think you could retain the feel of the bridge without having to reproduce it 100%.

 

[RhB Michael]

I visited a huge HO scale layout awhile back. The first thing that caught my eye was a scale model of the Eads Bridge over the Mississippi River at St. Louis. My jaw almost hit the floor. This was a scratch-built structure to scale. Of course, the Eads Bridge is not a mile long either.

 

[joergK.]

Selective Compression. Right through the center I see a set of 11 bents that look to be all identical. Likewise on the right side I see a very long lead into the deep part of the gorge. Instead of having 11 have 2. Instead of the lead taking 10 reduce it to 4. Make the first dip on the left with only 2 instead of three. I think you could retain the feel of the bridge without having to reproduce it 100%.

Thanks IH, that's what I like about this type of forum, bouncing thoughts of to other people to get the 'tunnel vision' opened-up. I will do some thinking about this. BTW, the river valley is not extra special and the relation of length to height above water level isn't either, it is the length in combination the 'only' 93' elevation that makes it worthwhile. West of the bridge is a large CPR marshaling yard with about 18 spur tracks to assemble/disassemble trains for west - east - south - north movement. The next is CPR marshaling yard Medicine Hat, Alberta. Just for info.

The idea to make this a 1:1000 scale came from the 'relatively easy' projecting it to a 3.75" height by 5'3.9" in length, something I could realize in my layout.

More to come, working on it

 

[joergK.]

Ok, this is the same bridge as 1:1000 with a train consisting of a Santa Fe Engine combination and seven standard grain cars in 1:87 scale. Doesn't look to out of proportion, does it? I guess building this bridge is a different subject.

 

[Rico]

That will be quite the undertaking!
I’ve been over that bridge a few times, scary as hell on a windy day!
I’ll be watching the build.
I had to look up 1:1000 scale, looks like it’s generally used in ship and airplane modelling.

 

[joergK.]

Hello All,

sorry for the lack of posting here, but I was two weeks partially out of commission, getting my left knee rebuild. I am slowly walking on crutches and getting better.

I have spend some time on my PC, trying to figure out hoe to build a track set with Win Track 17.0. I did not build the frame and bench around my planned track since I couldn't figure it out how to draw the frame in level 1.

Here my present layout

The High Level Bridge should go in, just need to figure out how best to do this.

Also, the ATL Grain terminal

Let me know your thoughts & ideas.

 

[GeorgeDaPorge]

I looked at several pics of this bridge. Impressive! I would agree with Iron Horseman with regard to removing several “repetitive” support towers.

What I find impressive is the height of the support towers and what appears to be “spindly” (flimsy) construction (I have a structural engineer background, so I know it’s not). My thought is the taller you can make the supports the better, as I think that will be an eye catching feature. Maybe a max 170’ towers (about 24” real) with reduced length, at 1:87, will look the best (if you have the vertical space for 24” H). Have fun with it!

 

[GeorgeDaPorge]

Ok, this is the same bridge as 1:1000 with a train consisting of a Santa Fe Engine combination and seven standard grain cars in 1:87 scale. Doesn't look to out of proportion, does it? I guess building this bridge is a different subject.
View attachment 256032

I would say that the length of the cars diminishes the visual impact of the bridge. It may look decent with reducing the width of the towers to 50’ from 63’, and the span between towers to 80’ from 100’, and still keep the visual impact. Just some thoughts to chew on…

 

[kjd]

As far as the bridge, selective compression is the way to go unless you are Yaron Bandell building the bridge over the Susquehanna.

Your 1:1000 bridge with a 1:87 train looks like a low pile trestle. The steel work went from rr bridge size to holding up a tin carport roof size. Reducing the size of the steel shapes by 10% might not be too noticeable but reducing them 90% would look wrong.

I think you have discovered a very common dilemma faced by model railroad builders everywhere, my imagination is far bigger than my available space.

The usual compromise is selective compression, taking major elements of the thing in scale instead of the trying to build the entire thing.

 

[joergK.]

I attached my updated plan with a shadow railyard in the lower level.

The grades are 3.3% & 3.5% on 7", or 3.5% on 8 1/4" on the down (left) side and 3.8% on 7", or 4.0% on the up (right) side.

 

[Iron Horseman]

Also, the ATL Grain terminal
View attachment 257632

That is one monster wide grain elevator.

 

[joergK.]

Thanks IH, that is why I think it has to be with the bridge.

I will putter around with it for a while.