My Grand River & Western R.R.


lpd4005

Member
Hello everyone!


I thought I would start a thread to post my layout under construction after seeing how everyone is so helpful and supportive of the idea. I found this layout in the Kalmbach Books 101 Track plans, it is plan #58 called the Grand River & Western. My version will reflect my interest, whereby I like a little bit of everything i.e. steam and diesel (from old diesel switchers to SD-40’s to a 4-8-8-4 and all things in between that move freight). I am sort of partial of SOO LINE as well as NYC/PENN Central as I have a grandfather who was an engineer with them throughout the 50’s -70’s in Jackson, MI. Also I like 1970’s and newer rolling stock from 40-86ft cars.

I plan to modify some of the track by eliminating one of the crossovers that leads into the turntable from the left, I added spurs in the area of the map labeled by the author as Faraway, Old Bridge Station and, Mill Hill. I do not plan to follow any of the scenery type or location as depicted by the author rather, I plan to go with no water and mostly hills / cliffs with lots of trees. I plan to throw in freight station or two, lumber mill, some sort of silo facility, small oil facility and, maybe a small passenger station. I don’t want to stuff it to full of track and have no room for scenery but I don’t want to be bored either so I’m still looking at options in regards to adding / placing spurs. The only bridge I am planning to have is the one that comes off of the MILL HILL to the right and is apart of what I call the high reverse loop. I have to solve a grade issue for what I call the low reverse loop due to construction of the layout as a large module setup.

In regards to the yard, I was planning to follow the plans, and go with the turn table however, after reading up on the value of the cheap turn tables verses the cost of the better ones, I am seriously considering deleting the turntable and replace that area with a multi track parking / service area with a service building, I also may alter the length of a couple of tracks in the yard to accommodate some structures to add some locations requiring service.

As for the bench work, I narrowed the pit a little and terminated the angled outer frame at a joint to eliminate a joint and giving me a bit more wiggle room for track or scenery. The bench work is divided up into four equal 6’5” X 5”0” tables. The bench work is made of a 2x4 outer frame and a 1x4 inner frame. The table top will consist of 4’x8’x1/4” OSB panel that will be “cookie cut” on the green lines as depicted in this image:

th_table5.png


th_layout-2b.png


I plan to use 1x4 riser’s screw mounted to the table frame to hold the paneling at various heights to achieve the elevations that the author indicates. I will be adding images of the bench work here as soon as I get it stood up, I have the tables built now and just need to make and attach the legs and stand up each table and bolt them together.

As for the track, I plan to use atlas nickel code 100 flex track and #6 turnouts as indicated by the plans. I initially wanted to use the Walthers code 83 but I cannot justify the high cost when comparing to the code 100. All of the turnouts within hand reach will have manual ground throws and I picked 6 turnouts to be powered with tortoise switch machines and used with a stationary decoder to run them. I plan to use the woodland scenic’s track roadbed rolls and super sheets for the yard.

I plan to eventually add occupancy detection and block signals as I plan to add the LED track signals. I used some of the original indicators used for DC wiring to ascertain the blocks. In the end the outer and inner main lines will be broken into five blocks each, the reverse loops two blocks each, and a block for each left and right yard entries ending up with a total of 16, just right for the future Digitrax system components I plan to add later.

As for the power, I am looking at a Digitrax super chief 5A and a matching 20A power supply, a stationary decoder and at least two auto reverse modules. I am also adding an IR sensor to take advantage of the wireless capability.

I am not certain how to build the scenery yet, my old layout when I was a teenager, I used ole fashioned window screen and model plaster to fill in the gaps of an old 4x8 cookie cutter. I need to get another book about scenery lol, so far I got books for DCC overview, track laying, benchwork, yards, track side details etc. So any suggestions about scenery will be welcome, I do like a lot of trees and ages ago on my ole 4x8 I had the woodland scenic kit trees and they were a disaster so ill probably go with ready to use unless they are to expensive. There is only two rather short tunnels so I’m not going hog wild with those either.

[FONT=&quot]So that’s about it as far as what I like to do with what I am building. Anyone have any suggestions about the engine service facility? Maybe suggestions on where to place more spurs? What would you do about the scenery etc, I love bouncing ideas of others I think it results in a better layout to have other perspectives. Thanks ahead of time. [/FONT]
 
To me the track plan looks like old school spaghetti with old school operations, a train goes out of the yard makes a few laps and back to the same yard. The curves look like 18" radius minimum which is best suited for 4 axle diesels like GP9s and 40' cars, not modern hi cubes or 86' boxes by any means. It is hard to fit a model RR into a small square because by their nature railroads are linear. Is 10' x 13' the shape of the space you have? If not, I wold consider the tables placed end to end or in an el shape. You can then have a double ended yard. I had a stub ended yard and hated it. It worked fine, it held trains, but it was a pain to stop, back the train in, etc. It just felt clumsy and awkward. The trains ran fine in it but I didn't like it and so I avoided it then thought what is the point. It is supposed to be fun and how I want it to be so I changed it all up and made two through yards, one for staging and one for making up trains to switch industries from cars dropped off by trains running to and from staging. Another reason to avoid the square and go linear is you don't have to crawl under the layout to get to the operating pit. As time goes by crawling gets less and less fun. So those are my first two thoughts and they are probably worth what you paid for them.
 
Thanks for the reply, the curves are all 24" minimums and 10x13 is pretty much all the room i have and thats putting me at a slight disadvantage...
 
A double track main line, a couple of "branch lines", and a nice big yard. If what you like is running trains vs. constant switching, this plan should fit the bill. Everybody has different interests -- we don't all need to make shelf-style / around the walls / linear layouts. I happen to have a modular/shelf-style, linear, point-to-point layout under construction, but I've planned for a removable section about 3' long that I can "plug in" to give me an option for continuous running when I just want to "model railfan". If it works for you, go for it! That's why this is such a great hobby!
 
Riverotter is exactly right, if it works for you go for it. If you ask 100 people's opinion about a plan you will get about 100 different answers but in the end, it you like it that is all that matters. When I built my last layout, it had parts I didn't like and changed them until I did. Some people press on long after they should have taken a different course.
24" is better but still tight for large or modern equipment. There is an article about curve radii in the premier issue of Model Railroad Hobbyist mediazine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bridges

Anyone have any experience with the micro engineering truss bridge kits? I am considering using that particular model for spanning the entire portion of the upper right part of the above track plan instead of having hills and multiple bridges. My problem is, that I am unsure what version of the micro engineering model would be the best for the span that is approximately 5 or so feet long ant approximately 5-8 inches above the surface (the surface will vary s it will be a cookie cutter). Here is a random link to the model I am considering, I just happened across it and thought having a image would help demonstrate what I am considering. I am unsure if it is to tall or short and how many I would need if I go with a truss bridge. http://www.internettrains.com/merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=MEC-75-550

Or if you have any alternative suggestions on crossing the span, I thank you ahead of time for the assistance.
 
Hi Robert: I believe that 210 scale ft. bridge would be approx. 29". So, for 5', you would need 2 bridges. ME makes some great bridge kits. I have 2 bridges on my layout, using ME bridge kits.

This is a double track 144' thru girder bridge with a tall viaduct tower.

P1010575.jpg


This is a combination of 2 50' and 3 30' ballasted deck girder bridges.

P1030321.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert, that's a real nice model and well worth the money. It's very adjustable for different elevations and even curvatures. However, don't buy it from the vendor in the link. Try www.modeltrainstuff.com or www.hobbylinc.com. Both have good prices and, more importantly, good service.

That bridge is 210' real feet long, which is about 29" in HO scale. Assuming you have somewhere between five and six feet to bridge, you'd need 3 kits. I think this would be a good kit if you want a spectacular high bridge to span a big valley.
 
Thanks for the input it is well appreciated. I am guessing the exact span as Im still working on benchwork but I selected this specific model out of the walthers catalog and found a online image from that vendor and thus the reason I used their link, to give an idea what i was talking about. I have no plans on buying anything form them at this time.

I selected the model because of its claim to versatility and the ability to take a curve, the above plan calls for a few spans with hills in the middle, I thought it would be a nice visual to make it all one long bridge. Again thanks with the help, ill post images soon of the bench work. The image of looking at the layout in a book don't do justice since I now have the table frame work, the size of it is a big change from the ole 4x8 I had a number of years ago.

I just took the plunge and ordered the bulk of my rail, turnouts, DCC etc tonight from Cherry Creek, cant wait to see the box in the mail in the coming week or so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Progress update

I apologize ahead of time for the blurry look from a cheap digital camera however, here are a few snaps of my pike, as you can see I now have the bench work up and I am in the midst of laying roadbed and track work and tinkering on the side with my digitraxx and locos, enjoy! any input or questions are welcome:

IMG_0001.png


IMG_0002.png


IMG_0003.png


IMG_0004.png


IMG_0005.png


IMG_0006.png


IMG_0007.png


IMG_0008.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Robert: I believe that 210 scale ft. bridge would be approx. 29". So, for 5', you would need 2 bridges. ME makes some great bridge kits. I have 2 bridges on my layout, using ME bridge kits.

Grampy, those photos of your layout are breathtaking, especially the second one!
 
Robert, looks like a great start. I'm concerned about those double crossovers at the top and bottom of the left side. By not leaving a straight section beween the switches, you've created an "S" curve which will almost certainly be the source of derailments. If you inserted a straight section between each switch, you would resolve that issue.
 
Robert, looks like a great start. I'm concerned about those double crossovers at the top and bottom of the left side. By not leaving a straight section beween the switches, you've created an "S" curve which will almost certainly be the source of derailments. If you inserted a straight section between each switch, you would resolve that issue.

I'm not quite "tracking" ya (pardon the pun but I couldn't resist lol), are you referring to adding rail on the portion of the turnout that takes the train from the main path to the diverging path?

I have found space problems in trying to follow the blueprints for this pike. They call for 24" radius and all #6 turnouts. I did have the blue print magnified and determined that they have 2" spacing between mainline centers and 2 1/4" spacing in the curves. So with the #6's I am having to butt them up to each other for the diverging route and I am still having a problem getting them all to fit per the blue print. I think I had to move one crossover in that picture to a different area to accommodate all of them. I looked at spacing the centers out a bit but I don't have the room in either direction. Any suggestions?
 
Update 04-01-09

Here are more snaps of the layout, I used a different camera so they are focused unlike the cheap digital from earlier. I also have completed more track work and pulled out my vintage rolling stock and cars, the UP SD-45 is my newest acquisition from DCCInstalled, I am very impressed with its detail and the way it operates, well let me know what ya think!




th_DSC00299.png


th_DSC00300.png


th_DSC00301.png


th_DSC00302.png


th_DSC00303.png


th_DSC00304.png


th_DSC00305.png


th_DSC00306.png


th_DSC00307.png


th_DSC00308.png


th_DSC00309.png


th_DSC00310.png


th_DSC00311.png


th_DSC00312.png


th_DSC00313.png


th_DSC00314.png


th_DSC00316.png


th_DSC00317.png


th_DSC00318.png


th_DSC00319.png


th_DSC00320.png


th_DSC00321.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert, look at the top switch in the last photo in the original picture post. Follow the flow of the track from that switch to the third inside track to the second inside track. You'll see the track is in an "S" shape, which is bad for motive power and rolling stock going through the crossing. You can potentially have one train heading in three different directions at the same time, which is the direct route to derailment city. :) If you add even a 6" straight section between the two switches on the third inside line, you'll straighten out the "S" curve and have a lot less problems.
 
Robert,
The curves of the mains are pretty close together. Have you tried a large 3 axle loco and/or rolling stock to make sure they dont hit? Best thing to try is a long engine coming out of the turn on the inside track with a long rolling stock car or engine half way into the outside first curve section. The outside car will overhang towards the inside and the engine will protrude towards the outside. If it is a problem just begin the inside curve a little earlier.
 
I see what you mean now Jim however; the images are a bit of a optical illusion. The switch you are referring to connects its through route to the crossover so its not to bad as it is more or less only one S-curve, I do understand your concern however, given the space allotted and the overall plan, I am pushed for space and there isn’t much room for adjustment. So far I have been able to pull and push 4-10 cars from 40-53’ through my entire yard without incident and I have been able to run all of my engines through them as well. My biggest problem with the whole layout thus far is the turnout points moving from vibration because I don’t have any switch motor or throws installed yet.

I followed the blue print and established the curves with a 2 1/2-inch space on centerline and 2-inch for the straight sections. I have been able to have my SD-45 pass my SD-40’s in a curve without problems as well as have the SD-40’s through the inside while my well cars are on the outside.

My earlier concerns about grade aren’t too much of a problem either. I pulled all of my rolling stock (approx 20 cars) in one train and it pulled fine but a long train sort of looks out of place on this layout (or at least till I get scenery in to hide some of it). So keeping trains 10 or less units long looks good and isn’t a problem for my GP-38, which will most likely be the smallest road engine I will own.

I did run into a bit of a problem of having a grade and curving joint over a table joint on the lower reversing loop, I couldn’t get it to keep its shape with mere rail joiners so I had to revert back to solder the joint and it appears to be resolved although it appears that 3 axle locos need slower speeds as the particular joint is a bit touchy.

I am pretty much done with construction till I get my back order of road bed and my turn table in and I then need to scrape up the cash for a couple of the micro engineering girder bridge kits to span that approx 5’ space of the upper reverse loop. I did opt for the 35$ Walthers special for my turn table and hope that a little TLC will avoid the problems I have read about it.

[FONT=&quot]I am looking to buy a scenery book or two to give me a background on ‘how to’ make scenery. I want to go with a northwestern USA look with the rock formations and huge amount of trees. Anyone have ideas towards scenery that would give me a few different perspectives feel free to speak up I appreciate the help and the ideas. [/FONT]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ive been looking around at the variety of "how-to" books and videos available out there and I am somewhat perplexed on which one(s) to get. I would like to dress my layout up in a more northwest USA type of scenery with the tress and etc, anyone have any suggestions on what book(s) or Video(s) to look at? any info will be greatly appreciated.
 
Bridge Question

I have a new question in reference to my layout here. I have been waiting for a specific Micro Engineering Bridge kit for several months now and after looking at the Joe Fugate's Siskiyou line videos concerning scenery, I am considering the idea of scratch building the bridges I need.

I originally ordered the Micro Engineering 210 ft low truss bridge with bents because it is long and able to be built to incorporate a radius in part of the span, I ordered two of them back in March and they have yet to arrive (internettrains.com) and I can save over $100.00.

How hard would it be to build them out of the plastic scratch building materials? Anyone have an idea where to even get a design or is their someone that can design one if given the dimensions?

thanks for the input ahead of time...
 



Back
Top