Scale Mileage

[nephthyr]

The Silverton branch of the Denver and Rio Grande Western is about 45 miles long. Quite short by most accounts but in model terms its huge. Lets quickly do the math:

1 mile is 5280 foot
45 x 5280 = 237600 foot
HO Scale is 1:87.1
237600 divided by 87.1 = 2727.899 foot
That's 909.3 yards (2727.899 divided by 3)

So to model a small branch mile for mile in HO scale will require over 900 yards of trackage. Micro Engineering HOn3 flex track is about $32.95 for 6 yards of track, so some quick math (909/6 x 32.95 = $4991.925) gives us roughly $5000.00 just on track. Where you put 900 yards of track is beyond my guess.

So it is quite blatantly obvious that to model a small branch line mile for mile in scale is ridiculous, unless you have a rock star's paycheck and mansion to house it. And in the 1940's the Silverton branch only ran 1 train, a mixed local. So 900 yards of track to run 1 train, keep one operator busy for a few minutes. Worth it? I don't think so.

The way around this is to selectively compress the 900 yards into a more manageable chunk and increase the number of trains / operators. The Durango yard had a switcher and its not a stretch (albeit not prototypical) to add a switcher at Silverton, we now have three operators. Add a few passenger trains (the Rio Grande gold coloured Silverton of the 1950's is quite nice) and perhaps another freight or two and you now have potential for up to eight operators. More interesting? You bet!

The difficult question is what compression ratio one should use? How long should the scale branch be in order to keep eight operators busy for say a two hour operating session running trains back and forth without them getting bored? If we use a ratio of 1:5 (909/5 = 181) we get 181 yards. Much more reasonable, still going to cost around $1000 in trackage but I bet it'd be a lot easier to squeeze 181 yards into a large basement than 900 yards.

But is a reduction of 5 sufficient? I bet only experience in building large layouts and operating them will help to answer that one! In the meantime I'm looking to buy a basement (with a house on top of course)!

 

[FunValleyLine]

I dont remember exactly with out looking it up but I think I am close to 8.8 miles of track not counting turnouts. HO scale.

http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5641

 

[Gary B]

Well having ridden those rails and NOT being a operations oriented model railroader, it's the 45 miles between Durango and Silverton that makes it interesting. I've thought of modeling one side of the canyon, making each section tall and narrow. A track plan that snacks back around itself would allow for a lot of great scenary. Most of the flat approachs to Durango I would delete as boring. The two towns I would build back to back but visually separate with a pass through track for continuous running. This would also let your operators be near each other. Just my $.02 worth.

 

[cuyama]

A better choice for most layouts is to modulate the compression ratio -- greater in some areas, less in others.

Another key tool I call "compressive selection". This is choosing the more modelgenic scenes (or whole sections of the prorotype) that are smaller, when you have a choice. In other words, if there are two towns with a lumbering operation, I might choose and model only the smaller of the two.

Keeping a certain number of operators busy has little to do with the distance modeled (except that you'd like to keep them out of one another's way.) Instead, many have had success defining the desired operator roles and then choosing (or enhancing) a segment of prorotype that offered those specific roles.

 

[Selector]

Modelling means keeping things you see to a fidelity to scale, and it should apply to all aspects within reason. Even a solitary scale mile of track, however, is going to take up a chunk of basement, loft, or garage/outbuilding. If that's all it is to be is a scale mile of single track, then it can all be done in a loop shelf, with the shelf averaging maybe 10-12" wide.

But with a specific prototype, if 'modelling' is the driving term, then you will want some of the key elements that make the stretch of track unique and...recognizable ...by people with more than a passing familiarity with the area.

So, it becomes an exercise in deciding what you will eliminate, or what two elements must co-exist in order to create the gee-whiz whole that you desire.

If it were me, I'd pick a key location along the main between the two principal termini and do a good job of it. Maybe 600 yards or so. Then a fudged 'nuther few hundred yards, but in theme, until you get to either terminus which should be done up quite well, certainly the servicing and switching elements.

Also important, because it should be done very early, is the backdrop...it should match the environs depicted in the model.

-Crandell

 

[nephthyr]

Hi,

I meant this post as a thought piece to hopefully spark some interesting discussion and I thank you all for the replies, I'm glad to see guys like Byron and Crandell replying.

I have to agree that the scenery is definitely what makes this type of layout (Colorado narrow guage), but still, being the operations oriented modeler that I am I want to have my cake and eat it too!

There's no reason one can't have realistic group operation on a highly detailed and beautifully scenicked model railroad. Just look at Paul Scoles' Pelican Bay Sn3 layout which I find inspiring. The key is, how far do we go in trying to faithfully reproduce a prototype in miniature at the expense of operation?

I like what Byron said about modulated compression which actually really makes a lot of sense. I mean one of the sidings at Hermosa is 1000ft which when compressed by a ratio of 5 is about 2.3ft, ridiculously small. While I agree that selecting only modelgenic scenes is the way to go, what about the modeler who is a real rivet counter and wants to model the thing as realistically as possible with all the towns along the way? (Granted I dont agree with rivet counters but they do have their place among us)

I guess what I was going for is where do you draw the line? Obviously this is a very subjective question and the answer is most likely wherever the modeler feels comfortable and can manage within his / her resources.

For me, there's no point in building/buying highly detailed and prototype specific locomotives and cars (think Blackstone Models) if you're not going to run them on a layout of equal detail and faithfulness to the prototype and equally run them in a realistic fashion!

 

[cuyama]

what about the modeler who is a real rivet counter and wants to model the thing as realistically as possible with all the towns along the way?

Then that person would need to be extremely disciplined in choosing a correspondingly very short stretch of the real thing to model.

These questions really can't be definitively answered in an objective way. Trade-offs are personal and must be made individually.

That's what makes track planning and layout design something of an art and a science -- and why it is so interesting.

 

[Chris Roy]

It really does depend on what your objectives are. I'm starting on my first of a series of modules depicting a relatively short section of the UP mainline heading into Los Angeles, with a focus on local switching. The first module will be Praxair's liquid hydrogen production facility here, which is home to their fleet of cryogenic tank cars and a trackmobile. They have sixteen tank cars in the fleet, they're long cars, and they're almost always operated in pairs with the end-mounted filling compartments adjacent so two cars can be filled from a single position. I can selectively compress the scene a bit, and don't need the room to hold all 16 cars, but for a reasonable representation plan to go about 3:4 - basically a lot of real estate for one industry, because scratchbuilding the structures and equipment is of prime importance to me. The modular aspect will allow it to be a part of very prototypical operations.

- Chris