Thoughts on Modeling Prototype Trains

Category: Research

Birch Creek in the Birch State

Posted on by jkdummler

Have you ever had the feeling that you’re close to the right idea, the right ‘thing’ but you’re just missing something intangible until you realize in an ‘Ah-Ha!’ moment, what was missing or off?  We have a sort of philosophy in our house that when something is “right” and you know it’s “right”, it clicks, it energizes, it removes any kind of turmoil.  

To go along with that, at several points I’ve said out loud to multiple friends that if I “ever change scale, I’d go model logging in New Hampshire in a heartbeat” or some similar version of that statement.  The thought always was that the research I did several years ago for an article that was published in the Layout Design Journal on early 1900’s railroad logging in New Hampshire would come back to the surface in On30 or On3.

The log pond and mill on the Gordon Pond RR, Johnson, NH (Author’s collection)

Fast forward to 2019 and the decision to shrink the layout footprint, and then go give in and add narrow gauge to the equation.  I had focused in on the Mann’s Creek in West Virginia for that project, but as I started making decisions and looking at model choices, it wasn’t ‘right’.  I was close, the narrow gauge was right, just like modeling the N&W in Cincinnati, OH was ‘right’ and progress has continued to move forward there.  I found myself stalling out, again, and looking at other narrow gauge options from throwing in the towel and modeling Colorado to modeling the Nevada County Narrow Gauge, or something else.

As we set up paper the redraw a narrow gauge track plan over the weekend, my wife and I were discussing my unease with the long-term attention factor involved in this project, and her statement to me was “Well, the scale is changing… why don’t you consider modeling New Hampshire like we’ve talked about for several years now?”

Gordon Pond RR Shay #1. This is a perfect size, at 25 tons, for an upper end on the Birch Creek (and of course, in HOn3)

Like a ton of bricks, it hit me, that was ‘right’.  New Hampshire is the ‘right’ answer for me with narrow gauge.  I wouldn’t have to change much, I’d loose coke ovens, but gain more logging, would also gain some interesting New England scenery and other industries, and the majority of the structures wouldn’t change, they’d just become gravel loaders instead of coal tipples or warehouses for the railroad instead of mine company warehouses.  

With the resources already here, in books and magazines, as well as online at White Mountain History (http://whitemountainhistory.org/Gordon_Pond_Railroad.html), it was easy to envision how to adjust the Birch Creek for New Hampshire logging and granite hauling.  As a bonus, the railroad doesn’t need to change name.  The White Birch, or Paper Birch, is the state tree of New Hampshire (since 1947) but the trees are quite common in the state.

Deciding to make a change, and be inspired by New Hampshire and New England logging railroads, I first looked to see what, if any, railroads are recorded as having been narrow gauge in the area.  While there were a few, the closest to a narrow gauge logging line that I’ve so far come across was the East Branch & Lincoln.  The EB&L was actually a standard gauge line, but there are some indications that J.E. Henry started in 1901 to use narrow gauge to log the line that was eventually the EB&L standard gauge.  Size wise, the railroad I envision is kore like the Gordon Pond Railroad, a competing line built by George Johnson, also near Lincoln, NH.

A few criteria start to become clear.  The line needs to reach Town A, like Lincoln, NH, where it will have shops and a way to transfer to the outside world via either the Central Vermont or the Boston & Maine.  Small locomotives, where my favorite Class A shays can roam appropriately, or small Class B’s, or even some small rod locomotives like the ones used on a number of logging lines in the region, can provide power.  With other industries springing up around these logging lines, like furniture, flooring, and possibly some sap processing (both birch and maple sap processing were occurring in the area in the early 1900’s) there is opportunity for some additional industries for interest.  Granite hauling is another important factor in New Hampshire railroading, and finding some resources for how that loos so I can include hauling granite blocks and hoppers of granite will be important.

One more important detail I should point out before I get to the redrawn plan.  I’ve been trundling along with the narrow gauge railroad matching the same year of my standard gauge Norfolk & Western project set in Cincinnati, OH.  The assumption there was that I would be able to ship in or ship out, goods that were destined for either of those railroads from the other.  However, most of the great logging photos and railroads that are serving as prototype inspiration for the Birch Creek shifted to New Hampshire were earlier, operating from the late 1800’s into the early 1920’s, with the heyday’s well into the 1900’s and 1910’s.  With that in mind, I’m shifting from 1927 for the Birch Creek back to 1915.  The N&W will remain in 1927.  That should make for some interesting modeling.

While the Gordon Pond RR routinely had 4 car log trains, and may have had to double hills even with that, this shot of the Harwick & Woodberry RR hauling a granite pillar in a single car train would be right at home on the Birch Creek.

The railroad track plan as redrawn, retains multiple scenes and locations, with some slight reorganization.  Along the right-hand front edge of the layout, we find the small town, the as yet unnamed “Town B” where there is locomotive service and other facilities.  This is where the sawmill is located, there is an engine house here for one of the handful of locomotives owned by the railroad, a man-made log pond, a loading dock for finished lumber, and a warehouse for railroad and lumber company supplies.  The sawmill will be some sort of conglomeration of details drawn from a number of sources.  

In the original plan, I had intended to build a sector plate for moving trains from the front to the middle section of the layout.  Now, in this redrawn version, I’ve dropped the sector plate and included a turnout on the far right hand side that will lead to a simple removable extension for a switchback that leads to staging and “Town A” with the connection to the outside world.  The switchback returns on the center track on the plant that will then take trains up a grade and over to the far left-hand side of the layout to a “Town C”.  

At Town C we’ll find a small New England town, with a small station, a water tank and fuel pile for locomotives, along with a handful of industries, houses, and a run around track.  The industries are still to be chosen, but it would be fitting to have a furniture maker and maybe some kind of company using sap from maple or birch trees included in the town.  

Headed to the right again, the layout retains the wye that leads to what was the coal mines and logging area, and now includes a granite quarry with a tipple for granite and a spot to load larger blocks of granite on flat cars, then heads into the two sports for logging.  A truncated siding that can hold up to 4 log cars indicates Camp 2, and Camp 1 will be all the way on the right hand side with a loading area for logs and possibly a spot to have boxcars come and be spotted with logging supplies.

The plan, when I redrew it, included one more important feature.  You’ll recall, I hope, that I’m building both of my layout projects on two pieces of benchwork, one is 6’ long and the other is 5’ long.  The first thing I drew in on the new version was the dividing line at 6’ from one end.  This let me make sure that the layout doesn’t have turnouts slated to be situated over the middle of that break, and that tracks are running as straight as possible in the area of the joint to make it easier to mate the sections together.  Doing that drawing, and I’ll cover in a future post the redraw of Cincinnati, has brought me to another change in plans.  I had intended for the layout to have the Birch Creek face one direction and the N&W face the other.  In the interests of how I need to lay out electronics and access for those, storage of the layout, and the simplification of some portions for both layouts, and my desire to potentially be able to line the layout along a wall and operate both levels, I decided to return to a more ‘conventional’ layout and both levels will face one direction.  It still shouldn’t bee terrible.  We’re talking about maybe 4 people standing or sitting along an 11’ span.  They’ll be running slowly enough in all cases that people should be able to get around without being too much in each other’s way.

A mill similar to this J.E Henry mill in Lincoln, NH would fit perfectly on the Birch Creek.

So, I’m back now to making structure templates for kits, making sure that I have the right structures.

I’m excited to share in short order the adjustments to the plan for Cincinnati as well.  Similar streamlining and rethinking of the plan have produced something I’m simply thrilled to be getting ready to build.

-JD

Getting a Jump On Operations: Paperwork Design 1

Posted on by jkdummler
The weekend was productive with 12 55 ton hoppers getting a great start, and a number of other cars getting some details added. With that kind of progress, it’s time to make some paperwork.

Operating a layout goes hand in hand with planning a layout in my mind.  Every layout has some kind of operation plan built in, be it the plan to run trains that the owner wants to just see run through scenery, switch industries, TT/TO, and any combination there of and more.  Planning for operating a layout comes along with the layout design because one must make sure there is room on the layout for the planned trains, and adjust either the layout or the operating plan accordingly during the design and construction phase.

The layout we’re working on really isn’t big enough to run much true TT/TO.  Some might argue that with me, and while I can run TT/TO, my personal preference is more laid-back operation with a 1:1 clock, time to switch, and time to get involved in the paperwork of the railroad, as that’s part of the model.  To that end, I’m a huge fan of lots of the information that Tony Koester and Tony Thompson have shared in the model railroad press and on blogs about realistic waybills.  The research to fill those kinds of waybills out is part of my personal fun.

A test location, close to what one side of our layout will have trackage wise, with every track named in order to facilitate making spotting instructions on waybills possible.

I know that Tony Thompson started out putting stickers with the car information on the clear envelopes (baseball card protectors) that he uses for holding the waybills.  I’ve thought about doing that same thing, but as the more realistic waybill systems have progressed, larger plastic pockets have been located and written about, and the advent of the ability to have a yardmaster re-route an empty car to a waiting shipper on the layout ideated of a car coming and going simply with a 4 cycle waybill system has emerged.  Tony Koester covered how that kind of system works in a video for the Model Railroader Video Plus site when discussing their Winston Salem Southbound project layout and operating it.  

The gist of the discussion is that an empty car is located by the yardmaster, and that person has a list of loads ready for shipping at online industries.  The yardmaster can then match an empty car moving through their yard and re-route it to that industry by slipping a new waybill into a pocket that is shorter than the original waybills, covering the routing information.  The one catch there has been that because the waybills typically include the shipping railroad information at the top, the shipping railroad information doesn’t change, and that’s just ignored.

A test waybill shows the car information at the top, the railroad shipping info, the routing, and other information that are typically included on the more realistic waybills. (You can see at the bottom that I need to get a paper cutter better than my own hand and scissors).

In developing my own waybills, I’ve chosen, prototypical or not, to shuffle some of the information on the waybills around.  I’ve moved the car information to the top of the waybill, allowing allowing for the shipping railroad and shipment information to be lower.  This means that when the yardmaster on our layout needs to reroute an empty car for loading, the new waybills can all read ‘Norfolk & Western’, have the correct railroad number (if I leave that on the waybills, I’m still hunting for an ARA listing to see if those were used before the AAR accounting rules). 

The resulting waybills fit nicely in the same plastic protectors that are now common to see on layouts using the more prototypical waybill system.

Now I have the ability to start creating waybills and routing for cars that I am building while waiting out the Winter cold for time to get back to the garage and layout building.

-JD

Placeholders and Stand-Ins

Posted on by jkdummler

Placeholders are a concept in computer programming or writing that are used to occupy a location that the creator intends to come back later with other data and replace once new data or information is available.  That’s a rough definition.  In modeling, we often see placeholders used for models that aren’t available or the modeler hasn’t had time to scratch build the prototype for, but they needed to have something there.  Stand-in’s in film or television are similar concepts, they substitute for the final actor and are used to get lighting and other setups done before the final shots are taken with the actor.  In either case, placeholders and stand-ins are useful tools.  They allow work to continue toward an overall goal, while in both cases the final version is essentially absent.  Everything else can move forward while and the final version arrives later.

In a world as vast as North American railroading has been, with the variety of designs for locomotives, we often see stand-ins being used to hold the place of a final model that will eventually be built, or sometimes the placeholder becomes close enough and is never replaced.  The stand-in then still represents the model, but efforts are put forth toward other things until such a time as the modeler might desire to go back and replace that stand-in.  This isn’t the same, in my mind, as “close enough”, but is related.  The “close enough” model is a stand-in intended to be temporary.  Many close enough models simply remain in service and aren’t replaced.

From my collection of YVRR materials. This 1987 cover photo from Model Railroader. The locomotive pictured, lettered as YV 23, is a stand-in, the best available at the time. This model was later replaced by a closer-to-prototype stand-in modeled on a Spectrum 4-4-0. Unless you were told it was a stand-in, would you have known?

In struggling with our Norfolk & Western coal fleet for 1927, there are few options on the market at the moment that fit the needs of building cars.  Westerfield models has hoppers, and that’s about it.  The N&W did not own USRA 55 ton hoppers which would be easily available as models.  There are not the “battleship” gondolas available right now.  The other larger hoppers, the HU class, are not available either.  Having built one HPb hopper last year, and knowing the speed that I build that kind of car, I can probably build 3-4 of those a year.

11 car coal train on the “Wauconda Central”

Take a look at this drag of coal that I spotted on a visit to the Lake County Model Railroad Club’s “Wauconda Central” back in November.  The train has 11 hoppers pulled by one locomotive, and a nice caboose tacked on at the rear.  If you watch the short video of this train rolling by, you’ll see a few things. The closer you get to the models, the harder it is to see the front and the end of the train all at once.  Second, this train is actuallYy long enough that standing next to the layout, I had to find just the right spot to shoot the actual overall photo.  The rest of it’s run, getting the locomotive and the caboose in the same shot was nearly impossible.  It works the same way with vision.  If you can’t see the front and the rear at the same time, your brain processes the train as being longer than it actually might be.

I know I’m still in the process of track planning, but let’s assume for right now that I have one large mine, with 3 tracks, and room for 20 hoppers.  If I have a morning train and an afternoon train servicing that one mine, and I want to switch out 1/2 of those cars each time, I need how many hoppers?  Roughly 40 or so hoppers.  If I don’t want the same mix moving just back and forth, I need probably to aim for about 50 hoppers or cars to carry coal (because gondolas can count).  If I build 4 or so hoppers a year, it would take me over a decade building the resin cars to fill that.  I need other cars, after all, and the layout, and structures, etc… 

The solution I’ve arrived at is to employ stand-ins.  It’s not my first choice, but it will get things running.  I know, you’re not supposed to tell folks as a prototype modeler that “hey, I’m building these cars as placeholders”.  I share this with you, though, because it’s an important part to getting things moving.  If I can build 5 or 6 cars in a weekend session at the workbench, I could conceivably build enough equipment to be hauling coal within a month or two.  Later, when the layout is up, when things are operating, I can start to shuffle in the models of actual cars.  It’s not perfect, but I highly doubt that anyone is going to pop up and offer HP or HU hoppers that are Ready To Run in the short term.

The easiest choice for stand-ins is probably Accurail 55 ton USRA hoppers.  There are about 20 cars in the “As Delivered” series (2400 series cars) that are lettered for railroads that would be plausible connections that I could change a few dates on, build, and press into service as foreign-road visitors.  That’s not terrible.  The number could rise to 25 or so if I renumber a couple for some of those connectors.  25… that’s half the battle right there already.  Then there’s the Accurail 2497, data only, as delivered, USRA 55 ton hopper.  They’re black, they have period data on them.   A few quick decals like car numbers and some road initials, and some stand-in N&W hoppers can appear.  Likewise, Accurail’s 3700 series gondolas, with some slight modification, could be used as placeholders for eventual battleship gondolas.  

It’s not perfect.  I’ll know, and you’ll know.  Other N&W fans visiting the layout might know.  However, over time, as the massive undertaking that we all face in building a layout starts to overcome the hurdle of getting things up and running, and as I have time, I can replace a few hoppers here and there.  I can build jigs to make the Westerfield cars assemble faster, or I can CAD and 3D print my own cars.  In the end, though, figuring out how to get something up and running is a huge mental hurdle and, as with the last post where I discussed abandoning a moving helix, this has also been a huge weight off in unblocking the planning dam.  

Time to find some hoppers to build!

-JD

Industrial Research – Part 4: Choosing Industries from Maps

Posted on by jkdummler
Seen several years ago at Trainfest in Milwaukee, this small industrial switching layout starts to provide some idea of what the upper deck on my layout is emerging to look like.

My project to research and design the layout space based on the N&W line into Cincinnati (Norwood), OH, has once again made some progress, and the focus continues to become sharper, in my mind.

As I think I may have mentioned before, this whole layout needs to be able to move in the future.  With that in mind,  and allowing for the idea that the layout “could” or maybe I should say “should” be designed to at a minimum fit in a truck that isn’t a full-on shipping container, I obtained the inside dimensions of a U-Haul truck.  Assuming that either a 20 or 26 foot long U-Haul truck was employed to move, I need to plan for less than 19’ long, and for about 6’ at a maximum “deep” on the ends of any protrusions.  Ok, so that makes for a really nicely sized “U” shape.  While I know the overall target has adjusted several times, bringing the HOW of moving a layout into focus early in this process means I have a narrowed focus.  Even if the layout eventually moves with a moving company, this size should be movable for them in a moving truck.

With that out of the way, it’s important to also keep in mind that eventually there needs to be a way to go from one deck to the other on this layout.  We’ve been discussing just that here, and decided on a temporary helix for our location now, with the idea that later on, when we have landed in 8 or 10 years in our permanent location, that we may add a larger helix and expand this whole layout.  For now, a smaller helix, and running point to point with fiddle-staging at the other end of the runs, is pretty much where we need to go right now.

Now, some actual information on what will be on the upper deck of the layout in Cincinnati, OH.

The area selected to model has the following companies along the stretch of the railroad:

Unnamed Coal Bins. – Coal / Coke

2nd Unnamed Coal Bins  – Coal / Coke / Ice

The Cook Paint & Varnish Co.  – Paint & Varnish

The A.M. Lewin Lumber Co.  – Lumber and Hardware

The H.W. Roos Co. – Metal Parts and Shores Mfg.

The Cincinnati Cement Products Co.  – Cement blocks

The Union Gas & Electric Co.  –  Electric motors

The A.S. Boyles Co. – Paint & Varnish

The Wet Wash Laundry Co.  – Washing Machines

Cincinnati Sewer Pipe Co.  – Sewer Pipe

The Ault & Wiborg Varnish Co. – Paint & Varnish

The Rebhun Last Co.  – Shoe lasts

The Ulland Coal Co.  – Coal / Coke

Victor Safe & Lock Co.  – Safes and office furniture.

The J.P. Humphries Co.  – Road building materials

Norfolk & Western Freight House – General merchandise

In addition, I want to add some kind of connection to the Ohio River, but that will come in another post.

It’s safe to say in the space I have, fitting all of those companies in, even just from this list of 16, might be difficult.  Some consolidation will most likely be necessary.

Norfolk & Western Historical Society track diagram for the Victor Safe & Lock Co.  The top track on the drawing reaches a coal bin, the middle track goes into the building for what I am assuming from the Sanborn map indication of an overhead crane in this area is unloading of materials for making the safes, and to the left is a shipping and receiving track.
Late 1800’s advertising for the Victor Safe & Lock Co gives some, but not great, indication of what the industry looked like.
Norfolk & Western Historical Society track diagram showing how the railroad intended to reach the Rebhun Last Co through another industry track.

I have yet to locate any really good photos of just about any of these industries.  I have found some advertising materials for the Victor Safe & Lock Co, along with the N&W track diagrams and the Sanborn maps for that location.  I also have the N&W track drawing for how they served the Rebhun company through the Ault & Wiborg Varnish track along with those Sanborn maps. I’ve been able to locate some items for sale online that were made by several of the locations in the list, but not anything showing their buildings or any part of the area.  I did finally just recently find a photo of the N&W freight station.  Locating what these places actually looked like has been a challenge.

At this point, I’ve mostly concluded that finding actual structure photos may not happen.  I don’t know that there were many photos that would have been taken in the area anyway, as it’s not a particularly tourest-oriented area.  That seems to be reserved for Mt. Adams in Cincinnati and the inclines that operated there.  However, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.  There are photos of Cincinnati from M. Adams that can instruct on what the businesses might have looked like, and the Sanborn maps indicate the materials, so the two combined can start to really paint a picture of what this portion of the layout will look like as I being to doodle track plans.

A portion of a widely distributed photo taken from Mt. Adams in 1908.  This photo starts to instruct on the general architecture and style of industries in Cincinnati of the early 20th century, and can be used to help in designing the industries to be modeled.

In the interest of keeping things interesting on the layout too, a few things will probably be left off.  Their shipping will move to the N&W Freight House, and the companies will be used as off-line receivers of shipments instead of on-line and modeled.  While it pains me to cut down on the number of industries, as I’ve already discarded many that would have been absolutely fascinating to model, as with any model railroad, space limitations are a ruling factor.

When deciding what to include, I’ve taken my pruning scissors, as it were, to things that feel somewhat redundant to me.  If you look at the list above, you will see that there are 3 paint and varnish companies, 3 coal / coke companies, essentially 3 building materials locations with a concrete block, sewer pipe, and road materials companies, on the list.  Simply cutting 2 from each of those lists we cut the numbers by 6.  The reality of layout space, and also the added reality of train length and sheer number of cars, makes some of those choices for me.

Pairing the list, I’ve arrived at the following set of 10 industries to model.  You’ll see here, too, some of my notes on shared trackage.

Victor Safe & Lock Co. (Multi-track)

(These 2 industries share 1 siding)

Ulland Coal Co

Cement Warehouse (Some maps list a “Coney Co” at this location)

(These 2 industries share 1 siding)

Rebhun Last Co

A.S. Boyle Co (Wax & Hardwood Finishes)

(These 3 industries share 1 siding)

Union Gas & Electric Co

Cincinnati Cement Products Co. (Cement Blocks)

H.W. Roos Co (Adjustable Shores)

A.M. Lewin Lumber Co (2 tracks)

N&W Freight House

Take into account my previous post about interchange, and add connecting to the CCC&STL, PRR, and B&O here, and this is still a very busy part of the layout.  

With that, it’s now time to draw.

-JD

Industrial Research: Part 3 – Drilling Down With More Maps

Posted on by jkdummler

As time allows, I am continuing to research and refine the focus of the Cincinnati portion of our layout plans.  In recent days, I’ve been looking at what is in the area that I have Sanborn maps for, and getting down to even reading the trackage markings for ownership.

I’ve narrowed the scope of the modeled area of Cincinnati to essentially one stretch of track running through Hyde Park and Evanston.  Some friends have been quite helpful in providing links to other sites that have started to help me fill in the picture of where this section of track actually sits, and for that hep, I am grateful.

A map or Cincinnati with individual railroads drawn in different colors.

The overall map above was helpful in causing me to take a 2nd look at some of the Sanborn maps I posted in the last part of this series.  After doing so, I cut out several portions and some industries, that I was considering adding, as they fall on either PRR or B&O trackage.  More on that another time.

To help orient this map piece, black trackage is N&W, red is PRR, blue is B&O, and green is CCC&STL.   The master map comes from this site:  http://www.cincinnativiews.net/Railroads.htm

Important things to note are that the N&W enters from the East, runs essentially straight through into Idlewild, then turns North and connects just past where the label for Berry Yard is to the CCC&STL with B&O and PRR interchanges scattered around.

The further I refine this research, the more I start seeing where the model railroad will sit.  

This map shows the area that I am narrowing my modeling focus to.

This second map shows the area that I have really good Sanborn maps for.  It focuses on the industrial area that runs East/West just before the N&W turns North.

Industry wise, starting in Hyde Park, there is a nice mixture of large and small industries, starting with the RK LeBlond Machine Tool Co. and the Hyde Park Lumber sitting “far” to the East, and then entering a stretch that includes no fewer than 16 industries (by my count) that should provide the bulk of our modeled area.  

This aerial view of the RK LeBlond plant show just how big this industry that was in Hyde Park is. Figuring out if this will be included in the end will be something to take into consideration as I choose industries to model.

As we move now into some serious focused research and planning, the two large industries in Hyde Park may wind up dropping off as I can in my minds eye where everything is starting to present as a model railroad.  Along this stretch, the ‘operator’ would stand to the North side and face South toward this line of industries.

It’s amazing how this is all starting to feel like it’s nearly designing itself.  I still have a lot of work to do finding structure photos if they exist, and fitting things into the layout space, but the Sanborn and other maps make that so much easier.  

The overall Sanborn map of the area I am looking at modeling has been further trimmed thanks to the other map seen above.

It’s probably time to start looking now at individual industries and deciding what is screaming to be modeled and what is begging to be left off.

-JD

Planning for Interchange: Part 1

Posted on by jkdummler

This photo, taken in Cincinnati, OH in 1935, shows a CCC&STL 0-6-0 that would be appropriate as an interchange locomotive to model. (Jeremy Dummler Collection)

How many railroads do you model?  That thought has been bouncing around in my head for a few weeks as I continue researching the Norfolk & Western in Cincinnati, OH.  

The maps show numerous railroads reaching Cincinnati…. The N&W, PRR, CCC&STL, B&O, just to name a few. Then there are the interurban lines in the city.  (As a side note here, I was recently sent a link to a great website that has information on the interurban lines of Cincinnati.  That can be found here:  http://jjakucyk.com/transit/?fbclid=IwAR22WTdqvZinge4hOsOpCE06GcmUC35u0iIj8fY4fxJVzp8qipfUMPUJquM)

On a layout, part of the fun in my mind is not only switching the industries, but having a place for cars to come and go, not just off the layout, but also into some kind of staging that represents connections to other railroads.  In a city, that kind of interaction is a logical place, and figuring out how to include that will my layout planning is something I am putting a little energy toward.

Of interest there, then, becomes thinking about powering interchange trains.  Do I hunt for an appropriate locomotive for all those railroads, do I simply include a track for interchange and have the N&W locomotives push and pull cars from and to there?  

In my mind, as I work out designing for operation on this layout, the answer is both of the above.  Power for some, tracks for others, is where I lean.

Imagine this with me.  One of the “big” railroads has a track that represents the N&W interchange with them.  A switcher positioned in that track, with a cut of cars, arrives at some point during an operating session to exchange cars with the N&W.  The interchange train picks up it’s cars, and might drop some cars to head East on the N&W, or for industries on the modeled portion of Cincinnati.  Then it leaves.  Elsehwere, the N&W switcher takes cars to an interchange and picks up cars from that interchange, without there needing to be a locomotive from the foreign roads.  That could even be done with 1 staging track then representing multiple interchange partners.  Traffic, however, moves, cars come and go, and there is the feeling that the layout is part of a system, not just standing on it’s own.

Aesthetically, I tend toward smaller power, and the CCC&STL 0-6-0’s in the form of B-10 or B-11 switchers would be size-appropriate to the size of the layout and could be the interchange line that comes and goes.  Meanwhile, the PRR and B&O would be served by the N&W trains going into and returning from staging tracks.

So, is it one railroad, the N&W, two, the N&W and CCDC&STL, four, adding the PRR and B&O, or is there really an answer, because the freight car fleet means I am modeling each of those railroads too?  I’m not sure there is an answer, but a change of the question is probably what makes me feel best.  How many railroads do you interchange with on your layout?

-JD

Industrial Research: Part 3 – Cincinnati Sanborn Maps

Posted on by jkdummler

Finding time in late November and December to do much modeling is always a challenge. There are many other things, important things, that involve family and friends spending time together that can take our hobby time away, or in our case, occupy the space that the workshop often occupies with a Christmas tree and other decorations.  

It isn’t, however, impossible to do anything.  Often I find myself with a few minutes in the evening with time to do some research, and I’ve spent that time the last week or so looking at Sanborn maps of Cincinnati.  I found a set of maps from 1922 with 1927 updates at the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County website. (http://digital.cincinnatilibrary.org/digital/).

Coming into Cincinnati from the East, this area shows a massive machine company and a lumber company that were both serviced by the N&W.

Using the map I had previously gotten from the Norfolk & Western Historical Society, I homed in on really the heart of the N&W industrial switching operations in the city.  After printing the maps that I downloaded, I used a cutting mat, straight edge, and hobby knife to cut and stitch together a larger version of the N&W map.  With everything pieced together, I then cut away with scissors to make a focused almost aerial view of the railroad, I believe in 1927 or close to.

The “Heart of the Matter”. There are a lot of industries crammed into this area of the map. The top of the photo is North. With this view it’s possible to start imagining where an operator would stand on a layout.

It’s fascinating to start putting some physical buildings with the simple track line-drawing that I started with, and to see everything starting to have some scale.  The information has started to paint a picture for me that will influence the track plan that I develop in the next few weeks.

As I started piecing this all together, I found myself starting to orient where an operator of this as a model railroad would stand, what the view would be, and what kind of compression would be necessary for modeling this part of the N&W.  I’m still working that out, but the operating potential here is obvious to me.

This section is North of the 2nd section, so the tail to the lower left connects to the upper right of the last photo.

Many of the larger industries seen in the maps have coal deliveries being made for furnaces or power plants.  Many of the smaller industries are somewhat unique.  A shoe Last company, soap companies, lumber…. But the sheer size of the massive metal working facilities is what catches my eye immediately.

I’m just getting started with digging into the industries, to see if I can find photos of any of them, but even representational versions would make operating the Cincinnati area of our layout something that would keep a crew busy for a while.

With the Sanborn maps now assembled, it’s probably time to start sketching out some track plan ideas.  That’ll be fun.  In our house, that means more paper, cutting, folding, tape, and full size mockups to move things around.  

Stay tuned!

-JD

Industrial Research Part 2: Fertilizer

Posted on by jkdummler

On the map of Cincinnati, OH from 1921 that I got from the Norfolk & Western Historical Society, I find myself starting to dig into research on specific industries and how their particular traffic might impact my choices in modeling and planning.

One of the first industries that caught my eye appears to have been located on, or reached by trackage on, the CCC&STL (Big 4, part of the New York Central Lines), and that is the Bowker Fertilizer Plant.

Bowker Fertilizer Works, Cincinnati, OH (1921)

I hadn’t ever thought about a fertilizer plant being located in what I would consider to be an “urban” setting, but the traffic location in Cincinnati, with a potential shipping reach for supplies to make and material to sell, being able to traverse the CCC&STL, N&W, PRR, B&O and other railroads fairly quickly.  Researching the Bowker company, I find it interesting that records of them as an independent company appear to end in the earlier part of the 1900’s in an embezzlement scandal that seems more 2018 than 1910.  The fact that the plant still exists to be called out with track on a 1921 map is interesting to me.

A listing of Bowker Fertilizer Products from an early fertilizer catalog.

Bowker was apparently fairly important in the late 1800’s in New England, and the Cincinnati plant was, from what I’ve been able to find so far, most likely their furthest reach to the West.

While researching the Bowker plant, I stumbled on and secured a copy of a photo from a different fertilizer company located in Columbus, OH.  The Independent Fertilizer Packing Company appears in records from 1906 until at least 1919.  The photo of the plant from 1906, supposedly along the CCC&STL (according to the source I got the photo from) shows many interesting details, including the building, the box cars ob piously behind the fence, the wooden fence, and the train over to the right.

The Independent Fertilizer Packing Co, Columbus, OH circa 1906. (Jeremy Dummler collection)

I’m still working on selecting industries to model, but a fertilizer company would provide something interesting, especially in an urban setting.  Without yet finding a photo of the Bowker plant, but having discussed operation of these kinds of industries recently with some friends, it appears that many of the buildings were similar in design from Ohio to North Carolina and on to other states.  That makes me think that a ‘generic’ building, based on the IFPC plant, and labeled for Bowker, could be modeled and provide a sizable amount of traffic to model, along with a plant that would probably want sure-spots for cars to be spotted.

Along the way, I’m learning more and more about life in the 1920’s and the important industries of the time. Imagine my surprise when I discussed layout plans with another friend who models 60 or so years later in the 1900’s, to find that his prototype in the 1980’s also was still serving a fertilizer company.

I never thought I’d be modeling THAT.  Now, knowing it’s a huge source of traffic, can I leave it, or the traffic to and from it, off?

-JD

Industrial Research: Part 1

Posted on by jkdummler

It’s that in-between time of year, that time between RPM Chicagoland and Trainfest in Milwaukee, when not much get’s done.  Yes, freight cars have started, but this year, there’s more going on.

Research has continued on freight cars, but knowing how many cars to build, and hunt for, is always one of the things I am interested in.  To do that, figuring out the industries on the layout is important.

I counted 33 named industries of multiple varieties on this one map. The original can be obtained from the Norfolk & Western Historical Society at: http://www.nwhs.org/archivesdb/detail.php?ID=122480

For industry inspiration, I’ve been spending some time researching the Norfolk & Western operations in Cincinnati, Ohio along the Cincinnati Belt.  There are many fascinating industries in the area beyond just the expected freight houses, interchange with the New York Central (CCC&STL) and things I expected to find like the Glob Soap Company (Tangent made a 1917 tank car lettered for the Globe Soap Co of Cincinnati.)

A sample industry I’m considering building and making space for, this company will make shoe lasts.

Let’s look at this sample industry that I’m toying with.  This will most likely wind up being a company that makes shoe lasts, the forms used by cobblers to form shoes over.  (When you model earlier times in history, you learn all about dead industries).  The company has two docks, one inbound and one outbound dock.  In all likelyhood, there will be a split set of loading docks, so operating instructions for a crew will be to deliver a car to the inbound dock or the outbound dock, and there won’t be a specific door spot.  To spite the fact that there are three inbound doors, and 4 outbound dock doors, it’s likely that each dock will support 2 cars spotted there.  That means this industry might be switching 1-4 cars per operating session.  So I know that the top end here is 4 cars.  It could, however, at scale speeds, with paperwork for the crew and the like, time to set and remove flags, etc… have a crew occupied by this industry alone for 20-30 minutes shuffling cars around.  That’s well worth the space to build the industry.

This is the kind of research that I find fascinating.  Learning about industries and what they ship in and out, then telling that story in my models.  With many industries to pick from, from a last company to soap companies to lumber companies and on to fertilizer companies, deciding what to model and what to compress out or leave out is the harder choice.

That brings me to how this all ties together.  The freight cars need a place to run, and the industries on a layout provide that.  Modeling coal is fantastic, but I love my boxcars and other types of equipment, and fitting other industries in has become important to me.  Thus, the decision has been made to spot the layout space (eventual layout space) and model coal and also model some more urban operations based on the Cincinnati Belt.  

See…. Deep down, I know that prototype modeling bug would wake up and sink it’s teeth in some way again.

*** ***

It’s Trainfest weekend in Milwaukee, WI.  I hope to see friends and enjoy the show.  Maybe I’ll come home with some fun things to add to the layout, or the book shelf.  

-JD

Roster Research: Part 1

Posted on by jkdummler

Building a realistic model railroad isn’t only about laying track, building cars, locomotives, or even necessarily about physically building anything.  It involves many hours of research and a good deal of time invested in finding and verifying information that helps build all those things I just listed so that they fit together in a cohesive, visually appropriate manner.

I’ve recently been spending quite a lot of time doing research.  I find the learning part of this whole hobby to be one of the things I enjoy most.  The main topic of my research has been the Norfolk & Western freight and coal fleet in 1927.  I have a copy of a 1926 ORER that I’m working from, and haven’t yet located any 1927 issues, but I can get close with the 1926 date to a picture of what N&W equipment I should be building.

Part of the work has been to translate the ORER data into a spreadsheet that will allow me to add additional pieces of data that I need to model the equipment listed.  It’s handy to have the dimensional data on the cars, the roster number blocks, the ARA car types, and a general description from the ORER, but the work then lies in translating that data into N&W car classes which are not listed in the ORER, and from there into either drawings or photos or both through online and published resources.  Once that is done, identifying a viable model to build if there is one, will be the next step.

I’ve made a dent in the translation of the data, but it is still an ongoing process.  I would imagine that I should have a fairly good idea of what I want or need to build for the N&W within the next couple of weeks.  There are a couple of interesting things that I’ve already noted, just in the initial phase of this research:

  1.  The vast majority of the equipment owned and operated by the N&W in 1926/1927 was still 36′ or shorter in length.  The number of 36′ steel frame wooden boxcars that the line owned was more than double the single class of all steel automobile boxcars that they had built.
  2. There is only one class of steel sided boxcar on the roster of the N&W in 1926, and those are ARA class XA automobile boxcars.  Everything else is either single sheathed or double sheathed wood still.

The ORER also provides a list of connections to other railroads.  That list is invaluable in routing traffic on a layout, and in picking equipment to build as well.  Finding equipment from connecting railroads will be important in the overall scope of the layout as traffic isn’t just generated on the layout but comes from outside.  I’ve been slowly making a list of cars in my “stash” to build, putting them in order of what I want to build first, starting to source parts and decals, and generally putting in place an overall roster plan that should allow me to build, at my current pace, a viable freight and coal fleet within the next couple of years, with many years of building cars ahead.

Why is this important?  I find that I am drawn to the freight cars and could easily have one of everything out there.  I know about myself that working from lists is important and that the lists need to be as complete as possible.  I also know that I can spend my resources, that includes time and financial, in places I consider to be worth while if I have some picture of what I’m focusing on and hunting for.  It makes finding that gem in a bin at a train show, or heading for a hobby shop or swap meet, or searching for something on eBay easier.

As I finish this part of the project, and continue to do research, I’m finding other threads to follow that are leading me to some really interesting ideas and focusing my efforts as well. More to come!

-JD