What's New on the PRR Panhandle Division?

[Roy]

Probably easiest to take George's advice, thicker sub-roadbed than 11/32 ply and more risers. However, other methods are fun to think about...

On the other hand, heavy construction such as you show in your photo is expensive, and nowhere near as easy to move or modify. I readily admit that I'm not interested in conventional construction. However, I think lightweight construction may possibly be just as easy; perhaps easier. And the thought that it might be done using recycled cardstock and/or corrugated paperboard, which costs nothing, lends to the interest for me.

Think of the layouts that could be built for special occasions, as a track plan trial, or for a gift. The track and accessories could be removed, and the benchwork simply thrown away - without a sense of costly waste. Or, easily changed and adapted, for (again) next to nothing. Larger layouts could be built in sections, so if the room is needed for other things, the sections could be disassembled and moved.

[G3750]

Probably easiest to take George's advice, thicker sub-roadbed than 11/32 ply and more risers. However, other methods are fun to think about...

On the other hand, heavy construction such as you show in your photo is expensive, and nowhere near as easy to move or modify. I readily admit that I'm not interested in conventional construction. However, I think lightweight construction may possibly be just as easy; perhaps easier. And the thought that it might be done using recycled cardstock and/or corrugated paperboard, which costs nothing, lends to the interest for me.

Think of the layouts that could be built for special occasions, as a track plan trial, or for a gift. The track and accessories could be removed, and the benchwork simply thrown away - without a sense of costly waste. Or, easily changed and adapted, for (again) next to nothing. Larger layouts could be built in sections, so if the room is needed for other things, the sections could be disassembled and moved.

Roy,

The concept of light, strong, even throwaway benchwork is intriguing. But I think it's a phantom, a mirage, ever receding in the distance as we approach it. Remember, I'm not talking about the benchwork - my concern is strong, stable, subroadbed. Maybe it's my own limitations, but I haven't found any answer but the simplest - thicker (or stronger) material. And my subroadbed is cookie-cutter - maybe that's the unspoken assumption in this conversation. If we are talking about a flat sheet on ribbed benchwork, then we can get away with a lot more because the weight is distributed across the entire sheet of plywood (or whatever).

I think where you're going is modular, which is quite a different animal.

George

[Roy]

...I'm not talking about the benchwork - my concern is strong, stable, subroadbed...If we are talking about a flat sheet on ribbed benchwork, then we can get away with a lot more because the weight is distributed across the entire sheet of plywood (or whatever).

George,

If I understood you correctly, your presenting problem is sagging of the roadbed between the uprights. That is precisely what we have been addressing. Our main point is: you'll get more bang for your roadbed-stiffening buck by going deep, e.g., box or T support, rather than than thick.

[G3750]

If I understood you correctly, your presenting problem is sagging of the roadbed between the uprights. That is precisely what we have been addressing. Our main point is: you'll get more bang for your roadbed-stiffening buck by going deep, e.g., box or T support, rather than than thick.

You did understand me correctly and I agree with your proposal. A "T" shape is what I have pursued in certain spots. In others, I have used additional risers with cleats.

Thanks,

George

[G3750]

Hi All:

More photo updates. Photo 1 - In this shot, track work from the entrance to Weirton Steel Yard (top background) to the foreground has been completed. The yet-to-be relaid curve sections sit in the middle of the benchwork. The blue wire is for super-elevating the curve.

Layout Reconstruction 003W2.jpg (143.17 KiB) Viewed 7976 times

Photo 2: In this shot, the trackwork will proceed from just below the jade NYC boxcars to the right and down to the foreground (following the Vinylbed). The area in the bottom left quadrant of the photo will eventually become Standard Slag and a spur of the Weirton Junction Yard.

Layout Reconstruction 005W2.jpg (131.87 KiB) Viewed 7976 times

Feels good to be making progress.

Comments welcomed!

George

[rogruth]

I remember that feeling.When it became recognizable to me,when I ran the first train just a little,when scenery was started,etc.

[G3750]

I remember that feeling.When it became recognizable to me,when I ran the first train just a little,when scenery was started,etc.

I am happy that I generated some momentum on this task!

One of the really good byproducts of this effort has been the re-thinking of Standard Slag and Weirton Junction yard. When I was initially building the mainline, I cut about 2" off an O54 curved section. In the realignment of the mainline, I'm going to replace that shortened curved piece with a full size one. The 2" piece will fit beautifully into my plans to make Standard Slag's dump track arc away from the table edge and give me more space for the Bucyrus steam shovel working at the bottom of the pit (the slag cars will dump into that pit). The scene I'm trying to recreate is in Steel Mill Railroads in Color. I have a Lionel shovel that will stand in for the Bucyrus one (with appropriate paint & decals).

But as I noted previously, construction of that scene has to wait until the steel mills are done and less access to the eastern edge of the layout is needed.

George

[rogruth]

Sounds like a plan George.Looking forward to seeing more.

Steel mills are huge in any scale but I have seen a few that are able to make a nice presentation using fronts,backgrounds and full buildings.
I seem to remember that your approach may have been like that.

Many people when they think of a steel mill think of those that were in the Pittsburgh area and don't realize that the huge mills were the exception.
The upper Ohio Valley at one time had many towns with much smaller mills.Besides Weirton and not too far away were mills at Stuebenville,Mingo,Yorkville-Tiltonsville,Martins Ferry,Wheeling and Benwood that were still working into the 1960s at least.Some still are.Seven mills in about a thirty mile long area.

[G3750]

Thanks Roger.

Mill fronts and 3-D buildings at 30 degree angles to the wall are the plan. The biggest building on the layout (in terms of volume) will probably be the Strip Steel Mill. It will be 5-sided and take up a complete rear corner.

And you are correct. There were lots of mills (and mill towns) on the upper Ohio, Monongahela and Allegheny rivers. Many of these mills were smaller, but not Weirton. Weirton Steel had 4 blast furnaces, a Hot Mill, Tin Mill, Open Hearth (and later Basic Oxygen Furnace), Strip STeel, 3 ore bridges, dock facilities, and a railroad (27 engines, 900+ railcars).

I've got to get this track re-alignment done so that I can move on to more structures.

George

[G3750]

I was working on the section of track from the bridge to the switch last night and my train of thought got derailed!

The re-alignment will bring the switch closer to the edge of the layout and require a new piece of subroadbed to support part of it. My first urge was to grab a random scrap triangular piece of 3/8" plywood for this. But when I thought about it, I realized this is how I got into this mess in the first place (lack of forethought).

So, I'm pleased I resisted the first impulse. And I've come up with an idea I want some input on.

Basically, I am going to create a "sandwich" that covers the Weirton Junction Yard area. The bottom slice, resting directly on the benchwork will be a piece of 1/8" masonite. Above it and edgewise (vertically) will be ribs (like an airplane rib) of 1" x 4" that will support a subroadbed of 3/8" plywood (to match the existing subroadbed). The ribs will lessen in height as they extend towards the edge of the layout, providing a lower level pit for dumping slag from the track above. The sandwich will have self-contained wiring with quick-disconnect type connectors. The one entrance track will use GarGraves "fit-up" connectors to attach to the mainline at the Weirton Junction switch. The entire sandwich module will be removable for access to other structures and track on the eastern end of the layout.

Your thoughts?


George

[G3750]

Well, I am making progress but it's not going as fast as I'd like.

Construction of the "sandwich" is well under way. I'm building it in place to make sure that it fits properly and can be removed easily. The clamps at the right of the photo are holding a leveling "lip" or flange under the two pieces. It will be screwed to the removable part.

Sandwich Section 003W.jpg (127.99 KiB) Viewed 7898 times

In the next photo, the flat area (with the drill) will be Standard Slag's dump pit. The track above it will hold slag cars.

Sandwich Section 004W.jpg (125.47 KiB) Viewed 7905 times

George

[rogruth]

George, Will this affect your access to areas behind this addition?

[G3750]

George, Will this affect your access to areas behind this addition?

It shouldn't. The section you're looking at is an access hatch. It will be removable. The section behind it and to the right will also have an access hatch (buildings on a masonite sheet).

George

[rogruth]

OK.

[G3750]

OK.

Hey, I appreciate you asking.

George