Am I a model railroader or a railroad bibliophile?

Ok everyone get your head out of the gutter, just because a word has "phile" as a suffix does not make it bad or dirty.  I could have said book collector but I decided I would put my bachelors degree to good use. Also these type of words tend to trip people up when they try to pronounce them and I can't be the only one who experiences a bit of schadenfreude (look that one up) when I hear Lionel Strang butcher a word on "A Modeler's Life". Sorry Lionel, I love ya man, in a like if I was going to the fridge to get a beer I would ask if you wanted one kinda way.

Seriously if you somehow found this blog and don't listen to "A Modeler's Life" do yourself a huge favor and check it out  although like NyQuil we recommend not operating heavy equipment while enjoying (dont ask me how I know this). Also in the interest of fairness if you dont already check out the other model railroad related podcasts such as "Model Rail Radio", "Model Railcast", "Mike and Scotty Live" and the "Model Railroad Hobbyist Podcast", they are all excellent shows and each fills a different niche in the hobby. But this isn't a post about podcasts although now I think one might be in the future.

So we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming already in progress...

The other day I was going over my hobby purchases for the last month and realized it was very heavy on the book end of the spectrum. So I went back a little further and realized that in the last year or so I have acquired more books than models. In fact it is almost a three to one ratio and thats not including the inspirational railroad artwork I have acquired, once again a post for another day. Now there are probably some very good reasons for this, first and foremost that I am in full research mode and therefore acquiring books for research. It could also be that the railroad I model has an active historical society and many prolific authors such as John Signor, Tony Thompson, and Joe Strapac. The last two have been more responsible for my latest spending than others, where as Signor is one of the go to authors for history of any given route Thompson and Strapac are the go to guys for freight cars and locomotives respectively. Thompsons books on SP Freight cars and Pacific Fruit Express are considered the bible of for Southern Pacific Freight car modelers where as Strapac's recently completed 22 volume Diesel series and his two volume compendium on SP diesels will tell you everything you needed to know and some things you didn't about the over 5000 diesels Southern Pacific owned over 57 years.

Then there are the motive power annuals and "yearly" reviews, some of these written by Strapac as well but other authors have contributed here as well.  Then there are the non SP books on freight cars such as the X-car series in hard cover from Morning Sun or there are two freight car collections available  from Morning Sun as well (last I checked one of the collections was on sale for just over the price of 1 X-Car book and the other one was less that the price of two. They are also available individually for around $20 US, so for the budget minded model railroader these may be the ticket). I acquired the Morning Sun book "Amtrak Across America" as an e-book a few months ago and my only complaint is I wish I could zoom in further, but hey you cant zoom in on a real book either unless you use magnification devices.

So whats so important about the books I mentioned? While the text may be important the pictures are the real stars of the show. In high school and to some extent when I was working on my history degree we talked a lot about sources. There are primary sources, secondary sources and tertiary sources, primary sources of course being eyewitness accounts and secondary sources being works gleaned from primary sources. Tertiary sources of course are those that gathered all the information with in from a secondary source; I wrote a decent senior thesis in college for the most part using only secondary sources but this would be considered a tertiary source. Thats not to say that tertiary sources arent valuable resources; these sources can be mined for leads to primary and secondary sources. One of the first things I do when I read an interesting book or article is jump right to the footnotes or end notes to see where the author got their information and then start playing connect the dots.

Returning to photos, the reason photos are important is they are a primary source embedded in a secondary source. Also while oral histories can contain inaccuracies a photo is infallible. This leads to Pro-tip number 1: make friends with the local librarians and archivists in the area you are researching. If you build a rapport with them they are more likely to help you in your search, but dont expect them to find everything for you. The archivist in Yuma has given me good information that I needed that she found during her research on a completely unrelated topic, but she made note of it when she saw it because she knew I was looking for it.  Likewise I helped identify several photos in the unidentified folders as well as missidentified photos that I came across in my search of the archive, therefore helping them fix errors and ommisions.

Which leads us to Pro-tip #2: look everywhere even if you are not sure it is related. While I was able to rule out certain folders containing photos located well away from the tracks or taken inside buildings I am now just three boxes shy of searching through the entire subject photo collection in the archive (all 70 boxes). This has been a ton of work but it has yielded terrific results such as photos of the Union Pacific Olympic Torch Relay Train parked on the Somerton Branch prior to the Atlanta Olympics (Summer,1996) which would have been in the final months that the SP existed.  More importantly it hae been things in the background of photos that have caught my eye, such as a long since demolished building or a circus flyer in the window. This hunt for evidence and information is an aspect of the hobby I enjoy immensely and if it stalls progress on the physical railroad so be it, after all I dont even classify as young yet to some in this hobby so time is something I have. Besides most of us didnt get into this hobby to finish everything overnight, and as the great Frosty Westering, the football coach at my alma mater, always reminded us life is more enjoyable if you focus on the journey instead of reaching the destination, till next time.

Plan B

In the March 2017 MR Tony Koester discusses having a plan B on era and I think this is something that merits discussion.

When I started modeling the Southern Pacific it was the early 1990's.  In fact the other night I was relaying to some friends that it was Presidents Day 1989 (George Washington's birthday or what ever it was called back then) when I first laid eyes on a Southern Pacific locomotive, albeit a steam locomotive.  It was on that day that Southern Pacific 4449 lead an excursion train, across what would become my railfan stomping grounds the Burlington Northern Cascade Subdivision over Stevens Pass, for the Washington State centennial celebration.  On that day a love affair with the Southern Pacific was born and although I still have a soft spot in my heart for BN in the late 1980's and 1990's it is nothing compared to my passion for the Espee. 

Of course for the first few years I had to have everything  the SP ever ran (and somethings it did not, but hey someone made a model of it), I didn't care if I was running a wood sheathed boxcar with GP60's I had to have it, what can I say I was all of 9 years old. When my teen years hit I had pretty much settled on being a contemporary modeler.  Although my dad still bought me tons of Black Widow locomotives (he models the 1950's and doesn't much care for "modern" paint schemes) I just couldn't get enough Bloody Nose power and like Tim Taylor I wanted more power (grunt grunt grunt) so I was trying to keep up with the horsepower race that was going on in the mid 1990's.  On a side note there is an excellent article on the last locomotives ordered by SP in the most recent issue of Trainline, the Southern Pacific Railroad History and Technical Society magazine.

Enter September 11, 1996 and the Southern Pacific ceased to be; Swallowed like many great railroads before it by the Union Pacific. Call it the Borg or other derivative name the fact of the matter is that the Scarlet and Grey was gone and being replaced as fast as possible with that disgusting Armor Yellow.  As a modeler this was great as I had an end to my era unless I became a UP modeler but as a railfan an history buff it was a sad day. I continued on planning to model the 1990's and began the task of collecting the necessary intermodal equipment and high horsepower diesels.

When Plan A becomes Plan B

I don't remember the exact day it happened and it was probably many months in the making, but I know it was after I got married in 2007 but most likely sometime after moving to Yuma in 2008.  It started like with all things money; I was looking at the price of model trains and how it was continually rising and making some comparisons. For example a well car set from intermountain will run you well over $100 and then you still have to buy the containers. 89 foot flatcars are not cheap either, infact most longer equipment such as passenger cars or auto racks seem to carry a significantly larger price tag with it. At the same time I was lamenting how much I missed miss matched locomotive consists and heavy drag freights. My ever growing video collection also allowed me to see SP power in the pre ditch light days with fully functional light packages.  The final push came when Athearn released their Genesis SP C-50-7 bay window caboose (it should be noted that other than a Details West casting which are becoming harder and harder to find, no one makes an era appropriate End of Train Device). It was then I decided I was going to model the 1980's. Obtaining a copy of the 1981 SPINS book for Yuma set the year at 1981.

So Plan A is currently 1981, this ironically is the last full year of SDP40Fs on Amtraks Sunset Limited. It was also in this time frame that the SP cut back operations on the Somerton Branch.

So what about plan B? Well my research shows that the biggest physical plant changes in Yuma occured in the late 1970's with the construction of Interstate Highway 8 and Giss Parkway.  It was during this timeframe that the new yard office was built (the old one stood where the Giss Parkway underpass is today) and the ice deck was removed. From then until after 1996 the physical plant of the railroad did not see many changes so it is concievable that I could change years easily just by adding and subtracting locomotives and vehicles to fit the modeled year. So I looked at the various years and decided on a couple that I could model in the three and a half decade span I am interested in.  I have broken the plans down as follows with the specific year listed as a subset of the plan and list some of the interesting points of that year.

PLAN A The 1980's 

Plan A1 1981- pre HEP Amtrak, Somerton Branchline still in use, Cabooses, Iron ore train, copper trains, missmatched consists. B-boats have been on property 3 years Some Alcos still on roster.

Plan A2 1985- Kodachromes, need I say more? There is optimism as the SPSF Merger has not yet been denied. Last hurrah for the big U-boats. Superliner Amtrak (unfortunately no one makes a P30CH in plastic). No Somerton Branch but produce traffic is still heavy and lots of Beet trains out of El Centro. Copper mine in Ajo has closed so limited interchange at Gila Bend.

Plan A3 1988 - GP 60's and B39/B40's are arriving on property. Merger with DRGW brings more Rio Grande power to SP rails. Some trains still have a caboose but more and more are using a FRED.

Plan B the 1990's 

Plan B1 1992- Speed lettering makes its debut, more intermodal trains, P30CHs are starting to disapear in favor of more reliable F40's and new dash 8 "Pepsi Cans"

Plan B2 1994- all new locos have been delivered. SD70's and Dash 9's are starting to be more common on trains. AC4400's are on property but mainly on coal trains on the former DRGW in Colorado, Depot Burned down in 1993, Amtrak P40 and P42 locos are replacing the older Amtrak power. Its the last year before the mergers of the 90's began and doomed SP (BNSF merger approved September 22, 1995).

Plan C 1970's

Plan C1 1978- Agriculture is still a booming source of traffic, Alcos still on the roster physical plant changes have been completed in Yuma, Colton Tower is in its final years, Iron ore drags for both export and domestic production, post rainbow Amtrak. DD35s and U50s scrapped.

Plan C2 1975-1976- Bicentennial locomotives, American Freedom Train and Preamble Express, rebuilds are becoming a common sight,  Amtrak begining to find its identity, some rainbow but not as much, Ice deck present but derelict. Post FRA roofwalk ban.

Plan C3 1972- PFE still icing some reefers, Amtrak is full on Rainbow, old yard office some Black Widow units still around, F units are still in regular use, odd ball locomotives (U50 & DD35) still in mainline use. Roofwalks being removed from older cars.

All of this does not of course rule out a retro night of 1960's or late 1950's operation. Hey I have to find an excuse to run all those beautiful Black Widow F units my dad made me and my Daylight E9. Remember as a certain publication used to proclaim "Model Railroading is Fun"

Would you like mushrooms on that?

When I started this journey I had wanted to do a single deck layout. Single decks are so much easier to maintain continuity throughout, don't require any complex construction as there can be no grades and most importantly do not require a space eating helix. As I began to put my ideas on paper I soon realized that I would need a fairly substantial space to build this monster as a single deck layout and at the planned 50' x100' footprint for phase 1 and 2 this was already an ambitious layout. So the obvious solution is to double deck this thing.

After making this decision it was decided that it would be simple enough to get the linear space needed if phase three was placed on top of phase 1 and 2 but that meant that this contingency must be planned for in the design of phase 1 and 2. Also since it was my desire that the Yuma area be open and operable from both sides a traditional double deck plan would not work. This left me pondering whether to build the layout as a mushroom design.

Having visited Joe Fugate's Siskiyou Line and talking with Joe I learned many drawbacks to this approach.  Also there have been a few articles on the subject recently in the hobby press which have illustrated the pros and cons of the approach.  First and foremost it requires special carpentry in order to support the top deck. Also the bottom deck usually ends up with a sloped backdrop that can be difficult to hide.  because of the nature of the construction the mushroom design does not lend itself to phased construction.  Secondly the turn back curves on the lower level must be broad enough to accommodate the turn back curve on the backside of the backdrop for the upper deck. Another factor is that back to back scenes must leave room for an aisle and upper deck behind the backdrop, this leads to cramped aisles as well as a sense of claustrophobia. One draw back I noted when visiting the Siskiyou Line was that the mushroom portion of the layout was hot and stuffy most likely from less than optimal airflow. While I am modeling the desert I don't feel I want my operators to have to endure prototypic temperatures while operating. It should be noted that Joe has recently announced that the Siskiyou Line is going to be rebuilt and that he most likely wont use a mushroom design this time. While I haven't completely ruled out a mushroom design I will say I am definitely leaning another direction.

Enter the Mezzanine.

Since this layout is being designed for a space that is as yet to be built we can think outside the box. If instead of trying to fit phase three on the back side of phases 1 and 2 what if a floor was built above part of the layout and the helix continued up to that level. Phase 3 could then be built independent of the other 2 phases so long as provisions to support the Mezzanine were made in phase 1 or it was constructed with the building. This would allow for wider aisles on all phases as parallel scenes could be built back to back instead of having to allow for an aisle between the back drops.  Anyone who has visited the San Diego Model Railroad Museum has seen this approach put to good use by the La Mesa Club on their Tehachapi layout. It has allowed them to have a longer mainline run with out many of the drawbacks associated with other multi-deck methods.  The biggest draw back to this approach is that it requires extra tall ceilings.  While this is easy to plan for in a dedicated structure it effectively rules out a basement build as the minimum 20 foot ceilings in the basement would be hard to come by in most houses.  While it is obvious that this approach would yield greater quantity of run, the final question is would all this be worth it in regards to quality of run? I feel as if that question can only be answered through experience and the purpose of the layout.  In my situation I have always been a builder and model railfan. This layout is being designed with operations in mind only to make it interesting at ops sessions. So by that reasoning as long as I have room to keep building I will be happy and that is the ultimate criteria for this project.  I have seen too many quality layouts disappear because the owner finished it and had nothing more to build.  While I am not completely sold on this approach considering it has given me a great chance to think outside the box which has been liberating. As they say it is the journey not the destination. 

Wye wye wye

No this is not about my almost nightly conversation with my four year old daughter.  Rather this is a post about that versatile piece of track work that allows us to enter a junction from either direction or depending on the size turn a locomotive or an entire train.

 

As I was looking at the list of locations to be modeled in all three phases the theme of the wye jumped out at me. By my count at one time there were effectively 9 wyes between Colton and Tucson, 8 true wyes and 1 location that is effectively a wye. This is in addition to the balloon track and wye (junction with the Palmdale Cutoff) at the West Colton Yard which will be off the modeled portion of the layout.

 I am not sure what year the wye at Tucson was removed but from cab ride footage on Vimeo it was stated that it was removed before the early 90's.

This may not be important as like West Colton I plan to use staging  to represent the yard at Tucson and only model as far as the Tucson depot. But the depots I want to model is for another day and another blog post. 

So back to wyes, we have already discussed the wye in Yuma at great length so we will not spend too much time on it here other than a picture for reference.

Starting from the east there is a wye at Picacho AZ where the Phoenix line diverges/rejoins the Gila line. This has been more important since the UP take over as the western portion of the Phoenix line has been mothballed and for a train to get from Phoenix to Yuma such as when UP 844 was on tour the west leg of the wye sees use. However from what I can tell this is a rarity as most Phoenix trains in modern times go to Tucson and are then sorted for other destinations. Interestingly no wye was ever built at Wellton where the western portion of the Phoenix line diverges/rejoins the Gila line.

At one point there was a wye in Gila Bend and it is still visible in Google Earth images however there is no real need for this wye so it will be omitted.

Skipping Yuma the next wye is at Niland where the Calexico Branchline from El Centro joins the Sunset Route. While the west leg of this wye saw much traffic especially during the sugar beet rush, the eastern leg was used far less.

Proceeding west from Niland, CA along the Salton Sea between what was Bertram Siding and Salton Siding was the interchange with Kaiser Steel's Eagle Mountain Railroad at Ferrum. For those that don't know this spot gets its name from the Latin word for iron. At Ferrum there was a small yard for interchange of the 100 car iron ore trains and in this yard is a small wye. This area was built up due to the War effort and saw use for iron and later taconite trains until the mid 1980's. An interesting side note is that the taconite shipped from the Eagle Mountain Mine had a purplish color not the rust color that Athearn chose for the loads on their excellent models of these cars. This wye was built to turn steam locomotives used by the SP on the ore trains (as far as I can tell the Kaiser's Railroad was always dieselized) and did not see much use in the diesel era.  One time the wye did see use in the diesel era was to turn SP 4449 after completion of filming for the movie "Tough Guys" which had the final scenes filmed along the Eagle Mountain Railroad.  An interesting feature of this wye is that the tail track dead ends in a short cut this is similar to a wye on the SP Cascade line which dead ended in a short tunnel  (hey there is a prototype for everything).

Indio was the site of the next wye and although there was a very large engine facility to service steam engines here, it was built in a linear fashion like a modern diesel facility with no turntable. Due to space constraints I am trying to determine what if anything to model in Indio but most likely the wye will be omitted or only implied.

Colton has two wyes, one east of the diamonds and the final wye is only really an effective wye as the tracks at Colton crossing could be used in this fashion but to my knowledge never were.

So the biggest problem with wyes in the model form is that they eat up a ton of real estate. This can be a problem with our compressed scenes.  If we maintain our standards for switches and curves this can be even more of a problem. As modelers we can get creative to make a wye fit our space but is this really a good idea. What about reducing the radius on lesser used legs of wyes such as at junctions. The aerial photo of the wye at Picacho illustrates this perfectly. I have decided that at least one of the interchange tracks at Colton will only be implied and will end shortly after it goes out of view. But what about the other wyes?  This will be my challenge as I move on from here a Bachmann GS-4 (4-8-4) will allegedly negotiate a 24 inch curve but should it? My standards for yard trackage is 30 inch curves, which begs the question is it more beneficial to omit a wye or deviate from these standards on legs or wyes that are purely cosmetic. I guess it is truly a matter of personal preference and I will figure this out as I go along as they say it is the journey not the destination.

Lessons learned from the planning of Phase 1

If you have been following the progress on the layout's Facebook page you know that last week I completed the planning for Phase 1 of the layout.  Unless some glaring design errors with Phase 1 that impact phase 2 and 3 rear their ugly head there will be no need to revisit phase 1 until construction begins. So I thought I would share some of the lessons learned on Phase 1.

Orignially I had intended to save these lessons for the end and write an article however for a couple reasons I have decided to share them now.  First and foremost sharing them now will allow me to come back and revisit these lessons as the planning progresses. What may seem like a big lesson now, may in the grand scheme of things be a minor issue by the time the layout is completed. Secondly by making the blog post it puts my thoughts in writing where I can revisit them if needed; I can still possibly write the article as it will now most likely be the summationof multiple blog posts. So enough rambling on to the lessons I learned on Phase 1.

Lesson 1: Choose a scale that works for you

No I am not referring to whether to model in O, HO or N. I am referring to picking a drawing scale that works for you.  When I started out, I attempted to draw the plan in a smaller scale than I am used to in order to minimize the number of sheets of paper used.

Years ago I acquired a track planning template, I forget who made it and I dont think they are available anymore, but it was one of those transparent green plastic thingies. The scale on the template is 1 inch equals 12 inches (1 foot), this is a nice scale to work in as most graph paper is 4 squares to the inch which means there is a line every scale three inches and aside from helping friends plan on occasion this has been the scale I have worked in.

When I began this plan I thought that if I drew the plan in 1 inch equals 24 inches (2 feet) it would be a more efficient way to work and I wouldnt have the huge curves that require a compass to draw.  Well apparently my brain doesnt function as well in that scale and the plan quickly grew unrealistically large.  I was able to shrink the footprint in half just by starting over in a scale I was comfortable in.

Lesson 2 Set a footprint

When I started I figured the plan would set its own size organically. After all I was building this to be a sectional layout with no layout space as of yet. The idea was design the space for the layout instead of the traditional route of making the layout fit an available space.

 I soon realized this was a mistake as the layout quickly grew in size because questions on how much compression was needed could not be answered.  As freeing as it was to not have to worry about walls or other obstructions I had to realize that I was not going to have a space the size of the Boeing Everett Assembly Plant (largest building in the world by volume) build this layout in and even train shows have size limitations for layouts.

 After much soul searching and perusal of many websites specializing in outbuildings I decided on a footprint of 50 feet by 100 feet including aisles. Now I realize that this footprint is larger than most basements, but in all the areas I have lived in, basements are either rare or completely non existant. Also the average cost for a building this size is about the price of a fully loaded fullsize pickup.  My plan has always been that upon retirement I would move out to the country where an acreage with outbuildings could be acquired.  So as long as I have a reliable truck by that point I dont think a building that size is too far out of the question.

Lesson 3 when in doubt lay it out full size

When drawing a plan it is easy to subconsciously cheat to make a switch fit or a track diverge faster tan it should.  To solve this sometimes laying things out full size will allow you to see where issues might arise. Is that curve to tight? Does that track really hold that many cars? How are my clearances? Sometimes you just have to break it down Barney style into the simplest components and see if it truly works. Thankfully for me since I plan on using Fast Tracks to build this layout I have access to full size templates of the entire line. Those templates, a few pieces of flex track and a couple of your standard sized cars can quickly show you if your plan will work. Also I learned a yard stick (Im sure a meter stick would work too) is the same width as a piece of HO flex track. So when laying out yards full size this can be a very useful tool.

I am sure I will learn many more lessons as I complete the next two phases but thats all for today. Until next time remember in model railroading and life it is the journey, not the destination which is important.

Layout Design and Frustrations with the NMRA

Those that follow the various model railroad podcasts, specifically A Modelers Life, are well aware that I have become frustrated by the National Model Railroad Association.  Although I am a dues paying member I feel that the association is out of touch specifically in regards to their meeting the needs of those under 50. That however is not the subject of this post; today I am frustrated with the NMRA achievement program as I feel the association is out of touch in this arena as well.  When I decided to set out on this odyssey it was determined that the title of Master Model Railroader was something that would be fun to obtain.  So as I started the design process I took into consideration the various categories and their criteria. 

Since this layout is supposed to represent a prototype, I knew that it would be difficult to find stand in kits for many of the structures and so scratch building would be a necessity therefore I should be able to easily fulfill the structures category.  I also figured that this process would yield substantial fodder for articles even if some were of the “look what I did while gluing my finger to my eyelid” variety and therefore satisfy the author requirement.  Another given was that scenery would be constructed to meet the requirements for the scenery category.  Ok, so that would be three certificates down, four to go but only two of the four required areas covered.  So I still need something from railroad equipment and although unique models of rolling stock are not necessarily needed I do have some ideas of cars that I could scratch build or super detail. So that takes care of the cars category and gives me something in the area of railroad equipment.  While I am at it, I might as well build three locomotives to collect the motive power certificate. Although I can’t think of anything I would want to scratch build motive power wise for the layout perhaps building a critter or other vehicle for an O or S scale narrow gauge line might offer a nice change of pace  and break from the HO modeling. So that’s five certificates and three categories. 

This leaves us the area of construction and operation.   Since there are not too many operational operations based layouts near me, that pretty much rules out the Chief Dispatcher certificate for the time being and leaves the two engineer certificates needed in order to complete the MMR.  This is where the frustration with the NMRA begins.

For the Electrical Engineer Certificate one of the options is to satisfy Part C is an engine terminal.  The passage reads as follows:

Engine terminal, including an electrically powered turntable or transfer table, a minimum of three stall tracks, and at least two blocked storage sections for parking locomotives outside the stall area. (This means you need to have a total of five tracks (three inside an engine house or roundhouse, and two outside), that you can cut power independently to store motive power).

Although my track plan has an engine terminal it does not qualify to satisfy this option for two reasons:

1. My prototype only had a two stall locomotive shop, so despite the fact that the terminal still has five tracks  (2 loco shop, 2 refueling/service pad, and 1 roundout/ready track) it does not satisfy this criteria.

2. Since this is a small service area in the diesel era it does not contain a turntable or transfer table.

Once again this is an example of the NMRA not evolving with the times.  When these criteria were written the transition era was the most popular era however many of today’s modelers especially the younger ones prefer more modern operations. Second there has been an increase in prototype modeling and while a freelance road can justify an engine facility that meets these criteria, a prototype based layout may not be able to. Also this criteria limits itself to a large layout that needs an equally large locomotive fleet which thereby ruling out small switching layouts that are currently in vogue  and also rules out modeling some prototypes that only have one locomotive and a single track engine house.  I find the requirement for an engine terminal in the Civil Engineer criteria to be much more palatable. It reads as follows:

Adequate terminal facilities for storage and service of motive power. This doesn't mean you need a turntable with a twenty stall roundhouse. For a small operation, a simple engine house with a fueling track may be sufficient. It should be consistent with the theme of the rest of your plan. Again, remember that you don't necessarily have to build these facilities, just show that you know how to plan one.

While the NMRA suggests that these criteria are consulted in the design phase of a layout it is frustrating that the two criteria are not necessarily compatible.  While this is not a deal breaker for obtaining the Electrical Engineer certificate it does mean that I have to figure out how to shoehorn in the third item to satisfy this section, as opposed to having it come about organically.  However this is where I diverge on my satisfaction with the Civil Engineering certificate requirements.   

The requirements for the design of a layout to qualify for the Civil engineering certificate read as follows:

This plan must include:

a.Adequate terminal facilities for handling freight and/or passenger cars ◾This will vary, depending on the nature of your layout. Keep in mind that a railroad needs to have a reason to exist, other than to provide modelers and railfans something to look at! There needs to be someone that will pay for it to haul something from one place to another, be it lumber, coal, fruit, passengers, etc. (and usually more than one thing). Your plan and your layout should reflect this. Remember, you don't necessarily have to build these facilities, just include them in your plan. This is to show that you know what the design of a logical terminal facility would look like.

b.Adequate terminal facilities for storage and service of motive power ◾This doesn't mean you need a turntable with a twenty stall roundhouse. For a small operation, a simple engine house with a fueling track may be sufficient. It should be consistent with the theme of the rest of your plan. Again, remember that you don't necessarily have to build these facilities, just show that you know how to plan one.

c.A minimum of one mainline passing siding

d.Four switching locations, not counting yards, interchanges, wyes, and reversing loops ◾These would typically be spurs for setting out or picking up cars. Again, each one should have a purpose.

e.Provision for turning motive power (except for switchbacks, trolley lines, etc.) ◾A turntable, wye, or reverse loop, which actually changes the way that the motive power faces. Not just a loop of track that sends it back through the scene in a different direction on another track.

f.Provision for simultaneous operation of at least two mainline trains in either direction. ◾Remember, you don't have to actually build this, just show it on the plan.

First of all how is a bridge line moving from point A to point B with no industries not a reason to exist? Second does a tourist line or museum line not exist solely for the enjoyment of railfans and the public? Perhaps only giving them something to look at? Yes they move passengers from point A to point B but sometimes there is not much in the way of facilities other than the track used for movement. 

                The next item I take issue with is that the layout must include a provision for turning motive power.  This is a mainline steam centric requirement.  Modern diesels do not need to be turned, therefore this causes the modeler to have to plan something in there layout that is not necessary. Of course the powers that be will state that it doesn’t have to be built just planned, but why would someone take the time to plan a feature they do not intend to include on their layout.  I lucked out, the Southern Pacific removed the roundhouse and turntable in Yuma in the 50’s however when they built Dieselville Yard they included a wye most likely for turning full sets of cab units. However as far as I can tell from my research the biggest use this wye got was for turning pig (TOFC) flats so they would be facing the correct direction for circus style loading at the pig ramp in the old yard.  This lack of turning is not limited to diesels in the modern era as many logging roads did not turn their steam locomotives. On many logging lines the locomotive was left facing so that the crown sheet would always have water covering it on the extreme grades these lines worked. This means the locomotive was always pointed with the boiler facing uphill. The locomotive would shove the empties up hill and then use its breaking effort to hold the loaded cars back as it slowly backed down the grade.

Which leads us to the final exception I take to these requirements; the simultaneous operation of two mainline trains. This limits the scope of what can be modeled as many logging operations only had one locomotive operating at a time especially on the steep grades. There were no passing sidings just a single track going into the woods.  This also means switching layouts are ruled out as many of these do not include a mainline, let alone a provision for two mainline trains.

The NMRA needs to get away from its mainline steam centric roots and re-examine the requirements they have in place for their achievement program.  I won’t even go into depth the service to the hobby portion of the achievement program as I have already gone on too long.  Other than to say that I am disappointed that the NMRA chooses to require participation in the good old boy network in order to achieve an MMR other than being an author which can be difficult to do for some people.  I know of a couple people who have attempted to volunteer with the NMRA who were either told quite frankly that their services were not wanted or completely ignored.  I am not saying I am done with attempting to pursue my MMR but all of this does give credence to what my father is always griping about, that the NMRA is just Boy Scouts for model railroaders and the MMR is just for those that feel they need validation.  He also stated that being a member of the NMRA was not worth the headache from dealing with the politics.  I am slowly seeing the validity of his point.

2017 Annual Report

When I started out this post I thought about calling it the state of the layout but that seemed like too limiting a title. Thats why I am going with the annual report much like many businesses give their share holders. So here is the first ever annual report for the YPG Lines.

As we close out 2016 many milestones were accomplished even though no physical layout has been started. It has been about 2 years since I officially changed my focus from a protolanced Southern Pacific Railroad to modeling the Sunset Route. While I spent much of 2015 questioning this decision 2016 provided many to opertunities to help solidify this decision.

First and foremost Athearn announced they were rerunning the SP ore gons that were unique to this segment of railroad. In 2016 I also successfully 3d printed a preformed concrete electrical box that are located in the Yuma yard, as well as have been working to learn how to design structures for 3d printing.

The SPH&TS convention in Palm Springs was attended and much was learned about all aspects of the Yuma to Colton segment of the line.  The biggest milestone is that the critical research has been completed and track planning has begun. I have examined all the photos in the Railroad section of the Historical Society collection and have gone through 35 of 70 boxes of their entire collection looking for photos thay may show railroad. Research will continue but will focus more on aesthetics of the area versus track planning.
In 2016 I also joined the local model railroad club which has two benefits, first it has introduced me to other modelers in the community, several of which have contacts within the community which I am trying to use for research.  Second the club is in the process of designing a layout based on Yuma Arizona set 20 years earlier than my era.  This has meant that I have been able to give the other member research I have uncovered in exchange for other information that they might have.

During 2016 I appeared twice on Model Rail Radio which allowed me to not only publicize my efforts, but to reach out to other modelers and bounce some track plan and layout design ideas off of them.

The final milestone for 2016 was the layout went from being a concept to having a name and getting its own Facebook page.  The Southern Pacific YPG Lines was chosen to represent the areas being modeled. This layout will model the Yuma, Phoenix and Gila Subdivisions of the Southern Pacific so YPG for short. I felt this was more descriptive than calling it the Sunset Route because the modeled area will only be a small section of the sunset route and to call it a division would be a misnomer as the modeled areas include parts of two division, the Tucson Division and the Los Angelos Division (or depending on the year San Joaquin Division) and not a whole division.  This need for a name came about because the Facebook page I created for the layout needed a strong name that invoked images of a class 1 railroad that was simpler than the title of this blog.

So where is the railroad headed in 2017?

The railroad was always intended to be built using the TOMA approach(even before MRH coined that term) and be built in phases with phase 1 being the Yuma area, phase 2 being the line from Colton to Araz, and Phase 3 being the Phoenix and Gila subs with the idea being that these last two parallel subdivisions could be added later as a second deck.

In 2017 I plan to finalize the track plan for phase 1 as well as start design work on phase 2 and 3.  I am hoping to be able to start construction on phase 1 before the summer as it will be miserably hot and using power tools outside is not an enjoyable process.

 I plan to finish the design work on a structure for my father's layout and possibly start construction on it so that he can display it at the 2018 GNRHS convention which is being held in my hometown.  This structure is being worked on in a as time is available capacity and mainly serves as something to shift gears to when the YPG lines frustrates me to the point I need a break.

I am hoping to acquire the needed kits to build the Salt Creek Bridge along the Salton Sea and have that done in time for the 2017 SPH&TS Convention in Sonoma as I won my lodging and convention registration at the Palm Springs convention.

I also plan on starting on a locomotive model and posibly having that ready for the SPH&TS convention as well.

I plan to attempt to add a blog entry atleast once a month. Which is certainly more regularly than I have before.

So how do I plan to get there?

I am going to try and stick to the 15 minutes a day on the hobby and also use part of one of my nights off.  Smaller projects or parts of projects can be accomplished in the 15 minutes with longer projects and design work being reserved for the night off.

 All in all these seem like managable goals and hopefully will be easily obtained with other goals being picked up along the way. Overall the state of the railroad is good and we are a lot further along than we were two years ago.

Happy rails and see you in 2017

Morgan