DFW Portable Layouts -- Mainline and Traction

[J. S. Bach]

[quote="R.K. Maroon" ...snip...
I have a matching combine:

...snip... Jim[/quote]
I have nine of the Grzywna Philadelphia Suburban streamliners (only three are painted):

100_8704.JPG (1.03 MiB) Viewed 7856 times

Note that they are not PCCs although they share a similar body. The one in the photo has the wrong trucks and will eventually be converted to an Illinois terminal PCC.

[R.K. Maroon]

Nice looking cars, Dave. There were a pair of the Grzywna Red Arrow shells on eBay recently:

Grzywna Red Arrow Castings.jpg (38.31 KiB) Viewed 7834 times

They sold for $120 plus shipping. They were tempting but I have too many projects as it is.

And since we're talking traction, here is some more action from the show:



It's really a sight to see this thing creep around the 15" radius curves. At first glance we all thought it was lettered for Illinois Terminal, but somebody eventually noticed that the herald is for the Southwestern Traction System. All agreed that it was perfect for a North Texas club. We didn't really have plans to create a "home road", but if we did the name would be a good choice.

Thanks for the photo. Edit: It disappeared while I was typing! We run out of space?

Bob, most of the photos I post are embedded as links to my Dropbox account. I do this as my part of minimizing the use forum's file storage space, as photos that are linked are not stored by the forum's server. There are upsides and downsides to this method:

Upsides: 1) It is a fast and convenient way to post photos
2) Photos is displayed at full resolution and can be saved by the reader as such (if desired)
3) There is no limit to how many photos can be put in one post.

Downsides: 1) Your browser may want (or need) to reload the file as you navigate off the page and then back on. If you close the page and re-open it the photos should reload, as long as the link is good.
2) The full-resolution photos take longer to load, which may be noticeable to those with slower network connections.
3) If I move or delete the file within Dropbox then the link is lost.
4) The link from Dropbox has to be modified slightly when pasted here, or else the photos don't display on all computers or browsers.

The upsides outweigh the downsides for me. The small edit required to get the link to work is now second nature to me, and overall I really like how easy this method is. And it absolves me from guilt the next time there is a purge of the forum.

More traction next
Jim

[J. S. Bach]

Nice looking cars, Dave. There were a pair of the Grzywna Red Arrow shells on eBay recently:

Grzywna Red Arrow Castings.jpg

They sold for $120 plus shipping. They were tempting but I have too many projects as it is. ...snip... Jim

I saw them but with six or so in the same condition, I decided to pass.

[R.K. Maroon]

-
Here is a nifty little Pittman box motor out on its rounds:



I believe these were sold as "work cars" or something similar, but it seems they often (usually) get pressed into service as box motors. Pittman sold them with a single truck, but whoever built this one made it a nice B-B unit, which really makes for a smooth runner. This one is setup to run on either two-rail or pantograph. Our overhead does not (yet?) support pantographs, so this one is tooling around on two-rail power.

There was a Skagit River Railway. It was in the Seattle area, and I believe the modeler, whose name I don't know, was also from that area. The Skagit River had at least one box cab:



The easy guess here is that the model is a free-lance. More on Skagit River can be found here:

http://coastdaylight.com/skagit.html

That's it for traction. One or two more mainline shots to go.

Jim

[Nortonville Phil]

[quote="R.K. Maroon" ...snip...
I have a matching combine:

...snip... Jim

I have nine of the Grzywna Philadelphia Suburban streamliners (only three are painted):

100_8704.JPG

Note that they are not PCCs although they share a similar body. The one in the photo has the wrong trucks and will eventually be converted to an Illinois terminal PCC.[/quote]

Hi Dave,

The Red Arrow Lines double end car with the wrong trucks will soon be prototypical. Two of these cars are under rebuild at Brookville Equipment in PA. They will be put on PCC type trucks and will be running in San Francisco when rebuilt. SF had need of more double end cars so they fished two out of two different museums and they will be mechanically equivalent of the other PCC types that are running in SF.

The other car that Maroon mentioned is a Twin Cities Rapid Transit "Gate Car". The model was built by Dick Stoner from MN.

[R.K. Maroon]

There hasn't been a lot to post on the DFW club layouts, in part from the Covid shutdown but also due to the loss of our workspace. The new shop is almost done so hopefully we'll have more progress to report.

In the meantime, here is a video of the club traction layout operating at the recent O-Scale National in Denver:

https://youtu.be/O7iWKQg-5Ik

Note the appearance of several Ohio Public Service (OPS) models. These are all the fine work of John Fisher of Corvallis, Oregon. OPS was a real railroad operating in the Toledo area, where John grew up. Of particular interest are the two Grzwyna cars (coach and combine) as well as the scratch-built steeplecab.

Club member Andy Scott is the chief wire-line foreman. The layout and equipment proved to be remarkably reliable. This is not always the case at show, especially one you have to travel over a thousand miles to get to.

Jim

[rogruth]

Beautiful models and an exceptional portable layout that fits together very nicely.


I have never seen traction models actually running from the overhead wires before.
I hear a sort of hissing sound that I thought was from the pole on the wire. Maybe??

[big bad jim]

I'll have to show this video to my friend Charley. He's a p48 traction modeler over on the east side, who grew up around the corner from, and spent his youth riding and railfanning, the Lake Shore Electric Railway. I'm sure he would be interested in the Ohio Public Service cars, and excited to know that somebody out there shared his interest.

Jim

[R.K. Maroon]

The DFW O-Scale Club has been in the long process of rebuilding our portable mainline layout, with the goal of morphing the original single-track, tight-radius layout to a two-track mainline layout with curves wide enough for passenger trains and (most) large steam locomotives. Much of the progress to date is recorded in the earlier posts of this thread.

We started 2022 with sixteen of the original twenty modules replaced. The next phase was to replace the last four modules, which are the original yard modules. Replacing these with new modules will complete the two-track mainline and will finally mean that all modules are built to the same construction standards. As part of this change, we decided to extend the mainline passing track, which is co-located with the yard modules. This step required the installation of a curved turnout on an existing module.



We often fabricate our own turnouts, but an "Old Pullman" pre-built turnout became available. We were pretty excited about this, as the radius of the main and diverging lines very closely matched our needs. That was about the only good thing about it. Much to our dismay, we found the turnout to be badly out of gauge in several places. That wouldn't be so bad but the rail is not just spiked but also glued to the ties. This makes reworking the rail alignment harder than usual. Additionally, we discovered (after a good amount of head scratching) that the frog was bent out of plane. We were able to work all that into submission, but there was still one hill to climb. We found that the roadbed needs to be DEAD FLAT for this turnout to be broadly reliable. This would have been easier to achieve if we were doing new construction, but this was a retrofit to an existing "new generation" module.

After all the trouble we encountered, we expected the turnout to be an operational problem. To our surprise, it has been remarkably reliable. The biggest issue is the frog gap. Smaller wheels will drop into the gap, so having a floor in the gap is important. The problem is that we run all sorts of equipment, new and old, and the flange depth varies all over the map. This requires a compromise, where wheels with short flanges drop a small amount, wheels with large flanges actually bump up in the gap, and most everything else runs pretty smoothly. So far, we have not had an associated derailment issue with this -- so far!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/o0sh0xydsuy6c22/Curved%20Turnout%20Operation.mp4?raw=1

We did this turnout first, as our track plan for the new modules is based on reliable operation of this (and another) curved turnout. We felt it prudent to prove we could get a curved turnout to work as it should before proceeding. Things look good so off to the races we go.

More to follow
Jim

[E7]

Fascinating stuff Jim. Thank You!

Rich

[R.K. Maroon]

I thought providing a little bit on what the plan is here would be helpful. Here is a diagram of the layout as it exists today:



This diagram does not show the track plan exactly correct, but it gives you an idea of what we have. Note the lead tracks at both end of the yard that loop around the ends. These lead to an industrial switching area but also tie into the inside main line for yard access. These lead tracks allow working either the yard or the industrial switching area without fouling the main line. The four legacy yard modules that are to be replaced are marked. Note also that the layout is basically an oval, with horseshoe curves at each end.

In addition to replacing the four legacy modules, we are going to widen the layout by four feet:



This breaks up the horseshoe curves but more importantly gives us a lot more room inside the layout. Part of this space is reserved for our portable traction layout, but we have additional (future) plans to add a passenger terminal, roundhouse, diesel shop, and freight storage yard. More details will be provided as plans eventually firm up.

The project for now involves building six new modules -- four for the yard and two to widen the layout. Next step: build the module frames.

Jim

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Thanks for the plans and update! The inner partial loop is not connected to the outer domain? Any plans to connect them together?

[R.K. Maroon]

Martin, I decided to use your question as motivation to update the layout diagram. I am going to show the complete diagram and then explain it by breaking it down:



Going around the layout clockwise from the top, we have named the four legs of the layout Riverside, West Tex, Yardside, and East Tex.

Here is the same diagram showing just the two mainlines:



The two mainline tracks are adjacent everywhere but on Yardside, where they are separated by a shared passing siding. Here is a closeup, with the middle sections compressed:



The turnout I showed in photos several posts back is on the far left. Another will be installed on the far right, as shown. The shared passing track in the middle allows trains to crossover from one main to the other as well as supports meets on either track. The effective length of the passing siding is longer for the outside main than for the inside. We did it that way as the greater radius of the outside main supports longer trains -- especially passenger trains.

Here is the diagram with the mainlines removed:



The three-track yard at the bottom of the diagram is accessible from both ends. Trains leaving or entering access the yard via the lead tracks, which tie into the inside mainline on the other side of the layout. A small section of the inside main is visible where the lead track turnouts are. The switching area has five spurs and a run-around track. This was a tradeoff. More spurs makes for more interesting operation, but, with the space requirements associated with a portable layout, leaves little room for buildings and scenery. The club voted for operation. I would have picked scenery, but I will admit it's cool when somebody is actually doing some switching work.

Speaking of scenery, we currently have very little. We all agreed to finish the track work before starting any scenery. Given that we have reworked some of the alignment as plans matured, delaying the addition of scenery seems to have been a good decision.

Jim

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Thanks for a far more in depth update!

[R.K. Maroon]

The current phase of the layout upgrade project requires the building of six new modules. All of them are rectangular, two feet wide and four feet long. These will be the same design as the other eight upgraded modules on the layout, so we already have plans and a material list. Step one is to purchase material and cut the stock lumber to the specified dimensions. It makes quite a stack:



We use two-inch thick foamboard for the deck. It comes in four-by-eight foot sheets:



It's not easy to find this in Dallas, but with some diligence it can be had. Home Depot lists it on their website, but it is not an item that is usually in stock down here. Happily, I found two sheets at a local store by searching all stores in my area on the HD website. I am not sure why they were but I am not complaining either.

Jim