03-31-2011, 07:04 PM
Russ Bellinis Wrote:I think I may have lost track of what you are trying to accomplish. As I mentioned in another thread on modeling LA, we are pretty much at the end of the line for all railroads coming into So Cal. There are very few places where there is double track in L.A. except where the mainline of a railroad enters L.A., or for the provision of a run around track on a switching lead.
Hi Russ.
Thanks for your maintained interest and apologies for confusing you.
I reckon your confusion stems in part from my ineloquent wafflings but in the main probably my mention of a 6' way (together with the term 'mainline'), which in the UK usually denotes mainline running as it probably does in the USA. What I actually have, is a 'mainline' or feed from the fiddle yard into the proposed industrial area I'm modelling, with a siding running alongside. The feed or 'mainline' and the 'siding running alongside' are joined at each end by a set of turnouts arranged to form two sets of crossovers, in effect, creating a runround loop. Trying to be clever, I decided to reduce the distance between the two sets of facing crossovers in an attempt to form a prototypical 6' distance between them (regrettably, this handfisted attempt just exacerbated the problems already experienced with the Peco items used and rather than go into further detail here, suffice it to say I cried, "Help!" in the form of a post on the Technical Forum page under the heading ' suitability of Peco Code 75 for Railroading' or words to that effect).
Anyway, getting back to the point in hand, one end of the 'siding running alongside' in the direction of the fiddle yard (its the broken line with the capital letter 'A' marked next to it on the CAD drawing provided), requires some form of screening due to a severe lack of planning which left insufficient room on the scenic section for a full length siding. To surmount this, I've had to use the fiddle yard for the purpose.
As a picture paints a thousand words, and to save confusing you further, please may I direct to the following link where I have prepared a technical drawing of my proposed plan using the very latest in railway modelling design programmes, a system so advanced that it allows you to produce a design even when your machine is switched off; bizarrely, it's also one of the cheapest systems around and extremely hard to beat for user friendliness as even the biggest fool like me can use it. So, without further ado, here it is:
When I saw the building we were discussing, I immediately hit on the idea of using one of the arches seen at the front of the building as an entrance to the service point for box cars; this would then provide me with that much desired screen to hide the fact that I'd simply run out of length to accomodate any items of stock on the scenic side. Problem was/is, that because the feed is immediately alongside, there was just no way that an end wall of any substance could be placed between the tracks due to their close proximity. I then thought about widening the arch to enable both tracks to appear from 'inside' said building, which would also screen the entrance of the 'mainline' onto and exit from the scenic portion of the layout, thereby killing two birds with one stone.
I'd reached this point of procrastination, when you quite correctly pointed out, for reasons given, the fact that rather than 'entering' a building, it would be more in keeping to have it running 'between' buildings, even parts of the same building which could theoretically be joined by an overhead walkway for pedestrians crossing from one part of the building to the other. At this point, I admitted defeat, and withdrew to come up with a 'better' idea.
However, I don't believe all is lost with my proposed venture, and here's why: Let's say the building has been split in two by my fictional railroad as proposed. The architect concerned, rather than ruin the lines of his proud edifice with an ungainly gantry, cannily decided to connect his adjacent structures with an overhead walkway sympathetically designed to fit in by using the same materials and features used in the construction of the buildings it served - hence the rather generous arch below. In this way, despite appearing to do so, the locomotive did not physically enter the building, the receiving and dispatching of goods being executed from a 'service hatch' complete with shuttered door to the side of the building, but within the 'arch' adjacent to the 'siding running alongside' the 'mainline'.
Provided you or anybody else haven't the lost the will to live and are still following all this, do you think I might have cracked it?
Answers on a postcard please
Thanks again for looking in.
Jonte