Blackwater Canyon Line - November 17, 2024 - Scratch Built Church

Dave, your encouragements are valuable!  For instance, just having you walk up to me outside the Orange Hall at York, the first of two times I attended, and greeting me was huge.  How would we have known each other if it hadn't been for your valuable presence here??  Also remember, every time You ask a question, there are others you are helping who are wondering the same thing.  I have learned a lot through others questions and enjoyed their presence.

The bridge looks great!!

@Mark Boyce posted:

Dave, your encouragements are valuable!  For instance, just having you walk up to me outside the Orange Hall at York, the first of two times I attended, and greeting me was huge.  How would we have known each other if it hadn't been for your valuable presence here??  Also remember, every time You ask a question, there are others you are helping who are wondering the same thing.  I have learned a lot through others questions and enjoyed their presence.

Much like the nudge that got me to go to my very first York. I had commented on a post from Peter(Putnam Division) about how he did the spray painting on the RossBed for I think the modular layout the club has. He answered quickly and I was inspired to check out the stuff at Michael's. I think a few weeks later the York conversation came up, and that got my wheels rolling. Looking back at how my whole life has changed since then, it was of course a great thing, and way better for me to venture forth putting one foot in front of the other.

I do find myself chiming in on topics that I may only know very little about, but since there was another topic on it, I will try to convey what was said(giving credit if I can remember who) and or trying to link to the other topic if that will help out as well. I think it was earlier this year that I did linking and explaining on the Lionel Atlantic's issue which was a topic that GRJ had commented on. I don't think he started it, though I may be wrong there. If it wasn't for me following John, I probably would have chopped up wires in both of my Atlantic's, which would have upset me greatly trying to figure out what went wrong.

So Mark, what is the next course on with the bridge? Another few coats of paint? When all that is done, are you going to pop it back in place and show the difference between the before and after?

Thank you, T-Bone, Dave!

Dave, I actually got my start here with finding the O Gauge Railroading Magazine on the magazine/book rack at a local Giant Eagle (pronounced Iggle) grocery store hear abouts.  I never knew the magazine even existed.  I came from HO modeling before that.  I saw the cover story was on Dave Minarik's store layout in his now closed Mercer Junction Train Shoppe.  Seeing he was only a 45-minute drive away, I visited his store, bought a train set, and then signed up for the OGR Forum.  That was a little over 10 years ago, and forum members have been reading my gab ever since. 

Yes, I am finishing up painting the Atlas track sections.  The ties are done, but they have nice simulated angle iron along the ends of the ties that have bolt detail.  I am painting that black to match the bridge.  It's a subtle difference from the 'creosote' ties, but is noticeable.  I will then be ready to fasten the track back on the bridge as mentioned a couple days ago, then assemble the plexiglass supports @mike g. sent me a couple days ago.  We discussed the measurements over the phone last weekend.  He also cut plexiglass to replace the 7-ply wood I used on the small bridge, so I will have a more see-through effect when the bridges are either up or down.  After that will be assembling the lift-ups to replace the existing ones with a better hinge system, and better electrical contacts.  One of my contacts broke and I jerry rigged it to last until I re-do it.  I have printed off some stuff Gunrunner John posted and some off Susan Deets Website.

Then comes matching up the passing siding to the second track and I'll be adjusting the station platform to the 1/4" difference between the first track and the new alignment for the bridge.  Maybe I'll get back to the scenery on the side of the layout featuring the grades up the mountain this winter. 

Mark, Sorry I am late to the game on the bridge! It looks outstanding! I can't wait to see it back on the layout with the new painted walkways and ties! Keep up the wonderful work and if you need any more plexiglass stuff let me know.

Side note, Dave the walkways come off really easy!

Mike, The plexiglass will work just great!  We both measured twice, and you cut once.    Here is a couple photographs of the double track bridge upside down with the plexiglass pieces placed on edge.  I could have never cut that stuff here with my scant array of tools!    I didn't take photographs of the other bridge since it is installed now.  Thank you so very much!

I haven't had time for the layout other than planning the bridge replacement and track realignment.  I sent a PM to @mike g. Mike this morning concerning that.  I did run some trains, and really with only one passing siding lengthened, I can't run trains of any length in opposite directions at the same time.  @ScoutingDad Jeff and I have been exchanging emails concerning that issue and his own layout.

I have two options.  The first is to double track the whole mainline.  Actually, it would be easy to do except for one caveat.  That is the lower bridge crossing.  I would have to extend the tabletop far enough beyond the Mianne leg to put in another track and third bridge.  That would be cool, but I would have to totally rearrange the whole bridge lift system.  It could be done.

The second option is an idea that Jeff liked the sound of, but I didn't have a drawing ready.  I made a new revision to my SCARM track plan to show this idea.  I am not that good at SCARM, so I did a little doctoring in paint besides showing the basic idea in SCARM.  I have attached the Paint drawing of the layout as it is today, then the Paint drawing showing the new idea for the lower track passing siding, and finally the SCARM file in case anyone wants to look at it.

Please note here first of all that I find it impractical to extend the lower passing siding beyond it's current position because of the bridge at one end (lower right corner) and the grade starts at the other end (lower left corner).  So, I show in the second drawing that I could extend the track that is still at Zero elevation around the lower left corner of the layout and in the area that I roughed in extruded Styrofoam for the river bed.  All the track in blue on the drawing is Zero elevation.  Then the track stays at Zero elevation and connects back onto the mainline near the top of the drawing.  It is true that now a train on that track will be going around and around never going up either grade, instead of just being a passing siding on the existing mainline.  I thought this could provide some variety because I really like running two trains and have only been doing it with both trains going in the same direction.

Also, I have decided to take Jeff's advice and raise the town at the Zero level to the level of the upper track.  As can be seen on the second drawing the grade at the bottom of the drawing (purple track) is extended to go over the Zero level tracks.  Jeff had his staggered and used a retaining wall to make one track go through a canyon so to speak.  I don't have room to do that and keep 054 curves and not hit the literal brick wall when I have the upper passing siding (green track) go across the bridge.  What it will give me is the ability to make a couple of lightweight lift outs with the town on top.  I can then reach the lower tracks.  Hopefully I won't need to do that very often since there won't be a turnout there anymore.  An added bonus will be I will be able to store extra cars under the liftouts which will be accessible with the liftouts in place.

Yes, I covered a lot, but I had a few minutes, so I decided to do it.  As always, comments and questions are welcome.  As an old English Literature professor I had many years ago used to say, "Let's cuss and discuss the assignment"  He also called Shakespeare "Old Shaky"

Mark, the bridge looks great! You’re a good egg Mike.

The changes in the track plan are interesting and should also provide some flexibility. I think option 1 is a tall order though. Keep up the good work Mark, Jeff had some nice input on the changes.

Andy

Thank you, Andy!  Mike's the best egg!!!

You are right, option 1 is a tall order.  Then would it be worth it???    Also, it may not even be as interesting as option 2 would be.  Jeff has had some good ideas along the way, and has been an encouragement in helping me realize I can never build the scenes as the big boys do.  I wouldn't live long enough to build a large layout anyway!! 

Just to be clear, our conversation looked at the layout size and then what could and could not be done. The ones that could not be done became dreams on the wish list for the next layout. The ones which can be built then gets priortized , what do you want more. As always we compromise.

This is true Jeff.  I knew from the start I couldn’t begin to do the canyon justice in my space, but needed to rethink it after I had roughed out the riverbed.  
For everyone else, I mentioned to Jeff I look at a Western Maryland modelers group on Facebook.  There are two layouts being built that include the Blackwater Canyon.  Of course I can’t compare, since they are both in HO and encompass large basements.  Jeff suggested I will have to settle for a small vignette.  

Mark- I would take the operational variety over the scenery. I like the second loop idea. Hard to follow the plan, but looks like you would have to keep on your toes when both trains meet on the lower level.

*Edit* OK- figured it out. The blue loop will give you a spot to park a longer train than you could before. Swapping trains from the lower to the twice around/ upper is possible now too.

Bob

Thank you, Bob!  Yes, the plan has gotten to be a bit difficult to follow.  You got it right!  I think the challenge with the common track on the lower level will keep things from getting boring.  The double track all around could get boring if I don’t keep crossing over now and then.  I think option 2 has become a no brainer!  Yes I am a bit slow!  😄

Layout plans evolve over time Mark. I've tweaked mine several times over the years too.

Bob

Mark, I think it's great you and Jeff found some ways to expand your layout.  Option 2 looks to me like it has more operational possibilities and maybe the potential for additional lower level hidded sidings for train storage on the left side of the drawing.

I've also been quietly following and admiring your progress on the station and the double track bridge replacement projects.

Thank you for continuing to post your progress.  Please keep up the great work.

Option 2… yes. Good job guys.

Thank you, Bob, Steve, Bill!

Option 2 has garnered 100% of the votes!  A landslide!  Whoops, no landslides onto the right-of-way please!

Hi Mark, sorry it took me so long to get back here, the bridge supports look outstanding! LOL

I sure like the option 2 for your layout and I think it will be more for you to do and enjoy! Just remember its your layout so do what you think is going to make you happy and have fun doing it!

Mike, thank you!  I knew you were busy; assumed the CEO had you on other projects!

I need to get some screws and the proper tap so I don’t mess up the plexiglass too much!

I like the new plans. The bridge supports look great - nice cut job Mike.

WOW! Lots going on! Looking forward to seeing what happens!

Peter

@Mark Boyce    Mark - had a bit of lunch time to look at the SCARM file. The inside riser is 5.6% grade not 3.8% as you show, The outer is 3.8%. Not sure if you caught this but you do not have 2 independent loops to run 2 unattended trains. The upper loop always goes down to the lower level before rising back up.  I have a couple of ideas I'll work out this evening.  SCARM also shows a few extra curves, but I cannot figure out where they are to remove them. They do not appear on this image.  I did run the 3D simulator - everything now connects. Pink track is changing grade, blue is the 0 level, green is the 6 inch level.

Running on the understanding you prefer to have 2 loops, I think we add track to create a continuous upper loop, The existing pink track gets moved right a few inches to provide room for the upper loop track.  Then we flip relative positions of the next two sections so the grade level track will be inboard of the other 3. So if you were standing at your bridges you would see the grade level track, then a pair of tracks on an incline - one up one down and then the upper level in the back. At this point you could then decide on whether you want the grade level track to be hidden by a hill so it exits from a tunnel portal or just be in front of the incline tracks.

We could move the grade level track close to or beneath the upper left side loop, but I am concerned about removing too much incline track run which would make the grade too steep.

@Mark Boyce

a few images -  Mark this gives you the ability to run 2 loops and you could connect the lower inside for a 3rd loop, but it would run into your town.  Maybe use for yard space. As always just tossing out ideas. Not sure what you were thinking on with the 2 change of grade track sections, but I left them in. 

You have some track I cannot find to remove. I can see it in 3D. Also your layers are really messed up. I don't think there is a point to fix unless you want the lower tracks to show up under the upper.  Track is all connected.  I think you can reduce the grade a bit by starting the elevation change 5 or 6 inches past the turnouts. Even raising the turnouts 1/2 inch would help.

I make use of the flex track to connect loops - I find it quicker when I am just trying to get ideas, Nothing is under 042. Red are the on-grade track. Everything else is level.

Nice work on the track plan Jeff. Running the simulator helps sort things out.

Andy

Thank you, RJ, Peter, Andy, Jeff!!

Jeff, thank you for taking the time to fix my SCARM drawing.  Obviously, I wasn’t paying attention to the layers, but also, I totally forgot how to work out grades since DoubleDAZ Dave worked on my initial drawings.  The inside loop grade was intended to start right after the switch right after the bridge, so it wouldn’t be as steep as 5%, but I wasn’t thinking of how low it would be at the second crossover of the lower tracks, so I could have ended up with an overhead clearance problem.  Thank you for moving the starting point for the grade to the end of the ‘overpass’.

I was aware that there was a section of track that both loops would occupy.  I hadn’t figured out a good way to eliminate that, so thought maybe it would make for operating interest; or operating headaches, which is what I am trying to avoid with this revision.  I did find the ‘phantom’ curves that show up on the 3D view.  They were on the level Dave identified as ‘coordinates.’  I’m sure my error and not his.

I’ve looked at this plan twice to see how I like it.  Overall, I like the concept!  The ability to run two trains at once will make me happier, I think.  Also, I like being able to have trains go between levels.

I’ll post more later, but I want to get this much out, since I first read your comments at 3 am.  Thank you.

Mark, working with layers almost always results in things being put on layers, like coords, that are active, but then get hidden. I take the time to not only color-code tracks, but I’ve gotten pretty anal about then turning layers off/on to make sure tracks are on the right layers. The funny thing is that when I get a design back where someone erase made changes, the layers usually get really messed up, but that’s okay. I’d like when folks learn enough about SCARM to make their own changes and all I have to do is maybe make minor adjustments and cleaned up the layers.

I’ve been following these changes and since Jeff is doing such a good job, I haven’t seen any reason to jump in. However, I think it’s very interesting to see where you’ve taken the layout since the first day we started working on it, way back when it was a photo of John’s drawing on paper to where it is now. I’m sure you never dreamed this project and thread would have taken on a life of its own, I sure didn’t.

@DoubleDAZ  Thanks for the comments. Mark and I have compact spaces in which to build our little empires. I've made enough mistakes or learning opportunities that made me rethink what I wanted to do and how to accomplish them.  Also beginning to see switch problem areas as I lay things out. I can address those once I understand Mark's interest/willingness to do so track re-work. So I've sent Mark another SCARM drawing to see what he thinks. 

Not sure if you came up with the wye coming out of the engine shed, but it is a clever way to turn an engine around in a limited space. I'll have to convert the file into workable layers as some of the ideas will be difficult to manage with track directly above. 

Regardless I've always found your comments constructive. Please chime in. If Marks gives me a yes to the track adjustments I'll share an updated plan with layers to make it easier to see varying heights and independent loops.

@Mark Boyce  should have been working on TPRR, but ...

Now time for refining,  Have the layers updated so you can remove elements to see better. Scarm won't show it, but there would be open space beneath the town so you would have full access from the front and side.  I did not remember where you were going to put the station, but there is plenty of deck space with the town. Added tunnels and bridges to be able to see the track plan better. Not convinced we need the double crossings to the inner loop or even if the loop in needed at all. There is more space underneath the town for a small yard where I would probably use tighter curves. You could use the inclines as long sidings. 

Thank you, Dave, Jeff!

Dave, it has been a year since I last touched SCARM.  I haven't spent the time to get any good at it.  I certainly appreciate all you have done on the many iterations.  Yes it has come a long way since we first started with John's sketch in whatever software he used.  I never expected the thread to go on as it has, nor did I expect to be fiddling with it yet again 5-1/2 years later.  I actually had hoped to have the track long since settled and have a lot of scenery in place.  But there is more to life than our layouts.

Jeff, I replied to the email, then saw you wrote here as well.  I came up with the wye.  Originally there were just going to be a couple of sidings there.  I cam by the engine house and that is where it fit and amazingly, the wye fit.  Yes, you should have been working on the TPRR, but I certainly appreciate what you have done on the Blackwater Canyon.  You did a great job with the layers.  I was going to start sifting through the mess, but thank  you very much.  Yes, the sidings on the very inner part of the layout certainly could be extended as another loop to run another train, and they or the inclines could be used as sidings to stop trains.  The existing track around the area of the wye and passing siding didn't turn out just like the drawing shows.  The tracks are shifted to the right allowing for an area for a station.  Here are a couple photographs of the area as it stands.  I don't know that the drawing needs to be reworked to reflect what is there.  The first shows the single track bridge.  The second shows the double track bridge just dropped in place to see how it all looks.

I'll give it all some thought and looking at the layout trying to imagine the different scenarios and any others I think of.

Mark, one of my favorite parts of this hobby is watching a layout evolve/develop and realize it’s potential.

Andy

Jeff,  I really like the improvements you've made to the plan.  If I may offer a couple of tips to enhance the 3D aspect of SCARM.

Terrain Control Options: Normal, Wireframe and Off.  Here are two examples.  The red arrows point to the controls for each within the 3D window.

Terrain Off

Wireframe Terrain

The attached SCARM file, which is the same track plan as Jeff's #5, has two small suggestions one of which can be seen in the 3D Wireframe above.  Moving the tunnel portal in the foreground out a bit more from the track switch above it will help with the portal fitment.  Commercially available tunnel portals (MTH and K-Line) outside heights range from around 8" to 8 1/2".

Also in this attached SCARM file, I took the liberty of removing selected upper level track supports which were coinciding with lower level track and under the otherwise unsupported parts of the Double Track bridge.  These removals allow viewing the lower level tracks in 3D mode more clearly when the terrain is transparent.

Here's how to remove or add Track supports.  Note that the Track Heights have to be turned on to access this option, as indicated by the Red Arrow.

I hope this is helpful.

@SteveH  Thanks for taking a look and for the SCARM tips.  I find using SCARM to be pretty intuitive, but there are also some aspects I have to scratch my head on. I was wondering about those views - they never seemed to work quite right to me. Looks like I missed shortening a building foundation. That view works much better for showing the lower track detail. 

Mark Boyce,

First and foremost, thank you for sharing your journey, trials and tribulations while building your layout! I have been stuck several times while working on/planning my layout and have learned a lot just by following your thread. The members of this forum have shown me that there are still good people in this world that are willing to help someone with no questions asked. I think your newest track plans are really cool for the space that you have, and this is from the contributions of the forum's members.

I myself am starting to wrap-up the painting of the background scenery and can't wait to implement on my layout what I have learned from you and the other forum members! Happy railroading Mark!

Thank you, Andy, Steve, Jeff, T-Bone!

Andy, it is fun to see a layout or layout plan develop.  I am following several at all times.

Steve, It does make sense to move the tunnel portal.  I had noticed the supports on the track but had no idea how to remove them.  Thank you for your input!

Jeff, SCARM is intuitive, but I lose it on some things.  Having a very slow computer makes it almost impossible to get the flex track where I want it and do the snip.  I totally forgot how to do the snapshot, but found it for the 3D view, but not the track plan view.

T-Bone1214, Trials and tribulations is an excellent way of putting it!!    I'm glad following this thread has helped you through places you were stuck!  I was stuck in the very beginning, before I started this thread the first week of January 2017.  I don't want to think where I would be if it wasn't for all the help from so many great forum members!  I'm glad you are getting ready to move on past painting your background.  Yours is one of those planning threads I was thinking of above. 

For another potential version - the 3rd loop is removed and replaced with a switch yard. This is where I could use some help as I am just learning about how to do them. The upper track and town layers have been removed to help show the yards.  The upper industry yard could be extended and perhaps split into two. the lower yard has two tracks but may be able to fit another in. I don't see a way to get in a runaround.

This is the top view with all the layers.

3D View - kind of thinking about pulling the town back to a single row of buildings to expose more of the yard. But then you lose the town feel. What do you all think?

Thank you, Jeff!  I think I need the bigger town.  I have too many buildings already.  But the yard tracks underneath the removable town is a good idea.

Wow Mark, you must be happy as there are some great ideas here! I am sure whatever choice you make it will turn out terrific!

I think I have finished all the summer CEO honey do list so I should be able to fallow along more than the last few months!

Thank you, Mike!  Yes there are some great ideas floating around here.  I guess I'm in the place you were when you wanted to build the reversing loop.  I don't have room for that, but do know I now want two routes so I can run two trains in opposite directions.  Car storage would be a great asset as well.  I would be floundering with two boring loops and a lift out piece of plywood for access if it wasn't for all the great help here on the forum, you included of course. 

I'm glad you have the CEO projects about wrapped up.  I have some outside to keep me busy part time until the leaves start to fall.    Fortunately the son of the widow neighbor across the road cut down 4 trees this summer, so we won't have as many leaves blowing in from that direction.  There are still lots beside us that blow in.  We will see how much less the job is keeping them cleaned up. 

I'm glad you're doing good and that maybe this fall there might be some less leaves! Just remember the old saying, sometimes less is better! LOL

I can't wait to see what direction you go! Just be happy with whatever you do!

Mark, I am amazed at what you are doing on your layout! Just amazing what you are doing in the space you have. Great Job!