Missouri Valley Western -- a portable, expandable railroad

"Someday" is today

Like many (if not most) folks, I don’t have space for my dream layout. But you can’t let a little thing like that stop you.

This is the story of my Missouri Valley Western, and how I’m designing and building it so it can be easily moved and installed into a larger space … eventually.

Within the next few years, we’ll likely build an addition on our house and/or build a new garage. Either way, I expect to get somewhere between 185 and 450 square feet for railroadin’. Yeah, that’s quite a spread in estimates. So the layout I’m building has to be not only portable, but expandable and adaptable to the space available. And, oh yeah, it has to be fully functional and provide operating interest at every stage.

Now, some folks would be content to wait until construction occurs. Or build a temporary layout they’d discard when more room becomes available. But I can’t see investing time and money in something I’m not going to enjoy long-term. And I’m sick of postponing my model railroad dreams until “someday.”

I guess that makes me lazy, cheap and impatient. If any of those adjectives fit you, or if you have less railroadin’ space than you hope to have someday, follow along. You might be inspired to get out of the armchair and start working on your dream layout … instead of waiting for “someday.”

Over the next few weeks, I’ll provide several posts on the Missouri Valley Western. I’ll talk about the concept behind the plan, and how this fictional railroad is grounded in history. I’ll show you my meager accomplishments in Phase I of construction, and how I get hours of operational enjoyment out of this humble start. And I’ll take you through the step-by-step of Phase II.

I’m a relative newcomer to Trainboard, but I’ve lurked long enough to realize my work pales in comparison to the many accomplished modelers who post here. But that’s OK. I’m only hoping I might provide an alternative for those who’ve been waiting for “someday.”

Next up: The concept behind the plan. (Don’t worry; fewer words and more photos by the third installment.)

Jim

 

Jim,

looking forward to seeing what you come up with. I really enjoy portable layouts, and am actually glad I don't have a permanent space at the moment. Building smaller layouts have allowed me to actually complete a few projects, and having tried different track plans, scenery types, and themes, I have found that my interests tend to shift over time. It is highly likely that if I tried building a room layout now, I would quickly change my mind and have temptations to start over at various stages of the process.

Good luck to you.

HuskerN
www.nscaleaddiction.blogspot.com

 

Hey Husker,

Even though I've always been one to dream of the big layout, I agree with you regarding the benefit of a small one. There's a lot to be said for eating the elephant one bite at a time. Ballasting 10 feet of mainline is a lot less daunting than 150 feet. And the beauty of N scale is you can pack a whole lot layout in a relatively small space.

Unlike you, I don't find my interests shifting much over time. The railroad I'm working on now is very similar to the one I've dreamed about for 25 years.

For me, the real benefit of building a portable, expandable layout is that you're never forced to abandon it. I learned my lesson there the hard way. I was working with a few family members building a 35'x50' HO empire in the basement of a building I was renting. We had just completed the mainline and were starting on scenery when I lost the lease. We had built the monster in sections, but not in a way that any of the sections could be used as a "stand alone" layout. So while it was relatively easy to move it, we had nowhere to move it to. So it ended up being dismantled. Lots of time and money down the drain.

Knowing I would never likely have 2000 square feet to work with again, I made the switch to N scale 1 1/2 years ago. It's been everything I hoped for, and it's allowed me to work toward that "dream" layout by building it one fully operational section at a time.

Thanks for reading and commenting, and congratulations on your Marias Pass project making it into N Scale Railroading! I look forward to the series, and to further exploring your blog.

Jim

 

It's always interesting to see similar concepts and philosophy that you believe in... and this thread aroused my curiosity to a great extent. I am following basically the same approach, driven by same set of constraints and having a very similar goal!

Looking forward to the plan and progress shots.

 

Hi Nimo,

Thanks for reading, and for providing the link to your layout. Checking out your plan, it looks like you've take a much more ambitious start than I have. Lots of operating interest, and plenty of scenic challenges. But it looks like you have a great start.

How big is this section? I counted 6x12 on the grid, but wasn't sure if those were 6" or 12" squares.

This is my first N scale layout, so I've kept things as simple as possible up to this point. I found that laying N scale flex track is only slightly trickier than working in HO, so I'll eventually be a bit more adventurous.

One of the things I felt I had to have right away was a continuous run, so I could more easily test out new engines and rolling stock as I acquired them. That was an overriding issue (a "given" in John Armstrong-speak) as I designed my first section, so it constrained things a bit. The way I envision these sections fitting into the overall plan also meant I had to take a more linear approach.

Operationally, I'm happy with what I have so far, but I'm a bit envious of the potential your section has. Good luck!

 

Track plan?

 

Track plan coming shortly, Mudkip. I'm going to put up a post in the next day or two on the concept behind the railroad, which will help explain what I'm trying to accomplish operationally and how that affected the design. Then we'll get to the plan and photos.

(Guess I better check out how to post images ...)

 

Thanks so much Jim... This one is just 6'X3' in overall space (excluding staging)-actual real estate is lesser than 18 sq ft, if you consider the broad curve on the left of the track plan.

I know what you mean by continuous run, it was a dilemma that I lived with for 4 years before I finally fixed on this plan! But more I dug into my actual priorities, I understood that continuous run in this amount of space is not going to keep me satisfied for long, because when it comes to trainspotting inside the room, I like long stretch of tracks through broad scenic sections - at least 25 car freight or decent size passengers crossing each other in the middle of no-where! so I decided on this layout for its unique shape and potential of the design - and with a hope that I will find enough space one day to connect this loop to another to be able to run trains in continuous loop and just sit and watch it go around the room! Honestly, I do miss continuous run time to time...

I think flex track will be pretty easy to handle. by the way, are you going for code 80 or 55?

looking forward to more pics... All the best!

 

Hey Nimo,

I understand why you made the choice you did regarding a continuous run, and I think you chose well. That's a great plan to work from, and hopefully you'll get a chance to add that second loop or extend your mainline further in the future. But even if you don't, you've got a layout that will give you years of enjoyment.

I had the continuous run a bit higher on my priority list, for two reasons. First, this is my first N scale layout, so it was a bit of a thrill to just run a train around the oval when I first got things running. Secondly, even though I have an oval, I operate it in a point-to-point manner, although one of the turnback loops functions as part of a runaround that's occasionally necessary. (This will be more clear when I get a few photos up next week.)

In regards to the flex, I went for Atlas code 80. The code 55 is certainly a much better-looking product, but there was a lengthy disruption in supply from China when I was getting ready to order track. That scared me off a bit. I didn't want to chance having to wait several months every time I needed something as basic as track. But eventually I expect to start using code 55 on future sections.

Jim

 

Part II: Concept

When it comes to model railroads, we all have our ideals, things that immediately leap to mind when our thoughts turn to the hobby.

For me, the writing of guys like John Armstrong and Bruce Chubb established the lure of realistic operation. Heavy mainline traffic, with train movements carefully orchestrated to keep the whole operation humming at peak efficiency.

Sounds like fun to me.

My only other major preferences were to build a fictional railroad well-grounded in fact, and to somehow work the Chicago & North Western into the mix. (I grew up a block from the C&NW’s tracks in southern Minnesota, so I’ll always have a soft spot in my heart for its green-and-yellow paint scheme.)

Researching C&NW history led me to Iowa, where it’s mainline to Council Bluffs/Omaha provided the crucial link between the Union Pacific and the transcontinental portal of Chicago. And it also led me to a (somewhat) plausible what-if scenario.

The C&NW grew rapidly in the latter 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century by buying smaller railroads, or funding new shortlines it later folded into the larger corporation. But what if a couple of those smaller railroads refused to be bought out, and instead merged to survive as a bridge route between the C&NW and UP?

The Sioux City & Pacific was founded in 1862 to build a line from Sioux City to the UP’s terminus at Omaha. My “what if” begins with the SC&P also building eastward to meet the C&NW’s advance toward Council Bluffs and the UP.

The second part involves the Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley, founded in 1870 to build a line across northern Nebraska that eventually became known as C&NW’s “Cowboy Line.”

The 1890s ad below promotes travel to the West Coast via the Chicago & North Western system. Note that the SC&P and FE&MV get their own billing (in the upper left corner), even though they were under C&NW control by then.



But what if instead of succumbing to the C&NW, the Sioux City & Pacific and the Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley merged to become the Missouri Valley Western? And what if they added a third real-life line that folded about 1870, the Council Bluffs & St. Joseph, thereby gaining access to Kansas City?

The image below shows that fictional Missouri Valley Western system. With three small exceptions, the lines shown were actually built by the SC&P, FE&MV and the CB&St.J. I’ve taken the liberty of extending the line eastward to somewhere near Boone, Iowa, where the MVW interchanges with the C&NW. Likewise, I added a line north to Mankato, Minn., providing a connection to the Twin Cities via trackage rights with the C&NW. Finally, I extended the “Cowboy Line” up to Gillette, which was once the world’s busiest loading point for cattle and later a source of coal and oil traffic.


I’m building a portion of the MVW’s Cedricsburg Division, named for the fictional city of Cedricsburg, along that busy bridge route beween the UP and C&NW in southwest Iowa. As far as the layout goes, the diverging routes will all be “offstage.” A single reversing loop/staging yard will function as all four off-layout destinations (and beyond). The diagram below should give you some idea of the traffic patterns.



Like many, I’m attracted to the transition era. The place and time I’ve chosen to model, 1954, featured some of the day’s top passenger trains -- like the City of Los Angeles and the Challenger – as well as lots of hotshot and drag freights working their way across the country, including early TOFC traffic. And of course plenty of those plodding way freights serving local industries.

So I had a plausible story and an interesting setting. The only thing I lacked was somewhere to put the railroad. But that’s no reason not to start building.

Up next: Phase I construction (with track plan and photos).

 

Part III: Design, construction and operation of Phase I
I knew what kind of layout I wanted, but didn’t have room for it. My current space is pitifully small compared to what I hope to have someday. But I could still make progress if I built the layout in sections. And if I planned it carefully, the very first section could serve as a standalone layout, providing operating interest from the get-go.

I decided early on to use hollow-core doors (HCDs) as benchwork for obvious reasons – they’re lightweight, warp-resistant and highly durable. Since the 30” width of a standard HCD provides a lot of room in N scale, I chose to have the mainline pass over each table twice, with separate scenes at the front and back. This would help me pack as much mainline into as little space as possible, and allow a single return loop and staging yard to serve both ends of the mainline.

Schematically, my ultimate layout will be a big, elongated loop connected to a smaller reversing loop and staging.

For much of the final layout, I envision using elevation to help separate scenes at the back or middle of a table from a scene in the foreground. But I needed my first table to have little or no elevation difference from front to back, in order for it to function as a standalone layout. So I decided to locate my main city – Cedricsburg – near the center of the loop, and build an HCD switching layout for my first section.

Ever since reading a two-part series on meat packing plants in RMC back in 2004, I’ve been determined to incorporate one in a layout for several reasons. First, these plants were a destination and point of origin for high-priority cargo. And packing plants also received and shipped a variety of low-priority freight.

But perhaps most importantly, meat packing plants required a near-constant shuffling of cars, with reefers moving from yards to icing platforms to loading docks and finally back to the yard to be incorporated in a train. Perfect for a small switching layout.

My first table, then, would include a packing plant, and also a small portion of the yard at Cedricsburg. A simple oval would connect the two, for now. Eventually, I’m envisioning three end-to-end HCDs for Cedricsburg yard and industrial area, or an area 20 feet long (although I could get by with about 15 feet, if that becomes necessary.) The first table is the middle of the three planned tables, enabling me to incorporate part of the yard in the foreground and the packing plant in back. Here's a view from the end of the table:



The “yard” at the left will eventually serve as part of two arrival/departure tracks on the completed layout. The inner loop at the bottom, which functions as a runaround for now, will be removed when the layout expands this way. On both ends, the turnback loops will be removed (pushed to the end of adjacent tables) when the layout grows. The passing tracks will be extended. The only other track alteration planned is the crossover from the main (center left in photo). That will be changed from left-hand to right-hand turnouts in the next phase.

A rough mockup of a few of the packing plant buildings and related trackage is below. The final models will be about the same size, but different in appearance; these were thrown together quickly in Photoshop.

J.J. Armstrong & Co. (named after my brother-in-law, a longtime Hormel sales exec) is served by four tracks. From left, there is a track for the icing platform, followed by a track to the loading dock. The third track serves a variety of purposes, shipping and receiving cargo like containers, coal, tankage, salt and hides. Finally, the track running behind the plant serves the stockyard. All except the utility track can hold at least five cars.







A typical operating session involves shuffling 6-12 stock cars to and from the plant, and 12-15 reefers through the icing and loading process. I usually mix in the delivery or pickup of 1-2 cars on the utility track, as well. A “day’s” work servicing the plant involves five round trips from the yard and back, and takes about 1 hour, 45 minutes. Since I expect to eventually use an 8:1 fast clock, that’s about 14 hours fast time, or enough switching to keep one guy busy for more than half of a typical 24-hour operating session.

The “layout” – as it is – has been operational for about nine months. The trackwork has been bulletproof (so far), enabling me to try my hand at painting the rail and ballasting for the first time. It’s also my first try at putting down a bit of ground cover. I didn’t touch areas that will eventually receive more trackage or be covered by buildings and streets.

That’s where I’m at, for the moment. I’d hoped by now to have installed a city scene in the open area at the bottom right of the first photo, but life keeps getting in the way. Soon, I intend to add the next table to the left (the end with the packing plant). This will enable me to expand the yard and add 3-4 industries, providing a lot more switching fun.

It should also give me a chance to add a scenic bend or curve to the mainline, so I can get away from straight tracks parallel to the table edge. I didn’t have much choice on this first table, though. I needed to maximize the space between the mainlines to cram in what I needed to meet my short-term and long-term goals. On the downside, this also limited the possibilities for background scenery. The plus is that my minimum radius is 13.25”, which may not be generous but is certainly not stingy … and it’s about the largest you can squeeze onto a 30”-wide table. The entire room-filling layout, should it ever come to be, would require only three curves with radii that small, and none would be in visually important areas.

Next up: Phase II construction plans

 

Phase II

Over the last several weeks, I've gone from this:



To this:



The Missouri Valley Western has doubled in size with the installation of the second HCD. These tables represent the fictional city of Cedricsburg, which will eventually cover four HCDs. (As a refresher, I'm building a large layout ... one HCD at a time. The grand track plan would utilize about 14 HCDs, but I don't currently have the space for that. So I'm building in easily transportable sections.)

Here's a closer look at the changes to Table 1. Keep in mind another HCD will eventually be tacked on to the end, extending the yard.



Cedricsburg yard is starting to take shape. The mainline is at the far right, of course. The next three tracks are the start of the A/D yard, followed by the first two tracks of the classification yard. That crossover from the A/D yard to the main will eventually be pushed back when the next table is added; the A/D yard will then accommodate 30-car trains. All tracks will be double-ended, of course, as will all the class tracks. Ultimately, there will be five class tracks, a caboose track and a thoroughfare track to the other end of the yard.

Here's the new HCD:



There will be some changes made here eventually. The next phase of construction will add a third HCD at a 90-degree angle extending from the left end above. That table will hold a freight station and stud-ended passenger station. The two spurs just to the left of center at the far end will be moved to the other end of the layout when the next table is tacked on there. The long, straight yard lead will eventually veer more to the center, making room for a turntable and roundhouse. (That will probably be one of the last things I do on this layout.) That short engine pocket will eventually be the roundhouse lead.

I road-tested all the trackwork extensively with jerry-rigged wiring. Everything checked out, so I've soldered all the track feeders. Now all I have to do is tip these babies over, run the power buses (the yard will be its own power district), and hook up the feeders.

I'd hoped to have my first operating session on the expanded layout in March. Looks like I'll miss that by a few weeks. Oh well.

If the trackwork continues to hold up, I'll be able to get the track painted and some ballast and basic ground cover down over a large portion of the layout this summer. Structures will be mocked up using Photoshop and art board. Can't wait to say good-bye to the "Pink Pacific."

Jim

 

Looking good.

 

Finally some progress to report after a busy summer.

Over the last several weekends I painted a good chunk of the track, started getting a layer of basic ground cover and ballast down, and mocked up some of the industrial buildings.



Cedricsburg yard (in the foreground) and the Armstrong meat packing company are only a couple inches apart … but operationally speaking there’s nearly five miles distance between the two. The Armstrong plant will likely be the biggest (and busiest) industry on the layout. It’s served by four tracks, with nine different spotting zones. I could see 30 to 40 cars being run through the plant over a 24-hour operational day.



I was hoping the icing platforms and shed at left (the final structure will look nothing like this) would provide a bit of a view block between the yard and plant. Good enough.



Below is a better look at some of the plant trackage, as well as the east end of the yard. This more clearly shows the two tracks in front of the plant, one for icing reefers and the other for loading them. The plant is also served by a utility track and another track to a stockyard behind the buildings (the blue Great Northern stock cars in the first two photos of this post are on this track).



Pay no attention to those two SP units. A C&NW shell will be swapped for one, and the other will likely be repainted for the MVW (someday).

The GP in the Kodak scheme is on the drill track. The first two classification tracks are visible at the top, just to the right of the packing plant. (More class tracks will be installed eventually, probably when I add the next HCD at the far end of the tables above.) The other three tracks at top right are part of the A/D yard. The Bloody Nose GP is on the lead to the eventual engine servicing area.

That 50' CGW box car at center left is spotted at Doolittle Manufacturing, one of three new industries added when the second HCD was brought online. This particular place was kind of shoe-horned in to provide a single facing-point spur.

Just about ready to run through the operating sequence for the first time since I expanded to two HCDs. Considering a schedule that would include six through freights and five switching jobs to the industries on the back side of the layout (the large number of jobs is dictated by the shuffling of reefers at the packing plant). Ops will be designed for two people, although I can easily do it lone wolf by just running train sequences.

I know from past experience the five switch jobs to the Armstrong meat packing plant alone take about one hour, forthy-five minutes in real time. This should push the ops session up to close to three hours for two people, which seems ideal.

Just returned from raiding what passes for my LHS (nearly two hours away in St. Paul). Picked up some more basic ground cover materials and some scratchbuilding supplies. Getting my nerve up to try scratchbuilding most of the structures. New experience for me.

I'll share the laughs.

Jim

 

My thoughts exactly. This stuff is all mostly new to me. I was afraid of screwing up to the point I put off painting the track and starting the ground cover. Then I just forced myself to plunge in. It isn't difficult, it's actually a lot of fun ... and the results haven't been embarrassing. Kind of encouraging, actually.

Jim

 

Here's my first attempt at scratchbuilding. It's a meager attempt to construct one of the buildings in the meat packing plant, specifically a small cold storage building that's about 60 years old.



Yeah, it's pretty crude work. But the idea was to just get my feet wet in scratchbuilding. My next attempt will be slightly more elaborate.

That's brick sheet from N Scale Architect, painted box car red, with white tempera paint for mortar. Whole thing was hit with several ink washes and dusted with the chalk.

Jim

 

Thanks for the kind words, Hemi. Encouragement -- if it's not too misplaced -- is always appreciated.

(And that thing does look considerably better when the crucial three-foot rule is applied.)

Jim