Building an HOn30 Railway

Almost a year ago I got my first Minitrains F&C set and played with it a bit on a Unitrack loop. I have always had a thing for small teakettle steam, and was fairly impressed with how well the Minitrains engines ran. For the last year I have been collecting some additional pieces and making plans to jump into HOn30. So now is the time to get started, so this is my build log for my HOn30 railway.

First I needed some space. I started in N scale, then to Z, and had two 2x4' early layouts just taking up space in the garage. I haven't used either of them in years, and neither are really great in quality. So I figured before I started a new layout, I need to get rid of some old ones. That would leave me with a 2x5' space for the layout. These layouts are now gone.

Old Z Scale 2x4' Layout Gone


Old N Scale 2x4' Layout Gone.


The inspiration for the new layout will be based on an On30 layout I have seen on YouTube that fits in 2x6' and an On18 layout plan by David Meek. Both are basic figure 8 railroads, but themed form gold mining.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0GcDG3ZitEI/VMv3oq1Ag3I/AAAAAAAAFoM/FAq6QyB9haA/s1600/calico-schematic.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-V9eSzBpkBAY/VMhaKsPUdQI/AAAAAAAAFmE/QO_dvdZHny8/s1600/CGC-plan.jpg

All layouts need base to start on. I needed table. I considered going with Kam Konnects. I could get a 2x4' module and the dress end caps for a 24x55” layout, or get a 2x3' and a 2x2' module for 2x5' total. The cost for both would have been ~300 with legs, and probably an extra $100 for shipping. So for $400, I figured I could build my own bench work. I went and bought some lumber. I mostly used pine, with two poplar cross braces, and a 1/4” maple plywood top. It all fit into the back of my Suzuki.

How a Layout Starts Its Life.


-Matt

 

When I got the wood, I had them cut a 4x8' piece of plywood down to 2x5', They ended up cutting it to 24 1/8” x 60 1/8”, which defined the size of the table. It also left me with a 23 7/8' x 59 7/8' piece of scrap that I will use to cut the track base from later.

I ordered in some locking posi hinges from Amazon and some swivel leveling feet, drill, and tap from McMaster, and went to Lowes to get a compound miter saw. The saw was the most expensive part of the build, but I have frequently wished I had one for projects around the house.

I drew up plans in Corel Draw for the table. I used the plans for dimensions, and to make drill hole templates. The plans were printed on clear overhead projector sheets. Then I just had to use the templates and a punch to transfer the plans to the wood. I cut the lumber and then used a drill press to pre drill all the holes. After that, it was just like putting together Ikea furniture.

Table Plan: Bottom, Crossssection Side with Legs Folded Up, and Creosssection Side with Legs Down View


Transferring the Plans To the Wood.


Cutting The Lumber


Everything Ready for Assembly


Frame Put Together


The table has folding legs with locking hinges that lock in either the up or down position. This allows for it to be stored on the shelf, worked on on the workbench, or used as a table. It also is just wide enough to straddle my coffee table layout if I want to work on it inside. The final table fits my needs well. The only issue with it is that the hinges used have a little bit of play in them which makes the table a little wobble length wise. I used some felt pads behind the legs to absorb some of the slop, which helped tremendously. I have also sat on the table, so it can take some weight even though it is only 2 3/4” thick. The tables weights in at 19.4 pounds.

Table Stored On A Shelf:



Table Setup Over My Z Scale Coffee Table Layout


So far the table has cost less than the professional version.
Costs so far:
Lumber $82.64
Hinges $32.99
Screws $8.17
Heavy Felt $3.99
Swivel Leveling Feet $17.60
10-32 Tap $4.69
#21 Drill Bit. $4.69
Compound Miter Saw. $108.16

Hardware Total: $145.39
Tools Total: $115.98
Grand Total: $261.37

-Matt

 

Very neat! Post up a link for the hinges, if you can. Going with a loop or an over/under?

Whose blue airbrushes are those? I know the Talon and H Paasche..

 

Art,
I got the hinges off Amazon for $33 for a 4 pack and with screws. http://amzn.com/B00QSHQJFO They are also available off of McMaster for 5.72 each less screws. http://www.mcmaster.com/#18095a51 Kam Konnect also sells a similar hinge for a good price.
I plan on going with an over under figure 8 type layout. I'm still working on the plan. Those blue airbrushes are from Harbor Freight. They arnt great, but good enough for scenery, or junk paint. I wouldn't recommend going out of your way to get one. The red Paasche is a VL. I also have a Badger Renegade which is my favourite. I hardly use the siphon feed brushed these days and stick mostly to the top feed Talon or Renegade.

 

These are the current layout plans. The layout will be built with Peco Hom/OO9 track, using the SL-404 mainline flex track, and a mix of the long and short turnouts. The minimum radius will be 216mm, with a maximum grade of 4%! Yes, this is somewhat extreme, but I'm aiming for 2 inches of hight where the tracks cross. I have tested this using Unitrack, and it will add some operational problems to overcome, mostly limiting the length of trains. The Minitrains Forney could only pull 1 passenger car up that hill. The F&C 0-4-0 could at least get 3 passenger cars up the 4% grade. Going the other direction will have a 3% grade to climb. This isn't too far off from the prototype that had some 87' radius curves. I will probably have to stick with the Minitrains loop couplers to go around the tight curves.

Track is on order. I'm just waiting for the rest to arrive before I get started.

Current Layout Plan. Buildings are what was in the Anyrail library, but won't be what actually gets built.

 

As a Z-scaler I'm thrilled with your former Z-scale layout that must have given good switching opportunities.

Dom

 

Dom, The old layout did have good switching opportunities, and continuous running. However it did have its problems. Each layout is a lesson on what not to do next time 1. The front most track was too close to the edge to keep valuable trains on. It's a long drop, and an expensive lesson. 2. Extensively test the turnouts before gluing them down. Two of the main line turnouts were problematic, but replacing them would have been difficult. I eventually learned how to make MTL turnouts work well, but it was too late for this layout. 3: The tunnel runs almost the full length of the layout at the back. I built access holes in case of derailments, but really didn't leave enough room for easy cleaning. We all know how important clean track is for Z.

The HOn30 layout design has enough of a buffer on the sides than equipment can roll on its side without falling off, and tunnels will be kept short and accessible.

After writing my last post, I started thinking about how I arrived at a 216mm minimum radius, which came from trying to fit the whole thing on a 2x4 layout. When I went for a 2x5 table, it kind of just stuck with the smaller radius. Thinking about all the limitations I had with the 216 min radius, and wanting to future proof the layout in case a longer wheelbase engine is released by Minitains, I decided to redesign the layout with a 249mm minimum mainline radius.

New Plan with a 249mm (9-3/4”) minimum mainline radius.


This changes things quite a bit. I loose a bit of the fun stuff, like the wye, but it should improve general operations. Also it eliminated a few turnouts that were in difficult to reach places. Buildings were also sourced and shown to scale. I'm planing on mostly using buildings from Wild West Models, and RS Laser Kits. The engine house will need to be a cut down version of the RS Laser engine house kit. In going to a 249mm minimum radius, I should be able to use knuckle couplers. I also will get to build a long trestle.

Matt

 

Ken,

There may be enough room for a run around track. Any roundy-round layout doesn't really need a run around track as you can just run around the loop to get to the other side of the train. I will be relying the mysterious hand in the sky to turn locomotives. I was planning on mostly running trains up the 3% grade side and down the 4% grade side. Having more car storage space and a place to sideline a train is a good thing, so I am considering it. It would also eliminate a tunnel as I don't want to have hidden turnouts.

 

Still waiting on turnouts, so until they arrive, I'm having fun reading. One sub-hobby of model railroading is historical research, which can eat up a lot of time, but it is enjoyable.

Choosing a Prototype.

I though about sticking with the F&C Ry namesake currently painted on much of my rolling stock, however I would much rather model something less comical. Growing up in Tuolumne County has given me a fondness for the region, which happened to have two 30” gauge railways. These were the Yosemite Short Line (YSL) and Empire City Railways (ECRy). For the purpose of grounding my layout in a particular region and era, the YSL will serve as the primary influence. The town of Copperopolis, the Southern end of the F&C Ry, is just 12 miles to the north west, and I'm sure some of their trains will find their way over to the YSL from time to time.

Lennart Elg and Mark Stevens Francis have excellent articles on the subject which happen to be available online. Francis also extensively covered the ECRy in his book Empire, which I would recommend to anyone interested in the subject. Most of the books about the Sierra Railway have a small section on the YSL, but the Deane book is the most substantive. Mallory Hope Ferrell did a 2 piece article on the YSL and ECRy in the Short Line and Narrow Gauge Gazette a few years back. Still, little is know about this short lived railway. Maps showing its supposed route are inaccurate. I will paraphrase the history of the YSL, but It's a very simplified version of these sources.

-----------------------

The YSL started its life in January of 1905 as the Jamestown and & Yosemite Railway by the financiers of the Sierra Railway. The name was soon changed to the Yosemite Short Line Railway (probably because no one has ever heard of Jamestown). The railway was planned to leave the Sierra Ry's tracks west of Jamestown near the current intersection of Bell Mooney and Jacksonville Roads (Quartz Junction), near the town of Quartz. A third rail (dual gauge track)was run between Quartz Junction and Jamestown on the Sierra so that YSL engines could be serviced in the Sierras shops, and so passengers could be transferred at Jamestown. The railway was proposed for the purpose of transporting tourists to the Hetch Hetchy and Yosemite Valleys, accessing timberland east of the North Fork of the Tuolumne River, and to service the mines of the region.

Construction began on September 5th 1905, heading south closely following the Mother Lode gold belt where it crossed Sullivan Creek on a trestle. It then followed the canyon wall along Woods Creek (Sullivan Creek runs into Woods Creek) towards Jacksonville. By March 1906, track was within reach of the Eagle-Shawmut mine, with grading completed to Jacksonville, and surveys and land purchased for the route up the canyon to Groveland. A large hotel was planned at the terminus near Yosemite Park, with depots at Shawmut and Jacksonville, and a spur to the Republican Mine in Jacksonville. Once across the Tuolumne River, the track would follow the Tuolumne River canyon, and then follow Deer Creek (~ Wards Ferry Rd.) to Groveland. From Groveland the track would head along the general path of Big Oak Flat Rd., through Smith's, Colfax, and Crockers. The terminus would be at Carlon (The Northern Park Entrance, about where Tioga pass forks off from Old Big Oak Flat Rd.). A branch to Hetch Hetchy Valley was planned from Crockers.

Then the Great Earthquake divested San Francisco on April 18th 1906. The Sierra Railways Cooperate Offices in SF were destroyed, along with the fortunes on many of those financing the building of the YSL. The primary investor pulled his financial support. Without significant capital to finish the line, the YSL was done for. Details on how far the track was laid varies by source. Some say rails made it to Shawmut, and others say Jacksonville, but no one says that trains ever made it over the Tuolumne River.

By May 9th 1906, plans were being made to move the two side tank 0-4-0 porters, flat cars, unused track supplies, and labourers to the timber lands of the Standard Lumber Company for the construction of the ECRy. The rails from Jamestown to Shawmut or Jacksonville were left in place, but unused until abandonment in 1917.

In July 1917, the YSL right of way between Jacksonville and Stevens Bar was used for the construction of San Francisco's Hetch Hetchy Railroad for the construction of O'Shaughnessy Dam.

---------------------------

This is where I split ways with history, for the creation of my proto-freelance HOn30 railway. What if the investors didn't pull out, or they found new investors, and the railway kept building? Because the YSL only actively existed for less than a year, there aren't many prototype limitations. I just can't use #s 1 and 2 for locomotives, as that part of the roster is already assigned to the 0-4-0 Porters. This sets my layout in an era and place. 1906 and beyond, in Western Tuolumne County.



Matt

Sources:
Dorothy Newell Deane, Sierra Railway, (Berkeley, Howell-North, 1960)
Lennart Elg, The Yosemite Short Line Railway Co., PacificNG.org
Carl Fallberg, Fiddletown & Copperopolis, (Forest Park, Heimburger House Publishing Company, 1985)
Mallory Hope Ferrell, Along the Narrow Gauge, Narrow Gauge and Short Line Gazette, Vol. 32, No. 5, Nov.- Dec. 2006 (Mountain View, Benchmark Publications)
Mark Steven Francis,Yosemite Short Line Railroad Company. A Fresh Look, PacificNG.org
Mark Steven Francis, Empire: The Development of the Timber Industry in Tuolumne County, The Standard Lumber Company and its Railroads 1850-1920,(Berkeley, Wheelhorse Press, 2011)

 

I have continued to work on the track plan. I seem to have 2 options based on the type of Peco HOn30 track I decide to use. Peco has a mainline flex track, that goes with their 14.5 degree 18" radius turnouts. They also have a wood sleeper flextrack with irregularly sized and shaped sleepers that match their 19 degree 12" radius turnouts. I would prefer not to mix the two track types.

Option One

Track Plan Using Mainline Flex and 18" Radius Turnouts.


Because of the length and curves on the 18" radius turnouts, a passing siding is not practical with this track choice. The resulting siding would only be 13 inches long, enough for an engine, car, and a caboose. Not a very useful runaround track. To make sure this design was reasonable, I redrew the trackplan in SCRAM so it could be modeled in 3D. It seems to check out.

SCRAM 3D Renders of the Track Plan Using Mainline Flex and 18" Radius Turnouts.

Option Two

Track Plan Using Wood Sleeper Flex and 12" Radius Turnouts

This track plan allows for a passing siding. The only thing I don't like about it is the track. The irregular wood sleepers gives the impression of a hastily/poorly constructed railroad. I also don't have enough of the wood sleeper flex to complete the plan. I'm looking to get more but it seems to be sold out at my normal supplier.

SCRAM 3D Renders of the Track Plan Using Wood Sleeper Flex and 12" Radius Turnouts


I just need to decide which one I want to build

Matt

 

Starting Construction:

I decided to go with the plan that includes the run around track. I printed the plan 1 to 1. It took 18 sheets of paper. I trimmed and taped them all together into a single piece. When I had he tables top cut from a 4x8 piece of plywood, I had an extra 23 7/8 inch x 60 1/8 inch piece of scrap. It was perfect size to cut the track bed from. I transferred the plan to the plywood, and cut it out with a jig saw. I need to run to the hardware store to buy more lumber to cut all the risers. I also need some cork. Flex Track is still en route.



It's too cold to work in the garage.
Matt

 

That looks pretty good!

 

I have been continuing with the construction. I made raisers for the grades and put down a layer of cork for sound deadening. Rather than using strip cork roadbed, I prefer to use rolls of cork. I picked up two 2'x4'x1/16” rolls of cork and glued them to the plywood cutout. I then cut away all the excess. I prefer this method rather than using cork strips. I don't like bending cork around tight curves, having to tightly pin it down until it dries, and having to sand it level in areas that bulge up on tight curves. Also , I want the track to look like it was built on dirt, and and not on top of a thick roadbed base.

The risers were cut using the miter saw, which worked great for the purpose. I needed to purchase a few more 1x2” pieces of lumber for the risers. One grade was 2.88% (1.7[FONT=Liberation Serif, serif]º), and the other was 3.68 (2.1º). I accidentally cut one set of risers using the % number to set the degrees on the mitre saw, and had to remake them. In the grades, a riser was cut for every 1/4” of height, and they are spaced about every 6.7-8.5 inches depending on which grade they are on. I used screws top and bottom to secure them to the layout. The track bed seems very solid, with smooth grades and level side to side. It will make for a good base to start laying track on. The run around track, and yard tracks are at an elevation 0.25”, and the bridge and upper spurs are at an elevation of 2.25”. The siding at the front of the layout goes down to an elevation of 0”.



Additional Materials:
2 1x2x72” pine lumber: $7.76
Titebond III wood glue: $10.99
2 2'x4'x1/16” rolls of cork: $23.36

Sub Total: $42.11
Total Spent So Far: $303.48 (This total includes new tool purchases, but does not include CA sales/use taxes (8.75%) or shipping costs)

 

Nice work. I would not expect anything less.

Trey

 

Well Matt, any progress? Or has life grabbed you by the horns and away from the railroad?