Designing a switching layout

Recently a long-time friend, someone even older than me, asked advice about designing a switching layout he could build. He had limited space, didn’t want to do too much carpentry, but wanted some scope to do switching operations.

Now I’m really not a layout design guy, having only limited talent for visualizing how something would work. I admit my first thought, therefore, was to recollect one of the small layouts that I admired when it was first published, and which I’ve thought about it many times since. It is Model Railroader’s Beer Line layout, published as a layout construction article in the magazine issues from January to April 2009, with a follow-up article in May 2009 about operating schemes for the layout. 

An interesting aspect of this layout is that it was designed so it could be configured in several ways. As a layout with an oval of “mainline” track, it was 4 x 12 feet in size. But it was effectively made up of individual 2 x 4-foot sections, designed so they could be arranged in a variety of ways, such as a “J” shape or simply linear. As I recalled, some of the sections were able to be used in several ways. 

I went back to the MR articles and scanned in the track plan, then rearranged four of the two-foot-wide sections in what seemed like it would have a lot of switching. It’s shown below; you can click on the image to enlarge it, if you wish. (All MR images in this post used with permission.)

The industries shown on the drawing are the Milwaukee ones of the original design, but of course these can be changed to whatever is desired. The layout also has the Milwaukee River along the lower edge of the drawing, which can of course be omitted. Roads need not be located as shown, but could be relocated as desired. A nice feature is that there is a yard at one end. 

I have taken advantage of something in the original articles, tail tracks that can be removed, or hinged to fold down. These allow staging in those tracks, or in one case (at left edge in the drawing above), enough tail track to constitute a run-around. Below is a photo from the fifth article showing one of these in use. They could of course be as long as desired. 

Another point to recognize is that the original MR design was made so that the layout sections, however arranged, could be accessed from both sides. But a layout based on these ideas could well be located against a wall, making building flats on that side an attractive option to save space. If the upper edge of the drawing above were against the wall, several building flats could be served by an added track along the back.

The original MR article described building conventional legs and braces as support for the sections, as show roughly below. But my friend had two bookcases that he could put the layout on top of, each a little more than six feet long, so my 16-foot design shown above could simply by screwed or clamped to the top of the bookcases.  

My friend had also asked for some ideas of industries he should have. I promptly sent him the kind of list I personally have found effective, starting with the “universal industry,” the team track. Other very versatile industries are a wholesale grocer, a freight house, or a warehouse. Each can receive a wide variety of cargoes and freight car types. Freight houses can be long and narrow, as was the case on the Beer Line layout (below), or even as flats on the backdrop.

Beyond those choices, a beer and wine distributor is a possibility, along with a printer, a fuel dealer, and perhaps a cannery (fruit and/or vegetable). A chemical or pharmaceutical repackager could also be considered. Of course, any kind of manufacturing building, modeled only as a flat against the backdrop, could easily be added. These make possible a wide variety of car types to be switched to and from the industries. 

Tony Thompson 

Completing a ship’s boiler load

I have long wanted to duplicate a particular load for a depressed-center flat car that is documented in Southern Pacific photographs. The cars in the photos are home-built SP 70-ton flat cars, Class F-70-4, but of course such a load could ride on any suitable AAR Class FD car. The previous post is here: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2024/10/more-distinctive-flat-car-loads.html . In that post, I described  how a “Scotch” marine boiler like this works.  

For clarity, I’ll repeat an SP photo from that post, showing one of the 105,000-pound boilers on one of the Class F-70-4 cars. This photo was taken at Richmond, California, and the boilers were destined for Liberty ships. You can just see chocks underneath, and what looks like cable or steel rod over the top.  

 

I showed in the previous post what may be a Chooch HO scale boiler, which I cut down as described in that post. I had the idea to use some of the Heiser Models resin chocks, intended for armored vehicles, for this boiler (for info on the chocks, see this post: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2021/07/more-about-vehicles-on-flat-cars.html ).

I looked at the AAR booklet Rules Governing the Loading of Miscellaneous Commodities on Open Top Cars, Pamphlet No. MD-5, July 1, 1951. For boilers, chocks are shown, and directed to be nailed to the deck with 60-penny nails, toe-nailed with 30-penny nails, or bolted to the deck (for steel decks). Chocks are to backed up with 4 x 4-inch or larger cross-wise timber. 

Steel banding of various widths is shown as overall hold-downs, as is steel rod. Chart-Pak tape, which I have used on other loads as steel banding, would be about right for 2-inch prototype steel banding if the 1/32-inch tape width is chosen. But if my load is removable, as I intend, the rod hold-downs would be more durable. For larger and heavier loads, two 3/4-inch steel rods are specified, consistent with the photo above.

This kind of rod hold-down might be secured in several ways. I decided to make it run through part of the blocking of the boiler. I chose to use 0.015-inch brass wire, somewhat oversize but I want it to be visible. I painted a length of it black, then threaded it through the holes I drilled in the blocking. Here is the load at this point. 

A coat of flat finish was next, since the black wire turned out a little glossy. The load could then be tried on a depressed-center flat car, NYC 499056 (my upgrade of this Walthers model is presented here: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2011/12/small-modeling-project-nyc-drop-center.html ). 

I also wanted to try one of the Chooch boiler moldings in its entirety, loaded lengthwise on a flat car. I had another one of these boilers, painted a kind of red primer color. Here is how that looked, again with stripwood chocks and blocking, on the same NYC car. 

Both these loads would also be suitable for use in a 70-ton gondola, and likely I will prepare waybills for them to be moved that way also.

These are fairly distinctive loads, especially the drum-shaped one as seen in the prototype photo at the top of this post. I look forward to seeing these on my layout in future operating sessions.

Tony Thompson 

Waybills, Part 128: more weight stamps

I  have written before about weight agreements, but not recently, so here is a summary. Railroad cargoes were mostly billed by weight (there was also a carload category, covering, for example, a full hopper of coal). But the considerable majority of weight-billed loads were not weighed on a scale. Instead, weight agreements were in force. 

For example, a shipper of floor wax might know that a case of wax bottles weighed 48 pounds. Then the number of cases in a load could simply be counted and multiplied by 48 to get total weight. This was all certified by a regional Weighing and Inspection Bureau or WIB.

North America was divided up into regions, under the authority of Freight Associations or groups of associations. The map below shows the associations, some of which supervised a single WIB, but in other areas, several associations might cooperate to supervise one WIB. I have previously discussed the WIB territories (see the post at: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2021/05/waybillls-part-85-more-on-weight.html ).

Superimposed on the map below in green is a single WIB, the Western WIB, the territory of which matched that of the Western Trunk Line Committee (freight association). The map is a 1925 version, taken from page 28 of a book of that date (Grover G. Huebner, The Fundamentals of Traffic, Traffic Service Corp, Chicago, 1925). In addition to several complete states, included in the green area are the eastern third of Colorado, the upper third of Illinois, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

When a shipment weight was certified as part of a weight agreement, the shipper could stamp the waybill with the appropriate WIB stamp, including their agreement number, or oftentimes would simply type the WIB initials and agreement number of their waybill. This avoided a trip to the scale.

Just the other day, my friend Bill Jolitz sent me a WIB stamp he found on eBay, stating that he “knew with whom it belonged.” Thank you, Bill! The stamp is shown below, a typical design for these large stamps, about 3 inches tall.You can see it was made in Chicago.

As is common on rubber stamps, the legend of the stamp is placed on the top of the stamp; in this case, the stamp has a round opening in the center, convenient for the handle.  

Below I show the stamp image, about 1.5 inches square, flipped in Photoshop so you can read it (naturally the stamp is made in reverse, so it will stamp reading correctly). This stamp is unusual in that it does not have an agreement number in the center; I assume it could be written in, and an authorized person then initial it. 

Using a fresh ink pad, here is the image as it stamps now (showing some wear, which is great for our purposes). Note the generous center space for an agreement number.

If one used large enough waybill forms for one’s layout, this stamp could be used on them as-is. But my waybills are quite a lot smaller. I take a scan of the stamp image, remove the background so it is transparent, and set it to a size that will look all right on my small waybills, usually 3/4 inch diameter. (This takes a couple of minutes in Photoshop.) Then it’s easily added to waybills. Here’s an example, pending initialing the stamp and adding other scribbles.

This was a kind gesture of Bill’s, to send me this stamp, and I will be using it on future waybills.

Tony Thompson 

Kit appreciation: Speedwitch 50-foot NP box car

 I have written a number of kit appreciation posts for freight car kits that I have especially enjoyed. This one is about a Speedwitch Media kit for a Northern Pacific 50-foot single-sheathed automobile car, kit K103. 

The prototype is a group of 1000 cars purchased by NP in 1926, the first 500 from Pressed Steel Car Co. (cars 5000–5499) and 500 more from Standard Steel Car Co. (cars 5500–5999). They had a ten-foot, six-inch door opening, 5-5-5 Murphy corrugated steel ends, and a traditional NP radial roof. Below is a builder photo (Haskell & Barker, Smithsonian Institution neg. 5073, Richard Hendrickson collection). The fishbelly underframe is evident.

The NP monad on the door was only applied to cars from Standard Steel Car. Note NP’s typical lettering of the 1920s, with reporting marks, number and capacity data to the right of the door. In the 1930s, NP would revise its lettering to conform to ARA standard locations. By the late 1940s, the monad was no longer applied to these cars, and the word “automobile” was omitted as well. 

By January of 1953, my modeling year, there were 935 of these cars still in service. Here is a 1954 photo taken on the Embarcadero at San Francisco (Wilbur C. Whittaker).

An interesting detail of these cars, barely visible in the builder view above, was the application of the Miner “Ideal” lever-type handbrake. It is shown more clearly in a photo of the model (taken from kit directions). Here you can also see the lumber door, applied only to this end.

In building the car, I chose to apply AB brakes, as would be appropriate for my modeling year. These were retrofitted to these cars in the early and mid-1940s. Here’s a view of the completed and painted underframe. The train line was omitted. 

Here’s a photo of the completed model, showing the car lettering and number matching the Whittaker photo above. 

/

 The roof is nicely rendered as shown here, along with the corrugated ends. 

This model is a nice re-creation of a distinctive freight car. It often runs in my layout operating sessions, both in mainline trains and for local switching on my branch line. I enjoy seeing it at work.

Tony Thompson 

A note on the shipping of tanks

In a recent blog post, back on February 12, I showed my assembled HO scale Roco kit for a U.S. Army M47 tank (new in mid-1953, the year I model). I then showed the model being shipped on a flat car. (You can see that post at: https://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2026/02/a-new-armor-load.html .) Below I reproduce the flat car photo. 

 There ensued half a dozen comments to the post (you can see them at the bottom of that post), three of which pointed out that tanks like the M47 were shipped with main guns facing to the rear. You will also see my reply, in which I admitted I had not checked loading diagrams.

It nagged me that I had shown this load without checking a loading diagram book; after all, I have one. It’s shown below, and is clearly aimed at DoD shipments. Note the effective date of the book, AAR Pamphlet No. MD-7: it is October 1, 1953, clearly just right for my modeling era. (You can click on the image to enlarge it if you wish.)

There are two applicable loading diagrams in this book for tanks like the loads I have modeled. One of them, Fig. 90 on page 247, for lower-weight tanks, is shown below; it is rather obviously the profile of a Sherman tank. 

The accompanying description for this diagram states explicitly that guns are to face forward, and that if no gun brace is available on the vehicle, that one should be made with a piece of 2 x 6-inch lumber, secured to the gun with steel banding. And there are period photos of Shermans shipped just this way.

Note also the diagonal tie-downs in the diagram. I have omitted these on my removable armor loads so that the loads are not too fragile in handling, though of course they would be there in the prototype. 

 But the issue we are addressing is not Sherman tanks, but the newer M47. In this same loading pamphlet, there is a separate category for heavier tanks. In that case, diagram 92 on page 253 applies, and it’s shown below. This is very clearly the profile of an M47, with its distinctive long turret gun and rear turret overhang. 

And not only is the gun shown facing forward, but the text in the pamphlet reads thus: “Turret gun should be in straightforward position, and turret lock handwheel and elevating mechanism handwheel, must be wired to prevent rotation.”

I do not dispute that in later years, many different tanks, not just the M47, were shipped with guns facing rearward. I merely point out that such was not the case for the M47 in 1953. 

Tony Thompson  

 

A look back: David Weitzman’s steam book

Today I want to say a few words about a wonderful book I’ve admired and treasured for many years, Superpower, by David Weitzman (David R. Godine, Boston, 1977). It’s descriptively sub-titled, “The Making of a Steam Locomotive,” and that is very much what the book contains.

The dust jacket features an illustration that wraps all the way around the book, of the first “superpower” steam locomotive, Lima’s 2 -8-4 for the Boston and Albany, always called “A-1” at Lima. It’s an 11 x 13-inch book, horizontal format, hardbound, containing just 108 pages.  The jacket foretells the illustration style of the book: just the subject of each image, no background, nothing more. 

The story line is that of a young apprentice, just starting out at the Lima Locomotive Works, who is shown the various components for building the A-1. He even meets Will Woodard, the designer of the superpower concept. I will just show a few examples of the 35 drawings, which can only suggest the power of them in the book, as they often run across the gutter of this large-format book.

An early example is the cylinder castings, shown being examined before assembling the pair of them into the cylinder saddle. The right-hand cylinder is on the facing page, its edge just visible here.

Another interesting example is the foundry work for casting the frame halves. The partial image I show below is the sand casting mold, being prepared in the lower area for the molten steel to be poured into the mold, and the upper half of the mold above it. This is most but not all of this large drawing.

Other locomotive parts were forged from steel. The work making one of the main rods is shown, with a typical modest-size forging hammer. Again, this is most but not all of this drawing.

The last drawing I will show is the assembly of the boiler onto the frame and cylinder saddle, when the locomotive parts first begin to all come together. 

What a book! I have been through it  many times, and thoroughly enjoyed it every time. Of course, I’m a steam-era guy and all that, but the illustrations are so well done, and the processes so well shown, that I think anyone with an engineering bent of any kind would like it,

Tony Thompson  

String charts aren’t new

 What’s a string chart? It’s a way of representing schedules, for trains in our case. The idea is pretty well known in model railroading. It is simply a graph of time vs. distance. The distance is the geography of a train’s run and the time span is that of its schedule for that run.

This is very clearly explained, indeed spelled out in detail, in Bruce Chubb’s excellent book, How to Operate Your Model Railroad (Kalmbach, 1977). The example below is for a notional railroad, running from Easton to Weston, and the train is No. 24. The slanting line connects (from bottom) the departure time at Easton with the times of the stops at Frog’s Hollow and Elbow Bend, to the arrival at Weston.

Thus the slope of the line is the average speed. The times in such a chart can come from, or be the basis for, a working timetable. When a complete schedule of trains is represented in this way, the advantage of a string chart is that it visually shows all trains in relation to each other, while showing location and duration of intermediate stops. 

I recently encountered an example of string chart that shows the idea is not new. Here’s the background. The Gotthard Tunnel in Switzerland, passing under the very steep St. Gotthard Pass of the Alps to reach Italy, was completed in 1882. It is 15 km (9.3 miles) long, at the time of its construction the longest tunnel in the world (today an even deeper St. Gotthard Base Tunnel is 57 km long.)

In 1982, as part of the centenary of the 1882 tunnel, a commemorative calendar was issued, including photos of the original construction and train photos of various eras. What I found interesting, though was a reproduction of the original schedule through the tunnel, expressed as, you guessed it, a string chart. 

Note at the bottom of the image above that the cover and interior pages of a travelers’ guide, in French and German. It can be seen in the pages at right that there were a lot of trains. For contrast, the 1982 schedule was reproduced also, as you see below. Still lots of trains.

I would just mention in closing that most model railroads with any complexity of train operation can benefit in planning as well as execution if string charts are constructed. My point today is that the idea is far from new, and certainly didn’t originate with model railroaders. 

Tony Thompson