Tag Archives: Design

Matson’s Landing in L-Gauge – A Question of Scale

January 17, 2017 Elroy Davis 2 Comments

On the last installment of the Matson’s Landing in L-Gauge series, Mike Pianta asked what scale the locomotive will be if I build it as an 8-wide model. Fortunately, that’s just the topic I had planned to cover in this post.

Generally LEGO^® train builders fall into two camps: 6-wide and 8-wide. Traditionally, official LEGO train designs have been built to a “scale” of 6 studs wide. Since the LEGO Group’s trains aren’t really scale models, the width of the design is less important than the playability of the set. Builders wishing to add more realism to their models tend toward the 8-wide “scale” (roughly 1:48) which is a good match to the scale height of a minifig.

For the Matson’s Landing layout, I had originally decided to go with an 8-wide, 1:48 scale. This would allow me to quickly convert real life measurements into studs (real measurement, divided by 1.25, equals number of studs). However, as I began researching logging locomotives to build, I had a realization.

Logging locomotives are really small.

As I wrote in my last post, I’ve settled on building a Climax locomotive. While researching, I found that Climax Manufacturing Company, in their catalog, offered three different models of geared locomotive. The Climax “A” style locomotive is most like the Clishay locomotive that I wrote about before, with an upright or T-style boiler on a basic flat frame. The Climax “B” style is a more traditional looking machine, though the angled side-mounted pistons drive gears beneath the locomotive, instead of directly moving the driving wheels. Their “C” style locomotive is basically a style “B” with an additional tender and more wheels. After reading through the Climax catalog, I really liked the look of the Climax “B”. The gearing is more involved than what I had originally planned, but a challenge while building is always a good thing.

With a definite prototype model picked out, my next step was to research measurements. I took to the Internet in search of articles, photos, and builder’s drawings. I was fortunate to find a mention of scale drawings of a Climax “B” in the February 1985 issue of the magazine Railroad Model Craftsman. I was even more fortunate to find that I had a copy of that issue in my personal magazine collection. I quickly found the issue and read about the Cario & Kanawha Climax No. 5.[1]

(Tip: If a model railroader in his 80s offers to sell you 30 years worth of modeling magazines, especially Model Railroad Craftsman, buy them).

While the article on C&K No. 5 was interesting, what I was really after were the scale line drawings by Ed Gebhart. The basic dimensions shown on the drawings where close to what I had read in the Climax catalog, so I felt fairly certain that any other dimensions would be correct. I scanned the drawings and loaded them into LEGO Model Scaler, an online tool by Paul Kmiec, a.k.a Sariel, of Poland.

LEGO Model Scaler is an awesome tool. Upload an image from the web, draw a known dimension over top of it, enter how many studs that dimension should be, and hit the calculate button. From there on out, any other dimensions you draw over your image will be shown in studs. Incredibly handy for building truly scale models. The other nice thing about the tool is that if you enter your dimensions at a 1:1 scale, you can quickly find dimensions that aren’t listed on the drawings. For instance, on the C&K No. 5 drawing, the narrow gauge track is dimensioned at 3 feet wide. Entering 3 as my base dimension in Scaler, I can quickly see that a Climax “B” locomotive was only 7.5 feet wide. At my target 1:48 scale, this would only be 6 studs wide. While this does fit the scale, it doesn’t leave a lot of room for the PF components (battery box, IR sensor, and motor) needed to run the locomotive.

With this in mind, I thought about a few options. I could keep the original scale that I had settled on, and put the PF battery box, and possibly more, in a separate car that would always be attached to the locomotive. Stephen Pakbaz did this very successfully with his Shay Engine. I see the Matson’s Landing layout as a switching layout, however, so I really want the locomotive to be independent of any other cars.

Another option would be to build the locomotive in scale with the track. Climax locomotives were offered in both standard and narrow gauge. Narrow gauge would give me lots of room for electrical components and details, but the model, and therefore the layout, would be huge.

A third option, which I’ve decided to go with, was to base the locomotive scale on the size of the driving wheels. Measuring the standard LEGO train wheel, which I’m planning on using for the drivers, I found them to be about 2.5 studs wide. Looking at the wheel diameter listed in the Climax catalog, I found that the prototype wheels were, on average, 28 to 30 inches. Using these dimensions, and LEGO Model Scaler, I found that I could build my locomotive at roughly 1:33 scale. This should allow me enough space to keep all of the PF parts on board the locomotive, but still be small enough to have a workable layout in the end. Oddly enough, I found that the Climax, at 1:33 scale, turns out to be 8 studs wide. So, while the scale isn’t originally what I had planned, the dimensions are.

In the next post, I’ll go over the start of the locomotive build, and my iterative process for building a (hopefully) functioning model.

[1] Kline, Ben. “The Mystery of Cairo & Kanawha No. 5.” Railroad Model Craftsman, February 1985, 73-76. Drawings by Ed Gebhart.

Layout Design, LEGO® News

Matson’s Landing in L-Gauge – Choosing Motive Power

January 10, 2017 Elroy Davis 2 Comments

This is the second in a series of articles documenting the creation of brick-built layout, from start to finish. For part one, see Matson’s Landing in L-Gauge – A Layout From Start to Finish.

Before starting on the layout proper, I first want to define and build my motive power and rolling stock. The actual design of the track plan, including grades, number of cars spotted, and so on, will depend upon the equipment running over it. There are a few things to consider before beginning:

Scale – Six-wide or Eight-wide? I used to build six-wide trains, but I’ve come to enjoy the detail that can be added to the larger eight-wide trains. Six-wide would make for a smaller, more portable layout, but eight-wide allows for more space for batteries and motors.
Era – Most logging operations that are modeled seem to fall into the late 19^th or early 20^th centuries. Choosing a specific year, or year range, will help narrow down what kind of equipment to build.
Location – What part of the world should I aim for? Eastern or western United States? Maybe another part of the world?

Here’s what I first selected:

Scale – Eight-wide. I really want to be able to add detail. This will make for a larger layout, but I think it will be worth it in the end.
Era – I’m aiming for the turn of the 20^th century. This seems to be the height of logging by rail type operations, and research material for this time period is plentiful.
Location – I live in northern New England in the United States, and logging operations were plentiful around here back in the day. This also opens up research material, as I can literally step outside of my door and look at scenery that was logged by rail at one time. One of my favorite hiking trails, in fact, runs along a portion of what used to be the Lye Brook Railroad, a small logging operation run from 1914 to 1919 by the Rich Lumber Company of Manchester, Vermont.[1]

Lye Brook Railroad as pictured in Volume 14 of the Walloomsack Review. Now a popular hiking trail.

With my basics defined, I started researching equipment. Generally, when one thinks about logging railroads, they think about small wood-fired geared steamers slowly crawling up steep grades, pulling strings of weather-worn log cars. The big three that immediately came to my mind where Shay, Climax, and Heisler.

A lot of builders put together Shay locomotives, with good reason. They look great while running! The exterior gear shafts provide some movement not seen on rod driven machines. I don’t consider myself to be a steam builder, or a Technic builder, though, so the gearing was a little off-putting for me. A Heisler, with its gear shaft underneath, might be workable, but, due to another of my other hobbies, I had Climax locomotives on my mind. In my Live Steam life, I’m working on a 1/8^th scale “Clishay” locomotive. Billed as a cross between a Shay and a Climax, the Clishay[2] screams “small logging operation”. I love the hand-built look of it, and since the gearing is pretty simple, I thought it would lend itself well to a LEGO^® design. The basic layout is similar to a Class A Climax with a vertical boiler. This, then, was where I began my prototype research.

In the next installment of this series, I’ll talk about the Climax designs that I looked at, and where I am currently with the build.

[1] Bristow, Preston. “Vermont’s Long Trail and Logging Railroads.” Walloomsack Review 14:31. Accessed January 6, 2017. http://benningtonmuseum.org/library/walloomsack/volume-14/vermonts-long-trail-and-logging-railroads.pdf.

[2] For a great overview of a Live Steam scale Clishay, visit https://youtu.be/hBkAVHcHCJk.

Building Techniques, Inspiration, Layout Design

Matson’s Landing in L-Gauge – A Layout From Start to Finish

January 3, 2017 Elroy Davis 7 Comments

For several years I’ve wanted to write a set of articles covering the design and building of a LEGO^® train layout from start of finish. With the new year and the launch of Brick Model Railroader, I have the opportunity to do so. This post is the kick-off to a series of articles that I’ll write as I design and build a new layout: Matson’s Landing.

The original Matson’s Landing is an HO scale layout designed by modeler Jack Matson. I discovered the layout years ago while scanning through “Micro/Small Layouts” at the Carendt.com blog. While many model railroading publications feature the grand basement-filling layouts of master modelers, Carendt.com focuses on small track plans that fit into a minimum amount of space. The designs on this site perfectly capture what S scale modeler and author Trevor Marshall defines as “Achievable Layouts”. In other words, layouts that are small enough to be worked on in a reasonable amount of time, but large enough to be entertaining. Given our large track scale, Achievable Layouts are perfect for the L-gauge builder.

As can be seen in the original track plan, the Matson’s Landing layout offers lots of opportunities for a LEGO builder. The display contains two scenes, divided down the center of the plan. One side showcases a waterfront logging camp, where logs are off-loaded into the river/lake to be floated to a mill, while the other side of the display features a wooded landing area where logs are pulled out of the forest. While not a lot of space is allowed for train cars, there is plenty of room for switching a few loads of logs with a small steam or diesel locomotive. The setting of Matson’s Landing could also allow for some steep grades with lots of brick-built scenery.

My initial plan is to scale up the HO design to fit L-gauge track size and geometry. For the article series here on Brick Model Railroader, I hope to cover the following topics:

Benchwork – The base of the display
Layout Design – How the track geometry is planned
Landscaping – Everything visible above the base, covering brick-built hills and valleys
Locomotive Design – Planning, testing and building of a small steam-driven logging locomotive
Car Design – Planning, testing and building of log cars, and possibly others
Scenery – Covering trees, water, shrubs and other natural features
Building Design – The logging camp area features a couple of small buildings that are perfect for the LEGO medium
Operations – How the layout is run, and various options for running it differently

During the process of building this layout, I encourage readers to offer suggestions as we go, making it a community project. I look forward to everyone’s feedback, and welcome the opportunity to learn from other builders.

Layout Design

The Importance of an A/D Track

December 30, 2016 Elroy Davis 4 Comments

A common trend when designing an L-gauge layout is to attempt to pack as much track as possible into a space. We all like to show our trains, and, unlike buildings or scenery, we need track space to do so. Often we set up our railway yards as display areas, where visitors to our layouts can see the scope and variety of our creations. This works well until we get to our favorite part, moving the trains.

A standard ladder yard design works great as a display case. Trains are lined up in long even rows, waiting for their turn to run out onto the mainline. A problem arises, however, when you want to build up a new train consist from cars parked in the yard, especially if they are not already in the order needed. In order to shuffle cars around, it’s usually necessary to pull something out onto the mainline, where it could obstruct, or “foul”, the train that is running on that track.

Enter the A/D track. By adding a single Arrival/Departure track to our yards, we can eliminate fouling the main. The A/D track is a simple siding that sits between the mainline and the yard. This track can be used as an area to build up and then stage trains until they are ready to go. Cars can be shuffled around without interfering with any trains that are running around the layout. When it’s time to swap trains, the switches on both ends of the siding are thrown. The train on the mainline comes into the siding (the Arrival) while the train in the siding goes out onto the main (the Departure). The arriving train can then be broken down, if necessary, and shuffled back into the yard.

For small layouts with only one or two trains, an Arrival/Departure track may not be necessary. For larger layouts with busy mainlines, however, an A/D track can really help improve operations, keeping the mainline running while work is being done in the yard. For visitors to the layout, there is no break in the action, and for operators, there is more fun and less “Hand of God” shuffling of cars. Adding an A/D track is one small step in moving from “LEGO Display” to “Model Railroad”.