News:

Please read the Forum Code of Conduct   >>Click Here <<

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - JDLX

#16
I'll add a little to what has been written so far...

First off, disconnected trucks were common, but not universal.  What kind of log car an operation used was largely a reflection of what the company's harvest practices were, and, to a large part, what was available.  Skeleton log cars were perhaps the most commonly used, as they presented a number of advantages- no car deck for bark to accumulate on, the ability to have train brakes, and rugged construction.  However, as noted, the use of flatcars and/or skeletons limited the length of logs that could be loaded.  Where the companies chose to buck their logs- i.e., cut a downed tree into smaller, more manageable chunks- played a large roll in this.  The most common approach was to buck the tree on the ground as soon as it fell, which made the job of skidding the log to the railroad landing that much easier.  In such a case, flats or skeletons were far more practical than disconnects.  An additional factor is if the logging railroad operated its trains over any common carrier trackage, as ICC and state rules generally prohibited the use of disconnects on common carrier lines, though exemptions could be obtained.  However, if the company operating practices dictated delivery of longer logs to the mill, then disconnects would have been used.  Era plays a part in it to- disconnects were more prevalent in the early years.  Loggers seemed to transition later to flats or skeletons, especially if they had any sort of steep decending grades on the line, as with a train of disconnects you only had the engine brakes and manual application of hand brakes on each disconnect to fight gravity.  


In addition to log cars, your typical logging railroad would also have a collection of service equipment.  Nearly every operation had at least one or more steel flatcars with heavy frames, used to move logging equipment into and out of the woods.  The logging railroad was often used to provide supplies to outlying logging camps, which would require at least a couple boxcars and maybe a refrigerator car or two.  Logging equipment itself burned a lot of fuel, and the logging railroad would often have fuel cars- either wood flats equipped with wood racks for wood powered equipment, or steel tank cars for fuel oil.  Gasoline cars became common in later years as internal combustion replaced steam powered logging equipment.  Water was also a never-ending need in most operations- in the earlier years to keep men and animals hydrated, later to keep water in the boilers of steam powered logging equipment.  Your typical logging railroad would likely have numerous water cars, ranging from wooden boxes on flatcars to steel tank cars, to meet this need.  And then there would be a few pieces of more specialized equipment- a locomotive crane or two, a snowplow if you operated in snow country, ballast hoppers for ballasting track, your track gangs would likely have a small collection of work flats dedicated to the never-ending chore of building new log spurs and picking up the old ones, you would need a few fire cars to fight forest fires- mostly water cars equipped with pumps, hose, and firefighting tools, and then a lot of operations had outfit cars that housed track construction or logging crews out in the woods.  

For a good overview, I'd recommend finding the January through April 1984 issues of Railroad Model Craftsman.  RMC carried a four part series on pacific coast logging in those issues- January featured an overview of the logging industry, February covered the steam locomotives used in logging service, March covered steam era rolling stock and other equipment, and April covered the diesel era.  

As for specific recommendations, I'd suggest finding Kadee or Rivarossi skeleton cars, or Bachmann log flats, or Tichy Train Group's 42-foot flatcars- a very close representation of flatcars built by Pacific Car & Foundry that were extensively used in the logging inudstry.  Add a wood boxcar, a couple Life-Like 8,000 gallon tank cars, and a caboose- either one of Bachmann's 4-wheel models, or better yet one of MDC's old side door cabooses- and you'd have yourself a fairly accurate train to go with your Shay.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV

#17
HO / Re: Logging mikado
January 02, 2011, 12:31:04 AM
I'd second, or third, or whatever it is, the suggestion...in many places, mikados such as these were actually more common than the geared steam logging modelers love, but other than five or six brass models of 70-ton prototypes they have never been available...

My vote would be for a 90-ton model...but then again I've been saying this on the Bachmann boards for several years now...I hope to see it one day happen.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#18
HO / Re: More logging theme cars, buildings ect needed.
December 02, 2010, 11:15:29 PM
Maybe twelve years ago Walthers ran a "Trees & Trains" series that included a modest sized sawmill, a planing mill, a lumber yard, a paper mill, log cars, woodchip cars, centerbeams, a book, and some other items.  The log cars were based on Milwaukee road prototypes; the woodchip and centerbeam cars were modern; and the sawmill buildings could fit in most eras, though it would be most appropriate for more recent layouts.  Most of these kits have been long discontinued, though a few have been re-issued a time or two, and most can be found at swap meets.  Walthers also did a "backwoods enginehouse" that has been long out of production but does closely represent something that would be found on a logging railroad.

I would second the motion for rolling stock such as camp cars, but I'd like to see other cars made available too, such as the Loggers Special ballast hoppers produced by Rogers and others that were used extensively in the woods, 20- to 25-ton steam powered Brownhoist or Ohio cranes, fire and water cars, etc. 

In my opinion, what is really missing from the HO scale market is a Baldwin logging mikado of the 70- to 90-ton wight range.  A lot of these saw service in the western woods- in a lot of areas, they were more prevalent than the geared locomotives everyone loves- but they have only been made available in five or six brass versions, all 70-ton models.  I'd like to see these before anything else. 

Lastly, one thing to keep in mind is that very few of the sawmills that you see built on your "typical" model logging railroad would ever be big enough to warrant construction of a logging railroad.  Then as now, railroads required a substantial amount of capital expenditure to build, equip, and operate, and in order for them to be economically justified the sawmill had to be large enough to produce enough volume of lumber to pay for the railroad.  Sawmills supported by a railroad almost had to be bigger than what most modelers have room to display. 

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV   

Quote from: jdmike on December 01, 2010, 07:21:08 PM
How about some HO versions of the "camp" cars that Bachmann did in On30?   They could be sold seperatly or in a compelte set.   Bachmann has done the motive power, has a logging flat car and car if you want to haul the tourists.  But we need some proper camp cars for the loggers, affordable skelleton style log cars.  The flats are nice, a bit over priced IMHO for what you get.   Rivarossi used to do a nice plastic one, Kaydee still does but also higher priced and a kit that many modelers might not care to attempt.  The Skel log cars plus the bobber caboose would make the perfect train for the Shay or Climax engines!   How about structures, a nice small sawmill designed to put next to a log pond, one that would fit the average home layout and not the huge variety.  How about an unloading "jill poke" to go next to the track and some skidding donkeys to put at the log loading area and out in the woods.   Logging is the prefect small layout prototype when money is tight in the train budget.  Most logging RR's had only a couple of engines, a small sawmill and a few log skels or disconnect style trucks to haul the logs.   A small back woods engine house that is long enough to house the 3 truck Shay or Climax would also be an awsome add on sale.   Bachmann could offer a whole logging series that doesnt require the modeler to deal with craftsman style kits that make up the bulk of the logging theme buildings on the market that work on a small layout.  HO versions of all the logging items in the On30 line up would be a good start.  Walthers did a sawmill series, but it was more modern and took quite a large layout to deal with the size of the structures.   How about it Bachmann?
#19
HO / Re: spectrum wish list
July 10, 2009, 07:26:06 PM
I will third the motion for a Baldwin logging mike, something along the lines of the CC&C #15 featured, or McCloud River #14, #15, or #18, or Rayonier #70, or a bunch of others...very, very common locomotive in the logging and shortline world, but it's only been done in model form in a couple of brass 70-ton mikes imported a few years back.  Sure would be nice to see the 90-ton version made in HO scale...but I've said that for many years now. 

Maybe next year.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#20
First off...don't go bashing Hollywood that quick.  Parts of the movie depicted the lives of the main characters prior to the war, and that is the part of the movie the trains showed up in.  I recall no hints of Hawaian railroading in the film.

I think Joe's right in that the #3751 had a cameo appearance in the movie.  The film crews also used the SP 4-6-0 (I think) that the Pacific Southwest Railroad Museum has at Campo, California.  It got more air time than the #3751 and actually showed up running at track speed a time or two. 

This being said...in one of the scenes a couple of the characters are seated in a coach as a train is pulling out of a major terminal, and about half of a modern passenger diesel is visible through their big picture window.  Hollywood ain't perfect after all. 

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#21
General Discussion / Re: A MAJOR list!
September 21, 2008, 09:48:30 PM
Check again, glennk28- the YW is on the list not once but twice.  Both entries are in the bottom quarter or so of the list. 

Say hi to Conductor Roger for me!

Also, thanks to Guilford Guy for the plug on my COP site.  Much appreciated.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV

 

#22
General Discussion / Re: A MAJOR list!
September 20, 2008, 03:10:04 PM
Something that would help is if you would put the entire list in alphabetical order.  You could do this by copying and pasting it into any word processing program, order the list, and then copy and paste it back onto the board.  That would make it a lot easier to eliminate duplicates and look for ommissions.

You appear to have placed name trains into italics.  If this is the case, then you need to un-intalic the City of Prineville.  That is an actual railroad and not a named train.

That being said, here are a few that I don't already see listed:

Big Creek & Telocaset
Almanor
Union Railroad of Oregon
Oregon & Northwestern
Oregon California & Eastern
Condon Kinzua & Southern
Oregon Eastern
Wyoming/Colorado
North Coast Railroad
Sumpter Valley
Nevada Northern
Nevada Copper Belt
Nevada-California-Oregon
Eureka & Palisades
Eureka Nevada
Nevada Central
Klamath Northern
Trona
Humboldt Northern
Oregon Electric
Oregon & Eureka
Chehalis Western
Curtis Milburne & Eastern
Malheur Railroad
White Sulpher Springs & Yellowstone Park
California Western
Caspar South Fork & Eastern

There are still many more out there...

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#23
HO / Re: New road name for the GE 44 ton
September 19, 2008, 02:03:11 PM
I'm a little late to this thread...please accept my apologies.

First off, the diesel on the V&T is NOT a 44-tonner.  It's an 80-tonner, originally a military unit that went to the Western Pacific Railroad Museum in Portola, CA.  The V&T traded an old Western Pacific turntable to the museum for the diesel back around 2003.  Dave Epling has some pictures of this unit in service back in the summer of 2005 at the following link:

http://cencalrails.railfan.net/vtrr2005.html

Second off, the V&T that this diesel works for is a completely different outfit than the public commission that is rebuilding the V&T between Gold Hill and somewhere in the Mound House/eastern suburbs of Carson City area.  How this V&T- which is owned by Bob Gray and his family- will coexist with the rebuilt V&T is something that is not even close to being finalized yet and is the subject of a lot of contention. 

But back to the subject of possible roadnames for the 44-tonner...I'd love to see the Aracata & Mad River:

http://ncespee.railfan.net/Foothill/images/amr102.jpg

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#24
HO / Re: Spectrum 2-6-2 'Prarrie' Wanted
November 08, 2007, 12:42:07 AM
I find this thread interesting.  A lot of the feelings expressed so far seem to be more from the frame of reference of the poster.  To many a decent prairie would be a waste of materials and efforts.  To be fair, the type was not exactly the most popular in mainline situations.  As noted, quite a few railroads did own them, but tended to use them in niche situations.

That being said, a prairie would be a boon for those of us who prefer shortline or industrial prototypes.  Especially logging roads.  Prairies saw use in the logging railroad industry in all corners of the North American continent.  A prairie type in the 50-60 ton weight range would be ideal for so many operations.  No, it won't be for everyone, but there are a lot of us who would welcome such a model.

My dream model would be a 2-8-2 mikado type, of the 80-90 ton weight range riding on 44-48 inch drivers.  Baldwin and a couple other manufacturers built several hundred of these for the logging, industrial, and shortline market.  Like the prairie type, they have only been done in brass.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV 
#25
HO / Re: Water Tanks from old Tenders
October 07, 2007, 01:17:24 AM
I would say it would not be common to find tenders used in the way you describe in the U.S.  Tank cars would be more likely used for this task, and there have been at least a few main line scenarios where a lack of locally available supplies forced the railroad to import water from other places in tank cars.  In many cases if tank cars were used they would be pumped with steam driven pumps, sometimes mounted on the tank car, that would be powered by steam provided by the locomotive.   

That being said, you could expect to see some actual water tanks made from old tenders, although once again tank car bodies were far more likely to be used.  The Condon Kinzua & Southern railroad in eastern Oregon did exactly this with the water and fuel bunker off of an old Shay of theirs, as seen on the second photo down at the following link:

http://www.trainweb.org/highdesertrails/cks/JerryLamper.html

If a crew ran into serious water trouble the easiest solution involved drafting water from a creek or pond or any other natural water source near the tracks.  Many locomotives carried lengths of hose specifically for this purpose. 

The primary use for old tenders has already been alluded to.  Many were converted into m-o-w use, mostly as water or fuel cars.  Quite a few had all of the tanks removed, with the frames converted into snowplows or transfer cabooses or other similar equipment.  And quite a few were converted to fire cars, especially on western logging railroads.  A few of the companies- with Simpson and Rayonier, both on Washington's Olympic Penninsula, and the Medford Corporation in southern Orego being three prime examples- partially or completely scrapped the original tender bodies, with smaller fabricated tanks mounted on the frames and the rest of the deck space used for toolboxes, tool storage, rerealing frogs, fire tools, cables, and anything else that the logging railroaders felt they might need in the woods.  Over on the eastern side of Puget Sound lumber giant Weyerhaeuser operated extensive logging railroads tributary to their operations south of Tacoma, and when they purchased diesels and scrapped their steam locomotives in the late 1940's they kept two tenders for use as fire cars, with those cars still in on hand and basically un-modified from their original form when the last vestiges of these operations- the Chehalis Western- finally closed in 1990.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#26
HO / Re: Heisler
February 26, 2007, 01:34:47 AM
Peter-

It sounds like you have the makings of a very interesting railroad. 

More on the Willamette Valley #6...your chronology fits what my research has turned up.  A couple of other pieces of information on it...

- While on Port Blakely it had a name, the Maggie.  If you get your hands on a copy of Pete Replinger & John Labbe's book Logging to the Salt Chuck, you will find a picture of her on the Port Blakely in that volume. 

- Port Blakely was less than satisfied with the locomotive, and they turned it back to the builder shortly after getting it.  This coincided with Stearns delivering one of the first three truck Heislers built to the McCloud River as their #2.  The McCloud River had nothing but problems with the #2 from the day it arrived, and to help things out Stearns sent the Maggie down to McCloud to help them out while they tried to get the #2 up and running.  The McCloud River had a 2-6-2 on order from Baldwin that would go a long ways towards solving their motive power problems at the time, but to tide themselves over until it arrived the company looked around for some other power, which eventually led them to purchase the Maggie.  It became #3 on the McCloud roster.  This transaction took place sometime during the summer of 1898. 

- The McCloud used the "Maggie" primarily as a switch engine...at one point they reported to Stearns that, although it was a good locomotive, they were having to do an overhaul after every 3 or 4 miles of operation as the crossheads would not stay.  Apparently the locomotive got a new set of crossheads that solved the problem.

- I have never seen a definate date of when the two McCloud Heislers left the property.  All the written records tell us is that it was before 18 April 1906- the San Francisco earthquake on that day wiped out almost all McCloud River records, as both the railroad and its corporate parents maintained headquarter in the city.  1903 would make sense and fit in with other parts of the puzzle, however.

- Lastly, Nevada County Narrow Guage did have a short standard gauge operation...something to do with rock trains.  That's where this locomotive was used while on that road- I don't think it was ever converted to narrow guage.  I have 1914 as the year it moved from NCNG to Willamette Lumber Company.  I also have 1930 as its scrap date.   

I have a couple more photos of the locomotive on my website at:

http://www.trainweb.org/mccloudrails/LocoImages/Loco-0003.html

Have you run across any information about an ex-AT&SF 4-6-0 that Weed hypothetically used that came to the McCloud River around 1900?  It is the one in this link:

http://www.trainweb.org/mccloudrails/LocoImages/Loco-0007.html

One last note...the McCloud River #2 was one of two 3-truck Heislers that Stearns built around 1897.  Both proved to be complete failures...and partly as a result of them Stearns did not build another 3-truck Heisler until 1912.

Please keep us updated on your layout progress...and someday you need to turn your historical research into a book.  The Weed operations were one of the largest and most fascinating, and yet least covered, logging shows in California.  Red River and McCloud both have books written about them, and I hope to have my book about the McCloud out someday soon...but the Weed operations need to be covered.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#27
General Discussion / Re: Nortwestern Pacific
February 17, 2007, 02:15:23 AM
The tracks are still in place.  Ma Nature closed the line north of Willits in the first week of 1998, with the FRA closing the south end around Thanksgiving 1998.  Since that time only a small part of the south end (roughly as far north as around Santa Rosa) has operated, and that was only for a few months in mid-2001.

The entire line is now in public ownership.  The line south of Healdsburg is owned by Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART, while the line north of Healdsburg is owned by the North Coast Railroad Authority, a pulbic body owned and managed by the county governments of Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, and Sonoma Counties.  NCRA has rights to operate freight service over the south end.

After an extended period of financial haggling and political fights it appears that things may be happening.  Work crews have been making repairs to the south end of the line within the past several weeks, and more repair work contracts are in the immediate future.  NCRA selected an operator last year.  That being said...the projected date to resume service over at least part of the south end has already slipped from 2007 into 2008. 

Repairs to the line will be largely financed with public money, which has always been a contentious issue.  Those associated with the NWP say that the line can be a profitable, self sustaining operation.  There are many others who doubt that this railroad will ever be able to live without subsidies.  Time will tell how much of the railroad gets returned to operation and how long those operations last.

Ultimately SMART would like to start a commuter rail service similar to what the NWP used to have.  However, much of the trackage that the old NWP commuter operations used is gone, and a lot of infastructure would have to be built to tie what railroad exists into other transportation modes.  SMART also gets shot down by the voters any time that a tax assessment to finance the startup of commuter rail operations comes up during local elections.  Until they get some funding they are not really going anywhere.

In the meantime, the on-going saga of the NWP is a popular discussion topic on the Altamont Press discussion forum.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#28
HO / 3 Truck Climax???
February 17, 2007, 01:55:06 AM
On my infrequent trips through the old forums, I recall seeing some discussion of what became of the plans Bachmann announced a while back to do a 3-Truck Climax. 

Does anyone know, or can anyone say, if this is still something that we are likely to see?

Thanks in advance...and I apologize if this has already beey driven into the ground before.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV
#29
HO / Re: Heisler
February 17, 2007, 01:52:14 AM
The one thing missing in this discussion is that the Rivarossi Heisler is substantially larger than any "real" Heisler found in the real world.  The model is based on the old AHM tooling.  Rivarossi made many upgrades to the model, and it is a nice looking and nice running locomotive.  That does not, however, change the unprototypically large size.

Reguardless of the "someone has already done it" factor...it would be nice to see somebody do a proper Heisler.

Just my comments.

Jeff Moore
Elko, NV