While our
vacations are continuing, I’m going back reading railway-related literature of
all kind. In fact, the basement renovations are taking more time than
anticipated and thus very little progress is done on the layout. This is a good opportunity to step back,
relax and seeking new ideas before returning once again to our never ending
task!
For loyal
followers, I’d suggest reading this sharp series of articles about the historyof Murray Bay Subdivision published in Canadian Rail. The help of Denis Fortier
– a well-known railfan in Quebec and Charlevoix areas – really show. For
followers of this blog, I believe it is a good gateway to understand a part of
our layout.
Sure, I
have a major reason to do many searches right now. I’m in the planning stage of
building a new garage and that means layout-dedicated space for the first time
in my life. I’m entertaining the possibility to use a 9.5’ x 19’ room only for
that purpose. I consider an around the wall layout would be the best bet and I’m
not against the possibility of continuous running. While the space is
relatively vast, I don’t believe I can cram more than two small locations and
maybe a decent amount of scenic area between them (probably a substantial
bridge scene). To be honest, I think I have a fair idea of what I can achieve
in that space. I’m also well aware I’m interested in building prototypical
structures and reproducing real-life location. While I want my trains to have a
purpose, I’m not obsessed in filling the place with track and operation
opportunities. I’ve learned a long time ago I preferred small town with a few
siding than large industries and I love when there’s a fair amount of single
track main line blended in well-crafted scenery. In that respect, I feel we too
often try to incorporate too much specific locations on our layouts and not enough
mundane situation.
As usual
with most modellers, I’m struggling in determining which prototype I’d like to
reproduce and which era. Over the last decades, I accumulated a lot of rolling
stock and locomotives from various eras and roads. I can classify them in five coherent
categories:
-Non-descript
branchline steam era
-Canadian National
steam era
-Canadian National
diesel era (1960-1993)
-Canadian
Pacific diesel era (1960-1985, mainly Multimark)
I feel each
of them have a lot of opportunities and I’ll describe want I think of each
ones.
CN diesel
era:
I have a lot of cars and locomotives that have actually no purpose on our
current club layout. I feel it is a real shame to not be able to use them.
Among the interesting prototypes I’d be interested to model, I feel the area
near Drummondville and Aston-Junction is very promising. As a continuous run,
you can stage large freight manifest with 6-axle power and also various
passenger trains between Québec and Montréal. Industries are very limited with
a few feedmills and some interchange work with Bécancour. There is also a local
freight train than handle such traffic. Of interest is the fact this train has
its own small locomotive facilities which is a very interesting fact for a
medium sized layout. Add the fact that extremely scenic bridges exist in the
area and you have a winning concept.
Canadian
Pacific Diesel Era:
I always
loved the CP Rail with its mismatched consists of locomotives and rundown
appearance. Add to this the weird beauty of the colourful Multimark brand and
you get a very attractive concept. Finding a suitable prototype in Quebec is
however extremely challenging. The best candidate is the International Railway of
Maine in Southern Quebec. Industries are very small yet interesting and very
scenic. Among the most iconic locations on the line are Cookshire, which I
often used as inspiration in the past and other smaller locations like Milan. A
nice bridge scene exists in Cookshire over the Eaton river. Another option
would be to model the line between Jackman, ME and Greenville, ME. This would
make a terrific layout from a scenic point of view.
Canadian
National Steam Era:
I’ve never been a fan of large steamers though I do like them! I’m talking from a layout perspective indeed! Over the year, I kitbashed several models into CNR steamers, including 0-6-0, 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 and have built a substantial fleet of rolling stock fitting that era. Finding a prototype would be too hard and I must admit steam operation over the Murray Bay Subdivision is extremely engaging. That would be a nice complement to our modern layout and it would be a great opportunity to model locations that we left out because they were of little interest during the diesel era. Among the chief location is Baie-Saint-Paul which sported a small but dense rail operation. Imagine 2 stub sidings serving a freight depot, an oil dealer, a team track, a cattle pen and a lumber yard. Add a large water tank, a passenger station with covered platform, a section house, a grade crossing and a substantial bridge. Now, take in account this scene takes only 9 feet to model without any selective compression and you got an idea why I feel this prototype is great.
Now move to La Malbaie were the regular trains reached the last station on the line. You find there a very long freight and passenger depot, a weird two stall engine house, a turntable, a coaling facility using hoist and drop bottom gondolas, a few section house and a water tank. Better, the line doesn’t end in Murray Bay but continues up to Clermont which means you indeed have a terminal, but it isn’t too much unprototypical to make this a continuous running layout. Structures to model aren’t too numerous, but I can testify they are all very interesting to build. Also, must I stress out the fact that if Rapido release its CNR 4-6-0 in HO, that would be the most amazing thing since this very locomotive was the main power on Murray Bay Sub back in the steam days.
Non-descript
steam era aka Temiscouata Railway:
This
generic name could imply a lot of thing but it mainly means this material can
be easily kitbashed in a vast array of prototypes. What I have in mind is
Temiscouata Railway’s Connors Branch in New Brunswick. I’ve often talked about
that great prototype. The terminal in Connors is the epitome of small steam
operation. The traffic on the line was substantial enough to not look moribund.
Connors only take about 12 feet in HO, so no need for selective compression.
Also, several small but industrious saw mills and feed mills were rail served
in the area. Just a few miles east of Connors was the picturesque Little Mill
River, a seven-car stub ended siding. Switching opportunities are numerous and
making and breaking trains in Connors could be very interesting since many
trains were scheduled out of Connors and maintained there. I can already
imagine the scenic vistas of small trains crawling on the shores of St. John
River. Also, it’s interesting to note Temiscouata made extensive use of small
wood trestle all over the line to span brooks and rivers.
At this
point, I haven’t settled on any ideas. I think they all have strong points. On
the other hand, I must admit the two small steamer scenarios are my favourite. I
remember a few years ago to have acquired a Bachmann Alco 2-6-0 sound equipped
locomotive. For a while, I used it to switch a part of Hedley-Junction
depicting St. Joachim (were Montmorency is now located). I had the time of my
life and I was well aware the model wasn’t that great and the sound decoder was
minimal.
What will
make a prototype more interesting than another will be the possible traffic. Murray
Bay enjoyed first class passenger trains and freight trains but not mixed. On
the other hand, Temiscouata pulled very short trains, including passengers, freight
and mixed.
Imagine a
Murray Bay layout. While you have interesting activity going on in
Baie-Saint-Paul, there’s very little to do in La Malbaie except turning engines
and reordering the passenger cars for the return trip. To my knowledge, freight
activity in La Malbaie was almost inexistent (no dedicated sidings). It means
freight trains would originate and go to locations out of the layout. Is it a
bad thing? I don’t think so, but it means two staging areas, which isn’t
optimal. At least, there’s a provision for continuous running because, as a
matter of fact, the two staging areas could be merged together.
On the
other hand, a Temiscouata layout wouldn’t require provision for a continuous
run. Most action occurs in Connors, both freight and passenger. It’s also the
originating point for half the trains.
That said,
I have still many months in front of me to decide but I can already say that a
CP Rail switching layout (the one with the feedmill I once build) would be
enough for this theme. It would mean a steam era layout would be the most likely
outcomes.
Mat,
ReplyDeleteL'article sur la Sous Murray Bay était fantastique!
Greg
Greg, Denis Fortier did a very nice job. He has written many articles about Murray Bay for various local and national publications.
DeleteHe is a fine gentlemand and gave us decisive informations when designing the layout. I must say it was heartbreaking to not model some scenes on the layout and the choice wasn't easy.
Yes it was indeed. What beautiful railroading territory.
ReplyDeleteMat,
ReplyDeleteReading your post, it seemed to me that you have slightly more enthusiasm for a steam era branchline than the other options. Trevor Marshall has shown just how much fun you can have with such a "simple" scheme, and it doesn't require hectares of space to achieve this.
Modelling something like the Temiscouata would take you down different paths to those well worn by the footsteps of others: this makes it more enjoyable, but it can be lonely. However the rewards can be immense, and some day you may find yourself moving further back intime and entering the realms of scratch building those lovely 4-4-0s.
Simon
Simon, you definitely understand my train of thoughts about this endeavour. I've always had a fascination with small steam branchline prototypes and Temiscouata is almost untouch territory. Trevor has been pivotal in motivating me to tackle this project.
DeleteThe funning thing is that building the Temiscouata is a no brainer. The track plan is obvious and fit modest space without any concern for space. Operations are well-documented and follow a similar approach than Port Rowan.