Monk Subdivision: Wiring the Swing Gate

Wiring isn’t my cup of tea, but I must admit I had to step up my game a little bit over the last few months. At least, enough to barely understand what I’m doing.

One of the challenges on Monk is the lift gate. Not only it must be electrified, but current must be cut off on each side of it to prevent a train running over the gap accidentally. While there are many approaches to do that, I had a few DCC Concepts Legacy Connectors on hands. They are metal alignment dowels with spring load gold plated plungers that ensure electric contact when they met. They use a male-female arrangement. I thought they could be really useful because the alignment property would be desired at the open end of the gate where they can be a 1mm tolerance, enough to cause issues and derailment.

My concept is simple: Each track on both sides of the gate is insulated from the rest of the layout. I selected a minimal length of 2 feet, but on the right side, it’s about 3 feet long. That should be enough to take care of any locomotive running full speed with inertia.

Connectors on the hinge side

I run a flexible bus wire to the lift gate on the hinge side. This bus then split in three feeders. One to the hinge sides, one to the opposite side and one to the bridge track itself. Each of them is soldered to a male Legacy Connector that mates with a female connector located into the fascia or on top of it, depending on the geometry. The lift gate thus acts like a switch.

Connector on the opposite side

When closed down, both approach tracks on each side of the lift gate are alive and trains can run over the bride. If opened up, electric current never reaches these tracks and trains are safe from taking the proverbial plunge to the concrete floor. This is a fail safe and low tech strategy I like.

Connector installed on the opposite side benchwork

As you may have noticed, the bridge track always stays electrified with this design, but it isn’t an issue. Nobody will open the lift gate with a train on it… at least, I hope so!

Scenery will take care of these wires in the future

The DCC Concept Legacy Connectors aren’t probably the first choice for that kind of installation, but they are easy to install and helps with alignment. We shall see if they are able to survive constant handling.

Monk Subdivision: Lazy Signals for Dumb People

I wanted signals on the Monk Subdivision because they always appears on 1960s and 1970s pictures, but the truth is that adding the detectors to get a true railway logic according to Canadian standards is both a costly endeavour and a descent into madness. If you aren’t an electronic wiz, a programming enthusiast or haven’t that level of very specific autistic obsession with such intricate intellectual challenges, let’s just say it’s not for you.

Add to that the Monk Subdivision slice I depict is just one station, so not enough place to really implement full signalling over many blocks. It wouldn’t add that much of a layer of entertainment. Thus, I thought I should just wire the signals to be coupled with turnout positions. Simple, vaguely prototypical, and at least useful when operating trains because you get an obvious visual indication about what’s going on with the siding.

My approach to my dumb signals is to wire them all on a tortoise switch machine. They have two built-in switches, one will control the turnout frog polarity and the other one the signals. And here is the catch. I need to wire up to 4 signals to that single switch. Sounds crazy, but it is in fact relatively simple and very different to how I wired some on my stuff on the late Vince Valley layout (now demolished to provide free building materials to finish Monk.

I've read a little bit about Canadian signals and decided to replicate a few of their aspects that suits my needs the best. My objective are simple, I won't model occupation but route. It means that a diverging turnout or one aligned on the main line will change aspects. Not prototypical, but not completely nonsense either. As long as signals help you understand where you are moving, I'm fine. Anyway, Monk still used some TT & TO with their signals, and it wasn't a full CTC or ABS system. Just some hybrid thing to automate sidings a little bit.

Dumb signals schematics

Let's say a train is travelling from West to East (Staging to Armagh), if the route is aligned on the mainline, the restricted signal 2 will show green on red meaning to go full speed ahead and continue on the mainline... At the turnout, the signal will also show green on red. In the opposite direction, signal 4 will be also green on red. If occupation and direction of travel was taken into account, it wouldn't be necessary the case. Dwarf signal 5 is red since any train in that siding should wait the turnout is properly aligned to proceed.

Let's say we move in the same direction, but the turnout is set on the diverging route to take the siding. The staggered signal 2 show us red on yellow, meaning the main line is not accessible, but the siding is. Since yellow means to slow down the speed since we take the diverging route, we also get, in advance, an indication of things to come and to start reducing speed. Signal 3 is also red on yellow for the same logical reasons. Signal 4 is red on red because a train on the mainline can't move and must stop there.

If you travel from East to West, things are rather simple. Signals 4 and 5 will display green or red depending if the turnout is properly aligned with your respective track. Signal one is the less prototypical, but it serves a purpose of telling you if you are continuing on the mainline at full speed or if you are entering the staging area an must slow down. Occupancy will probably be done through optic sensors and a track diagram with LEDs... or simply a small camera in the staging room with a screen in the layout room.

I won't stress enough my system is dumb and really simple to implement. Better, it animates the signals, giving them an realistic aesthetic while providing useful information for an operator. Most derailments on model railroads are caused by misaligned turnouts. Looking at LEDs on a fascia isn't always practical, intuitive or interesting because it breaks the suspension of disbelief. Having the signals giving you that precious information is both more realistic, but also visually compelling to the point the route ahead is clear to understand at a glance. As long as the signals have a "real" purpose, they are "prototypical" in my eyes. I can understand if purists will be horrified at these shortcuts, but they make it possible to have working signals on a realistic budget and with bulletproof logic to it. It's simple and at the level I can do myself with some wire, a DPDT and my trusty soldering iron.

Also, it must be noted that with a DPDT on each specific signals, it could be possible to give them a different aspect, but that would need some little thinkering.

Layout Design: Breaking the Boundaries

Building a 4’ x 8’ layout is some sort of blessing when you come back to that style of design after dabbling for years with along the walls layouts and modules. Sure, the plywood sheet has a lot of limitations, but many of them are self imposed to some extend.

A river should be an invitation, not a menacing corner

Over the last month, I’ve been exploring my ideas more freely, considering advice by the whimsical mind of Chris Mears. When he drew the Japanese circular a few weeks ago, he didn’t stick to the circular footprint. The circle was an efficient way to make the trains move, but it wasn’t a good shape to tell a story and craft a landscape. All kind of bulges started to appear, and it was interesting to see how he would create very important deviation just to make sure the scene was great. It was a perfect decoupling of track from fascia.

When dealing with the ASTF-themed layout, I wanted to be more artistic, just as I did with the Stanstead module. For this reason, instead of conforming to a rectangle, I decided to make my scenic elements breath in a better framed context. One trick I did was to paint a mockup river on the bare plywood. No need to wait a long time before imagining it. It's there and it informs all my decisions, including sidings, roads, structures, topography. Everything becomes more intuitive rather than calculated and mechanical.

A culvert needs room to breathe

When I built the stone culvert, it became clear it was foolish to have poured so many artistic efforts into it to have zero foreground to appreciate it in context. For that reason, I decided to build an extension with some ¼” plywood to have more space in front of it. Somewhere to gaze from, to take beautiful pictures and feel the entire scene. I didn’t care about the future fascia location, only caring about having the physical space required to have a good-looking scene. The fascia is a consideration that will come in the future when it’s time to link every scenes. Already, I can imagine several bulges and alcoves creating compelling points of views. The station is probably one of these places where the layout will expand to better serve its purpose.

Even track is informed by these scenic choices

In hindsight, postponing Monk is a blessing. I know my mindset will be somewhere else, more open to opportunities, etc. Your exploration about how the foreground must vary and inform the visual experience really destroyed many of my personal assumptions. I had instinctively done it with Stanstead, but never pushed the idea further and you often sketched scenes that did take that as a given, something that shoudl be naturally implemented, almost obvious.

Things must flow

Vince Valley - Applying Lessons Learned From the Circle

The originating  story of this post goes back as far as last October when I was exploring weathering techniques on old plastic kits, many of them Revell. Exploring the American Southwest sure was an excellent way to be immersed into an ubiquitous presence that have always been there in this hobby.

And let's be bold. If I wasn't modelling Canadian National and its adjacent themes, I would either model 1870s 4-4-0 trains or simply the king of model railroading: ATSF. If you have grown up looking at box art like me for hours as a kid, you have been saturated with Santa Fe locomotives and cars. Geeps in dark blue and yellow, F-units in Warbonnet and classic big steamers like the 4-8-4 and the 2-10-4. I blame Bachmann for that, but Life-Like and Model Power didn't help. It's iconic, it's in your face, it's powerful, it's glamourous, it encapsulate everything about cool model railroading.

Classic ATSF steam at Raton Pass in 1954 (credit: Ed Olsen)

The idea of modelling the Southwest grew on me when I was thinking of transforming the Monk returning loop as an American themed shelf layout. Imagine, the main layout is CN and the hidden staging in the other room is Colorado or New Mexico. The idea didn't go far, but then, I explored it again as a lightweight shelf layout in my office room. Would be cool, but cumbersome. Then Merkiomen made me superdetail cheap kits using SP and UP... and ATSF, colors and details. Later, Merkiomen died and it resurrected from its ashes as my childhood friend Vince's long gone old layout. It had been built by is late uncle and decorated with sand to replicate the Southwest with a classic dry riverbed with a low trestle and the ubiquitous Arlee Station.

My friend's original layout track plan

Having collected by accident a few Union Pacific locomotives that were supposed to be kitbashed as CN locomotives, I had a head start... but then, I started to collect a few BLI ATSF steamers. Second hand for some, but also looking at refurbished one. Having seen pictures of the ATSF Fast Mail Express, I had some ideas in my mind. I waited for almost a year until I found the exact BLI Blue Goose (1950s appearance) to recreate that iconic train. I was settled.

Playing with elements to get the feeling right

As I said, I had that idea to recreate my friend's layout because I kind of liked the pragmatic yet versatile track plan. A station on a side with two sidings and a long passing track, and a classification yard on the other side, both separated by a scenic divider that was nothing more than a low kraft paper hill.

We derived countless hours of operation out of that simplistic layout, but let's accept the fact it was quite straightforward and made with brass snapswitches in a classic sectional track approach. Forget about easement, smooth transitions in the yard, superelevation or anything else related to quality track. It was an issue back then, it's even worse now that my standards have been significantly raised in 30 years.

I had to make that layout more jazzy, more curvy, more natural... more grounded in reality. Since ATSF was in my mind, I quickly thought about Raton Pass on the New Mexico border. Far less impressive for railfans than Tehachapi Pass, but quite inspiring for people interested in subtler scenery possibilities.

At Raton Pass, the line follow the river (credit: Eugene Diller)

At that time, a few months ago, I was using extensively AI and Copilot to flesh out the concept, including town names, operating schemes, train consists and even scenery. It was new, flashy, exciting and... full of blatant errors. I had to quickly acknowledge I was fed garbage 50% of the time. Some ideas were cool, but nothing to write to your mother. The sycophant aspect of AI was showing off and at the end of the time, it was just saying what I wanted to hear. A pure definition of an echo chamber... so AI got the boot and the project stalled for a little bit.

Switchlist lore generated by Copilot

That said, some work happened on the layout, including making foam splines and exploring a few ideas. What really changed my approach was that I came by to my Gosford railway explorations which used the same footprint and mainline shape.

A twisty previous version of Q&G

A particular picture of Lake St. Joseph station struck my imagination. I put it in a double S-curve and it worked magic. That's an old trick, but I recall seeing it on a beautifully designed small Japanese HO layout and felt it was worth trying again.

Lake St. Joseph on QLStJ Railway (credit: BAnQ)

Tracks follow valleys (credit: BAnQ)

I added these curves to the Vince Valley, my project file name for the layout, and it started to bring life to what was just a typical 4' x 8'. I had a hard time figuring out what to do with the riverbed and it was left as just a small ponctual feature in a corner.

Building something from scratch

I recall Copilot provided names such as Toluca station and Haskell yard for the main feature. I my mind, it was to be a helper district with an engine house and some sort of facilities to replicate mountain railroading. The creek and pass got named Ringtail as a nod to Raton Pass, though it never congealed perfectly into the concept.

The revised concept was still quite crude

Fast forward to last week and it was time to revive the Vince Valley concept. Once again, I started to play with the Gosford. Archives pictures shows that line followed closely rivers and valleys, curving here and there to conform to the topography. It opened perspectives but closed others. That was clearly resonating with Chris' ideas on the circular JNR layout concept. I thought it would be worth it to use the river not as a scenic feature, but as the backbone of the layout.

Revised Quebec & Gosford with the river on a paper towel

The track would follow the river as long as it could to explain with the railway was so curvy and twisted. Hills would frame that river to make it geologically plausible and realistic. I really liked how the JNR design closed the ends of the layout with higher ground instead of treating it as opening space. It was now two large scenes, back to back, that curved on each side in a realistic fashion. The scenes were neither approached in a frontal way, but rather diagonally. In Toluca, it was all about standing by the river and looking upstream. You could see the train emerge from the treacherous valley/pass, curve around the meander, stop at the station and continue its route. It also helped to frame the area in from of the station. With the long river crossing the entire scene, it made it cohesive and the "distant" hills really started to make sense. Small rural stations located at a river crossing are one of the classic thing in railroading. It emphasizes the depot as a nodal point point around which everything radiate. No need to model the village, we know it isn't far away...

Revised ATSF Vince Valley design without the bulges

At Haskell, the yard was no longer a contrived set of parallel track, but something flowing into the topography. There was a small natural plateau where the railway built the yard and it made sense.

How scenic bulges are framed (credit: Chris Mears)

All these interesting features would also be accompanied by a free form fascia that follows the scenes and expands where needed rather than framing the 4' x 8'. It's all about breaking that sheet of plywood and it's linear nature. Where the eyes and camera requires a larger foreground, it does expand. The perimeted created alcoves and bulges that are naturally responding to the layout with the goal, at the end of the day, of fooling us believing these is more than meet the eyes.

As for conclusion, the last lesson learned was to use watercolors (highly diluted acrylic paint on my desk!) to shape layout designs. It's incredible how the fuzziness of a brush is much better at grasping scenic ideas than anything else and in just a few strokes.

Going Around In Circles - A Japanese Layout

Over the last few months, I finally gave up and acquired a few 1:80 Japanese trains. Most of them of the late 1960s-early 1970s when steam was in its twilight. I could resist these fantastic videos showing double and triple steam headers pulling boxcars and cement cars during the construction boom. Kato has recently released a newly tooling D51 (their largest Mikado ever built domestically) and I was able to find an excellent deal for a pair from a shop in Kobe.

A D51 mikado visiting the QSSR

As expected, a recent discussion with Chris Mears pushed us to explore what could be a railfanning layout based around that material. Something that is made to gaze from a given perspective and immerse you into a surrounding experience. The idea sprouted from observations made about Japanese railways which typically follow deep valleys, crossing several bridges and tunnels to find their ways. In these valleys, your line of sight is generally obstructed and you stand in what could be best described as an alcove. Truly, you are a spectator and following the train along would be, in most cases, very difficult. In some ways, this way to appreciate a layout is much closer to how Japanese modellers experiment it. Lack of space for intricate permanent layouts and their focus on passenger trains make their approach quite different from how Westerners and North American in particular, enjoy their trains.

Rural lines in Japan are often both dramatic and small scope

Such an observation lend itself to a few interesting conclusions. The layout offers glimpses to capture and you are surrounded. These two facts make size almost irrelevant as long as your trains can use a comfortable minimum radius to not look silly. Hence our decision to explore the possibility to develop a scenic layout that would be nothing more than a circle! Yes, the little train circling around the Christmas tree.

Original idea about a scenic loop with a foldable side

A recent video only posted by Rob Waller of the Bron Hebog layout kind of cemented our idea of a layout built only for the express purpose of railfanning and sure, the pencils started to draw designs around it! We originally started the process by exploring a foldable oval with a visible and scenic part. Not uninteresting but not that efficient at the end of the day.

A second iteration

A second iteration was to make it a compact circle and implement a curved staging that could provide some variety while running the trains. Not a bad idea, but once again, the effective surface of scenicked layout was rather limited. It was a classic scene between two tunnels and maybe a curved bridge.

The classic 1970s Life-Like foam runaround layout

Then it dawn on us how close this design was to the classic Life-Like foam layout baseboards of the 1970s. I use to have a similar custom built layout and I recall that from a railfanning perspective, it had some fascinating potential, albeit generally not exploited correctly! What could be done from such a shape? We at least had the grade to replicate the steamers fighting the grade to pull their heavy load over the mountains. That was an excellent start!

Chris' final concept

That's where the magic of Chris Mears struck with this lovely circular layout implementing two scenes. One outside the loop that provides a mainline run along a river valley and an immersive inner loop where you can look at trains fighting the grade. Both scenes are seen from a different perspective, offering both the outside and inside the curve perspective. In such a design, you never really can see where the train originates and goes. Not that it is concealed, but rather that it simply fades away out of your field of vision. It's all about perception. Note that the descending grade is on the outside radius, providing a gentler slope and limiting the runaway effect. Also, it is where the radius is the largest, which is aesthetically more pleasing when looking at cars from the outside. Inside the loop, the grade and radius are tighter where we want to see a real struggle from the train. The tighter radius is mitigated by the fact model trains look better when seen from inside the curve. All in all, this is a very pleasing concept.

As you can see, Chris also modulated the foreground scenes according to the point of view. Where viewblocks or deep perspectives are warranted, the layout expand organically to achieve the desired experience. You will see more of that on other designs to be published in the following days.

Built using Kato R=22.5" and R=28,75" track

The beauty of all of it is the layout could be folded in two sections to save space. Also, it can be built using exclusively Kato Unitrack components, ensuring the circle is geometrically perfect. To be noted, often with small layout, the transition between small radius curves and straight lines are visually jarring. It never works and looks toyish. By removing completely the straight parts, we get a consistent look with no weird motions that break the illusion. All in all, I really love that design and thanks for Chris granting me the autorization to publish his wonderful drawings!

More to come about the ATSF and Quebec & Gosford layout ideas evolved from the lesson learned from that JNR experiment!

Monk Subdivision - Progress at the Staging

Steady progress has been recorded on the Monk Subdivision with more tracks installed in the staging. With the lift bridge completed, there is no reason to not lay track as far as I can until switching my attention to the layout itself.

Paper templates mockup really helps to settled down the track arrangement

Installing track right now without delay has been an excellent idea because I've been able to test the Fast Tracks 30"/27" curved radius by using paper template. The good news is they all fit very well in my space, meaning I can finally go forward with the track plan.

Another positive thing is that after a while, it was clear I had enough space for a seventh staging track on the lift bridge and I decided to add it. The benchwork had to be enlarged in the big 180 degrees curve, but otherwise, there was plenty of space for it.

The lift bridge is now optimized with 8 tracks

Then, it struck me that I also had space for an height track on the lift bridge... I did some test with spare turnouts and yes, it did all fit my space, albeit the 180 degrees curve which had to be widened anyway.

So, at the end of the day, I'm back to a 8 track staging yard, which is about the same capacity than the original 2 level staging design. This is an unexpected discovery that truly makes my day as the layout is now without any major capacity or minimum radius constraints to run all the trains I planned for it.

Monk Subdivision - Rebuilding the Staging

As I alluded to late in 2024, I had to revise my plans for Monk Subdivision and the staging area. With the upper level gone, a big choice had to be made and I decided to raise the track level to 50" from the floor. It meant I had to raise all the current staging benchwork too which, fortunately, went smoothly and only took a few hours.

To do this, I removed the Kato Unitrak loop and its shelf. The Kato track will serve its purpose elsewhere. It was a short but useful piece of track that helped me moved forward. When gone, I discovered the current staging wasn't level at all, which is quite the big issue when storing cars! So everything was levelled up during the raising process.

The shelf bracket holes in the walls were patched up and a new coat of paint was applied. Then, the fiberboard was reinstalled and painted with a beige color we use on Murray Bay subidivision for the fascia. It's a neutral and bright tone that blends well with anything. Sealing fiberboard really helps to reduce the dust on the layout.

Then, I started to lay the track, assembling several turnouts to create the yard throat and check the geometry. As I feared, the Walthers 28"/24" curved turnouts didn't perform as expected. Large steamed such as 2-10-2 experienced drivers binding when running over the points. This is unacceptable and some solution had to be found.

First, let's address the elephant in the room. Walthers new turnouts aren't good. Not because they are inherently poor quality, which isn't true, but because their geometry is based on the old Shinohara line of products. These turnouts have all have very drastic diverging routes. It's a sharp angle, then the track continue. This sharp angle is a nightmare for models even if prototype do have angled transition. The thing is prototypes use very, very long turnouts... not #6 or #8 and it makes a huge difference. If you look at PECO turnouts, the diverging route is a smooth curve that provides better tracking. Sure, unprototypical, but your trains don't derail.

The Walthers turnout issue is less of a problem with straight turnouts, but the moment you make them curved, it's a nightmare. And by the way, the interior radius at the points isn't 24" as advertised, but much sharper. To test that theory, I laid a Walthers turnout over the Fast Tracks template. Both are 24"/28"... but clearly, one isn't by a large margin.

Walthers VS Fast Tracks

So out of the window with the Walthers curved turnouts which are reliable with diesels of all kind and small steamers, but don't like large steam locomotives.

It seems the handlaid solution is the only way out. So I went to Fast Tracks and printed two templates. The first one was for a #10 28"/24". Following the advice of Chris Mears, I laid a flextrack over the diverging route and tested my large steamers. The IHC 2-10-2 didn't have issues, the Bachmann QJ 2-10-2's drivers binded a bit and the Bachmann USRA 2-10-2's speed slowed down by half while travelling the points due to serious binding. I also tested my BLI USRA Mikado 2-8-2 and it had no issues at all. So we can rule out the 24"/28" turnout.

A little bit tight, but IHC 2-10-2 can run over a 24"/28"

The next one was their #10 27"/30" curved turnout. I laid again my track over it and tested the locomotives again. As expected, the IHC performed well, it was flawless with the QJ and finally, the USRA 2-10-2 travelled the diverging route with flying colors! We have a solution... but will it works within the available space?

The USRA binding at the point of a 24"/28"

Well, theoritically, no... But, when you slightly adjust the connection angle between each turnouts, it do works. This is about a 1/4" variation over 15" long. I did some verification with the Walthers turnouts and it's not enough to induce a noticeable kink that could cause havoc later down the road. To be honest, this is well within the tolerance when laying tracks.

The revised yard throat... I'm happy with it, and my locos too!

Another nice thing is that I've also been able to greatly streamline and simplify the yard geometry to, which will make operation much easier. All in all, these turnouts issues wet me back of a few weeks, but at the end of the day, I'm closer to the goals I set for myself. Now, it's time to build custom turnouts.

Monk Subdivision - A Fresh Restart

Work has resumed on the Monk Subdivision while I put the Quebec and Gosford idea on the back boiler until trains can run on that old project of mine. I like my old time Canadian stuff and you can rest assured that the exploration started with Stanstead a few years ago will continue, but the show must go on and here we go again with Monk.

Removing the second staging level and the grade really put back the project into the achievable realm which is a good thing. Monk was never intended to be a basement filling empire and I'm glad I've corrected course before it was too late. So, over the weekend, I started to both test my ideas and rebuild the layout.

The final and simplified staging plan

Why test my ideas? Because track geometry is what will make that layout work. If it doesn't run smoothly, it all goes down the drain. To make the plan work as intended, I have a tricky crossover to create a returning loop. While it doesn't suffer from nasty S-curves, this arrangement is made of Peco, Atlas and Walthers track components, each with their own rail profiles that are nominally compatible in code 83. Atlas track is clunky and Walthers is that much better. Their curved turnout have extremely sharp diverging routes, something that is endemic of all products descended from Shinohara. In won't start to rant about commercial tracks, but suffice to know that Shinohara track geometry may be based on prototype about diverging route, but that doesn't work very well with model trains. Long prototypical passenger cars hate it, particularly when riding on 3-axle trucks. Thus, the importance of experimenting a little bit.

Working out the geometry... and cars

The first tests were done with Rapido first release Supercontinental coaches. These cars are faulty right out of the box and can be considered the most capricious piece of rolling stock I own. As expected, the car derailed on the crossing then ran poorly over the Walthers curved turnout. I then tried with a Walthers stainless Budd car which has similar proportions and trucks. Unsurprisingly, it ran very smoothly over the track. A quick inspection shown that Rapido wheels were grossly out of gauge, some piping was blocking the wheels from swiveling and the shell was poorly snapped over the chassis. Back to the benchwork, I discovered the pipe had been glued with its locator pin not inserted in the mounting hole. Two wheelsets had to be regauged and finally, poorly trimmed sprues on the interior prevented the shell to snap on the chassis. Once everything was put together as it should be, the car ran as well as the newer releases. It wasn't a matter of poor design, but extremely poor implementation and execution. At least, I'm glad the remedy was rather straightforward. It's just sad to witness how bad quality control was when that business started. 

The second round of test was done with WalthersProto and Atlas heavyweight coaches and sleepers. They both ran over the trackwork nicely, but I could feel some slight binding in the truck when navigating the turnout points when running over the diverging route. The issue was the wheel backs touching the flanges of the fishbelly underframe. It was a matter of cutting a small portion of that flange on each side to make the trucks swivel more freely.

All in all, I consider this experiment a success and I feel like I can go forward with the new staging plan. I already know that my locomotives will run over the curved turnout flawlessly. For this reason, this morning I dismantled the old staging, removed the fiber board to make a few changes to the benchwork and cut a new hole in the wall to provide the second access to the yard.

I've also almost completed the Monk locomotive roster. On Saturday, I visited the Vermont & Essex Railway model club located in Montreal. This is probably the most famous club layout in Quebec, being both based closely on a prototype and being almost complete.

The Vermont & Essex kitchen and dining lounge

It depicts the Central Vermont/Canadian National mainline from Windsor Station in Montreal to Bellow Falls, VT running through places such as St. Albans. The layout space is also wonderfully finished, with an elegant kitchen area reminescent of old time dining cars and a neat lounge. Well worth a visit and we had the chance to meet Clément Pot in real life, a young modeller who often post on Quebec Railway modelling Facebook groups. It's always nice to meet people and exchange with them.

Windsor station is the centerpiece of V&E

What I didn't expect was to find two True Line CNR ice reefers in 1950s paint schemes and a Proto 2000 GP38-2 locomotive in CN colors which was the last engine needed to complete the Monk roster. I've heard rumours that Rapido will probably do its own version, but that Proto unit runs silk smooth, has great details and a decoder. It would have been stupid not to jump on that occasion.

In the next weeks leading to Christmas, I will be installing a drop ceiling in the main layout room while trying to complete the new staging by then. I may be dreaming, but laying tracks in the main room during the holidays and maybe running an inauguration train would be quite the feat if you ask me!

Quebec & Gosford Sidetracking

Those who know Chris Mears and discuss with him frequently have come to fear him as he can elicit fascinating conversations that literally derail your train of thoughts toward the deepest fiber of your soul. Such a thing occurred to me recently when our discussion took a tangent toward the 1870s-1890s and the elegant 4-4-0s of the era. Add the nice Bachmann retooled 4-4-0 in the game and various old time equipment kitbashes and you have a recipe for disaster. Or should I say, a joyful recipe for fanning all over the fundamentals of railroading. But honestly, nothing is new about this discussion since it has been going on over and over since I was thinking about doing Temiscouata, then Stanstead which I always wanted to expand but with is too big for my layout room.

 

Bachmann retooled 4-4-0 (credit: Bachmann)

I can’t recall what sparked the exchange of thoughts, but for some reason, I ended up digging into the venerable Quebec & Gosford Railway which was the first railway built in Quebec City between 1869 and 1870 and operated from 1870 to 1872. Ill-fated because it adopted the wooden rail system developed by the American engineer Hulbert to save cost and was plagued by 4% grades, it was almost a financial success and would later be redeveloped and entirely rebuilt when the company was reorganized under the new name of Quebec & Lake St. John Railway. Unsurprisingly enough, Horace Jansen Beemer would be the man that would save the day and accomplish this undertaking.

 

Original Quebec & Gosford plans (credit: BAnQ)

The only picture of Q&G under construction circa 1871 (credit: Collection Marc Carette)

While only a very few pictures and drawings exist of the Quebec & Gosford, some contemporary descriptions and company documents give a good idea of what it was. Hadn’t it been plagued by the evitable engineering mistakes, the line would have been quite successful as demonstrated by the impressive earnings the company was able to generate during the few months of the year it operated.

 

The engine house at Rivière-à-Pierre on Q&LStJ (credit: BAnQ)

Q&LStJ, the spiritual descendant of Q&GR is much more documented and nice photographs of the era documenting its construction gives an excellent idea of what was happening in the backwoods of French Canada in the 1870s. One thing is sure, small shacks, settlers’ homes, railway structures and sawmills were quickly dotting an otherwise pristine forested land. And in that archetypical Canadian landscape, we know that the first Quebec & Gosford locomotives, bought new from Rhode Island Locomotive Works were working hard with their colorful paint, their brass appliances and gilded ornamentation. That contrast, between state-of-the-art machinery and the frontier is always appealing, hence why so many modellers are entrenched in that era that surprisingly never gets the coverage it warrants.

The second bridge over Jacques-Cartier river in 1879 (credit: BAnQ)

All these thoughts make sense when you understand what I tried to achieve with the demonstration Stanstead layout that served the purpose to prove that early pre-nationalization Canadian railways were worth modelling and fascinating. Each time I go to the basement, I see the module and its beautiful landscape and can’t help to gaze upon it, sometimes running even a modern locomotive on it.

A typical settlement along the line (credit: BAnQ)

I’ve always wondered if this layout could be expanded, and this is certainly the case. However, I have hardly the space in the house to currently do that. Nevertheless, I recently set a shelf over Monk Subdivision staging room to set a Kato Unitrak testing and programming track. As Chris mentioned, it was in some sense, the start of a layout. When I tried to run a pair of Bachmann Brill trolleys, I dug out my Montreal & Southern Counties track plan tailored for that room and looked at ways to improve upon it. From that point, I was doomed.

Q&LStJ No.5 was similar to Jacques Cartier (credit: BAnQ)

For some reasons, I revived my old Rivarossi Genoa 4-4-0 and seeing it runnings around the room was awesome… Some kind of revelation about the nature of what that shelf could become. I loved it and decided to start sketching based on descriptions of the first railways around Quebec City. At some point, the descriptions of our first locomotive, the “Jacques Cartier” and its sisters “Quebec” and “Gosford” came back. The original terminal in downtown Quebec City (St. Sauveur borough) was spartan with laconic descriptions of a house serving as a station, a reservoir, an engine house and other temporary structures and I suspect it was the same about Gosford, albeit much more simpler if newspaper accounts of the era are to be trusted.

Anyway, I find that era both fascinating and providing a plethora of small and achievable challenges. Building Stanstead was the epitome of "Model Railroading is Fun" and as mentioned, I always wanted to expand it to provide some running length to the trains. Time to move forward by making my railroading small and achievable again, and that includes Monk. I always perform better on more focussed projects that stand out and it was always my desire to continue my journey documenting what modelling pre-nationalization railways in Canada is all about. Doing frontier stuff that happened 150 years ago in what are now Quebec City northern suburbs is both thrilling and fascinating.

Monk Subdivision Track Plan Revision

I haven't written that much lately, or should I say, I didn't publish a lot of articles event if a string of first drafts are waiting in Blogger to be finalized. But they probably won't be published anyway because this hobby is about passion and when you write about a passion, it is often raw emotions captured on the spot and it's hard to come back a month or two later to alter them. Among them is a neat article about visiting hobby shops in Japan and the Kato Hobby Center last September and I think it's worth to be published. Another one is dating back to last fall when I railfanned Monk Subdivision again to shot photobackdrops.

Often, just having to edit and upload pictures on Blogger, which is very old technology by current standards, it enough to cut my desire to publish... we get lazy isn't it!

That said, I have continued modelling recently, in all directions to be honest. One thing is about completing the DCC sound installation in Monk CN fleet from the 1960s to the 1970s. Among them is a pair of Atlas C424 which will pull The Cabot passenger train and which my friend David Mira-Landry installed LokSound in them. It was great to spend an evening with him and seeing his workflow and tricks to get it done efficiently.

Atlas C424s going through decoder installation and detailing

Also, I had a lot of deep conversations about modelling and trains in general with good old Chris Mears. I wish these could be published as they are. Sometimes, I feel he is that reassuring voice that both listen and suggest. With him, no rocks are left unturned and this is a blessing. We have explored recently our deeply ingrained love of old time 4-4-0 from the 1860s-1870s but also thought about Monk once again. Jérôme and Louis-Marie also gave sound advices of keeping it simple and they are probably right. "Making it run" is probably the recurring theme and I agree. So let's dive into the future of Monk Subdivision.

Let's be blunt, I didn't work on it at all since I completed the staging first level and that gave me time to rethink the layout. Recently, to be able to run and tune my locomotives and cars, I added a Kato Unitrack loop in the staging room. It's at eye level and runs currently on DC only for older locomotives or those without decoder. I've ran a few trains since it has been put up there and that has helped me to better grasp what I'm doing in the basement. It was supposed to be fun and all about scenery, yet it degenerated into an intricate mechanical and technological issue that seems to never be resolved. What can be done?

A Kato Unitrack loop provide an excellent test bed

First, I took most of my high quality modern passenger cars (Rapido, Walthers, etc.) and tried to run them on the staging curved turnouts. It was a nightmare. Half of them don't negotiate the 28" radius curve properly. Sure, the Walthers turnouts are unforgiving, but it's ludicrously impossible to run a passenger train on the staging. Even on the flextrack, it barely works. The culprit is a mix of poorly design underframes, trucks and details. The Rapido Supercontinental cars (first release) are junk, even the couplers are operating poorly due to the diaphragm. Hard to believe someone designed that, tested the preproduction samples and went forward with it. Also, the wheels don't run freely and often the brake shoes on the sideframe are really braking. They aren't free rolling and this is a big issue. Fortunately, the newer releases are much, much better. As for Walthers, it's a mixed bag and fishbellies under the heavyweight cars makes them barely able to negotiate a 28" radius. So, I made a test, put 8 Rapido cars on the test loop (28.75 inches radius) and tried to pull it with an Intermountain F7. Didn't move and stalled. Added a Bachmann GP9 to the consist and it started to roll, but with serious drag and getting slow on curves. Basically, forget about running the Cabot (16 cars) under these circumstance, forget about a complicated yard throat and forget getting over a grade. This is a disaster in waiting.

So let's rethink the concept and go back to the basics. The two level staging is making thing very complicated in terms of trackwork, wiring and control. Some loves that stuff, but I don't and trains should stay accessible. So only one level. The new staging is basically a similar shape, but it feeds both end of the visible layout. I may plan to add extra capacity and a crossover later so I can turn passenger trains. Otherwise, keep it simple.

Grades are an issue because I had to get rid of the feed mill scene in Langlois which I really liked and added that touch of working a local train in the countryside. The recent QSSR module proved that I really liked shuffling cars at a small industry and I want it on Monk. Grades are also an issue because I have to make sure they are perfect and they were a real problem when dealing with the curved Abenaki bridge (which could most likely be modelled straight to save myself some problems).

Having the town scene 6" above the benchwork created a problem because the trains were much too close to the IKEA wall cabinet and it left very little backdrop. Having everything on a single level means that vertical clearance is the same and optimal everywhere.

At the moment of writing, I'm back to the original concept of Langlois and Armagh, with Lake Therrien and Abenakis bridge. It's as simple as that. In terms of work, I just have to lower the spline and shuffle some tracks in the staging room. No major benchwork surgery is required because I planned with sufficient reserve. I knew that things would change.

Revised track plan

The lesson behind that story is that running trains do help to make decision. That Kato Unitrack loop took me out of fantasy land and back to reality. Switching trains on the module also had a big impact. My slow progress was partially motivated by the fact I was constantly questioning the validity of my choices. The thing is that you can't validate them if you don't commit to build. Once again, Mike Confalone strikes: build, run then make changes. Not the first time I write about that.

So what is the future of Monk? First, we had some issue with the house drainage in the basement and a new one must be installed and the path is right in the train room. It doesn't impact the benchwork, but it means I need to clean the area, which in hindsight is a good thing.

Then, the mainline spline will be lowered and levelled. Finally, I will rebuild the staging according to the new geometry, but after taking some time to test it with various rolling stock. My goal? Run a train by Christmas.

I see more old time modelling in my future...

Meanwhile, the Kato Unitrack loop has raised interesting possibilities which I will explore in a later post. Let's just say there is a second life to that old time exploration I did with Stanstead.