A game of two halves: Milltown spur and the Woodland Branch…
I don’t have the room for this layout, or one like it, but never the less I would love to build it. Although I enjoy running my Beaverbrook shunting / switching layout on my own I would love to have a slightly larger layout to allow two people to operate independently yet collaboratively…
 |
| Caleb Wentzell photo (https://flic.kr/p/2kdwbvd) |
The Calais branch in northern Maine was a railroad built in 1898 to connect Calais and Eastport with Bangor, an important railroad cross roads in the state. Passenger service was lost in the 1950s and freight in 1984, at the sale of the Maine Central to Guilford. Guilford retained just a few miles of trackage at Calais to Baileyville from the Canadian border servicing several forest product industries, and interchanging with Canadian railroads. The line from Saint Croix junction south towards Bangor was bought by the state but in recent decades has seen no further trains and track was lifted in the early noughties. Over the border the 40 mile line from McAdam south to Saint Stephen was built as the St. Andrews and Quebec Railway in the 19th Century, eventually forming part of the Canadian Pacific’s Maritime network.
It was whilst watching this video of a New Brunswick Southern train (that I’d found whilst looking up their GP35 rebuilds to GP38-3 i.e. non turbo 2000hp with 645 power assemblies on the 567 block, you know my obsession with rebuilds) that had me looking up the strange last remnant of this former Maine Central route…
In recent years the Canadian side has been served by the New Brunswick Southern, although prior to that Canadian Atlantic (a CP Rail subsidiary) ran trains down to the border. Guilford, later Pan-Am stationed a GP or two here, that had to be returned via Canada and the former Maine Central / CP junction at Vanceboro / St Croix. It is this period, the run down feel of a branch on its last legs that appeals, as usual, to me and this scheme draws deeply on the same back catalog of light weight track, overgrown and down at heel that has fired my imagination with industrial, narrow gauge and even British branchline schemes.
 |
| James Hilton - Sketch book doodling |
Chris’s original scheme described a single locomotive and controller being exchanged between friends over a table of layout, drinks and coal wagons. This is such a wonderful picture isn’t it, such a distilled and pure concept. In comparison my own scheme is more muddied, but calls ‘A side B side’ it’s inspiration. Less pure, a mix of shelf layout and shortline, a 5-10 year garage sized (in H0) project, one to build and operate with friends in a way that is not as common on these shores, and our experience the poorer for that.
The blend of shortline (A to B) and industrial spur (B to C) allows either a single operator a real blend of operation that could be split amongst sessions, or even operated as the mood takes you, be it branch operation or mill switching. Introduce a second operator and you collectively work the mill via a shared experience at the interchange, or work together as a crew. Flexibility, if you just wanted to ‘run a train’ you could run from A to C via the interchange with just the minimal of operation and enjoy the journey.
I shared the scheme with Chris, as we’d discussed the prototype previously…
Initially I thought of typical modern bungalow design around our region (Canadian Maritimes) that places the basement stairs in the middle of the building. So, instead of hanging the layout on the walls wrapping it around the stairs, is it too much to play on this where the stairs act as a kind of border dividing upstairs and downstairs as the actual border divides the country? And this beautiful layout design doesn’t need any kind of hidden staging which I think is appealing. It is contained within the frame.
Chris is right, the staging yard would be scenic and is intended to represent McAdam but could equally represent the small yard on the north side of Saint Stephen where the line reverses again.
Equally if a second friend could visit a larger operating session is hosted but the style of session can be tailored to the experience needed at that place in life and the layout changes to suit each without feeling any less a good design.
This scheme is actually just that, a social layout, something I would love to create. The choice of prototype matches the larger space that a multi operator layout dictates, yet beautifully adjusts to the needs of the owner and session they’re running. As a blank canvas the operation just needs cylindrical hoppers, wood chip cars, chemical tanks and boxcars. Locomotives are small, and trains single locomotive, indeed most of my Beaverbrook fleet would fit really nicely, and by ‘adjusting’ the online customers to suit your favourite box cars this scheme would be easy to cast as the next step on my Canadian adventure.
You can read more of the conversations Chris and I have shared here, or to learn a little more about the prototype visit the links below. In the meantime, I hope you’ve enjoyed this longer read, more soon…
Further reading:
Chris’s A side B side: https://princestreet.wordpress.com/2018/06/11/9562/
Abandoned Rails Calais Branch: https://www.abandonedrails.com/calais-branch
Calais branch Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calais_Branch
New Brunswick Southern: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Brunswick_Southern_Railway
I've been thinking for a while now that this concept (albeit much more generalised and not based on any particular prototype) meshes particularly well with the modular layout approach. Rather than build a series of modules to be butted against each other to create a linear run, the interface between the modules could be the interchange. In this way the patchwork nature of many modular setups (which I can find charming myself, but certainly jars) is avoided, and that 'independent yet collaborative' aspect extends to the fabric of the layout itself. You could build a chunk of layout that passes on trains to someone else's little empire to gain a feeling of greater purpose, and swap with them to linger over what they have built and how it can be run. This would be less an exhibition setup than one for a club I feel. And there'd certainly be logistical issues, as that interchange, which would likely have to be it's own module, is far more complex than a few electrical connectors and bolts. Perhaps it could be sceniced along the lines of Mike Cougill's experiments as detailed here: https://www.ostpubs.com/experiments-with-light-and-dark/ to act as a neutral transition point between different approaches?
ReplyDeleteTim
That is certainly a fascinating build on this A side B side game, and how the collaboration that comes from it can enrich the experience. I love the way these design ideas and conversations encourage this sort of debate.
DeletePersonally, this is a garage or basement empire that is mangavle and for friends, that is driven from my own preferences for small groups of friends rather than larger social gatherings. I’m not one for clubs, but a friendly collaboration between a collective is right up my street.