INTRODUCTION
The majority of concepts presented in Part 4 start at the terminal of Bigelow. Thus a logical next step would be to attempt to fit Bigelow into the concepts.

This is the 1916 Railroad Evaluation Map for Bigelow. I’ve annotated it to make it easier to find elements of interest.

Since I’ve already designed (and constructed) a free-mo module representing Bigelow a quick test is to fit the free-mo module into the concepts. The free-mo module shown in 12′ long, and fairly comprehensive for Bigelow.

Sn2 Free-mo version of Bigelow. Nearly track for track. Due to a glitch in XtrkCAD the turntable does not appear; the approach track is there.

The two sections at left contain the main yard, while the section at right is for the sawmill, lumberyard and boarding house/store. The right section is probably too short to fully contain full fledged sawmill and lumber yard, so to do it “right” Gary would need more space.

It’s obvious that a Bigelow of 12 feet in length is going to be hard to fit any of the concepts (OK…not fit most). So it’s likely that we’ll have to compress Bigelow to meet our goals. So admittedly, I know these short comings, yet I’m going to go ahead and attempt to fit, just to get an idea of what compromises will have to be made.

BIGELOW IN CONCEPTS

Concept #1: Around the walls

Free-mo version of Bigelow does not fit bounds of room. However, close enough to indicate that compression and curving might result in acceptable design.

Obviously, the angled wall impinges on Bigelow sawmill area. However, the yard fits in nicely. It looks promising that a compressed Bigelow might enable the sawmill yard to bend along the angled wall so that the sawmill area could be along the angled wall.

Concept #2: Stubbed Peninsula

The Sn2 free-mo version of Bigelow is too long for the space. Scene compression might result in an acceptable design.

At first glance, the stubbed Peninsula does not fit, and I’d have to agree. However, if Gary wants a long main line, having the peninsula is the only way to go. Looking at Concept #6r (below) there is a possibility that representation of Bigelow and Kingfield yard could be on the peninsula with a backdrop. While I’d downplayed that concept in my previous post, I plan push this concept further.

Concept #6: Kingfield in the middle

As expected the Sn2 Free-mo Bigelow extends beyond the boundaries of the room.  Still I see promise that a curved version (compromises) could fit preserve the operations and represent the location.

The free-mo Bigelow extends only fits one foot of the 3rd section along the left wall. Compression might add 1-2 additional feet to the sawmill area, but Bigelow as a whole will remain tight. The major impediment is the angled wall. The best way to handle the wall will likely be to “bend” Bigelow a bit, which may result in a deformed representation. The deformation might take the scene from prototype to representational. Such changes may be acceptable because Kingfield representation is good. I’ll proceed with this concept.

Concept #6r: Kingfield in the middle (Rotated)

Rotating to the long wall, the Sn2 Free-mo Bigelow is a natural in this position. Kingfield is compromised by acceptable. Visually, Bigelow and Kingfield are not far enough apart. Possibly separation can be obtain in another way.

By rotating Concept #6 90 degrees, Bigelow fits well without compression. There is still space for Kingfield to extend into the room. Two issues I see are that Kingfield’s stub get’s a sharper curve and that Bigelow is directly behind Kingfield, put both ends of the layout and metropolises in direct line of sight. This concept moves forward as it has sufficient space.

NEXT STEP

Next step will be to “fit” Bigelow into the concepts above. I’ll proceed in order of merit (Concept #6, Concept #6r, Concept #2, …). If one sticks, then we’ll take it further.