Topics

Original Drawing Size.


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Image result for Half through span bridge   Half Through Span.....  


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Ya know... Warner..  the topic is interesting... no doubt.    The whole mention of the "Suspension Bridge"... or the "Half Through Arch Span" that is in the book on page 103, brings me back to the entire premise of so many of my posts in here. 
    All the evidence, so far, indicates to me John was going to replicate his steel arch bridge located on the other side of Scalp Mountain.   That is my best guess....  And many of us agree on this.  I am planing it in my head all the time.   But Linn's mention of "Notebooks" with drawings of these TWO different style bridges means these notes along with all the dozens of drawings and doodles and artifacts used to print the book were fine and did not burn and we know were still in his possession back in 1980.   After his death is when it all gets fuzzy....   That is when the box was gone through....   So;  
 
Anyone who has the slightest inkling of what the value of these things would be to a John Allen enthusiast, or even a simple model railroading fan on a basic level understands without a second thought that these things did not get THROWN OUT,  did not get LOST,  did not just sit in a box and ROT AWAY.   John Allen's things were super sought after even before his death.  He even stopped printing his passes in 1962....everyone who visited wanted one he simply did not have any for people in later years.  I was told, he was sort of mad that guy's were selling them for good prices even back then and using his good nature to get one and not keep it.  SOUNDS about Right.     So along with the Expanded Drawing.. I say that notebook is still in someone's hands.  I say it's foolish to think otherwise. 

 NOw to my point again....WHAT POSSIBLE HARM COULD IT BE FOR SOMEONE TO SHARE THE IMAGES FROM THAT BOOK...?    The publishing buddies of Linn Westcott and authors who knew these guys and all who know of John Allen and would have wanted, (just the same as MANY OF US TODAY would want) to have an item from John's hand.  Linn had them, they existed, they were used for the book.  I was told he gave some things away (again how much I do not know) on his own, but the rest of the items he had must have been gone through after Linn passed.   I know Andy Sperandeo was the man who ended up inheriting the Box of Lines after it had the photos removed for future publishing options.  So the the drawings and notes and etc. must have went to many places.  Mr King did not care about these things.. so we can only do the simple simple math by who worked with and for the company Linn worked for.   Andy's Wife told me a few years ago that there was never anything in the box of Johns he discussed or found.  She told me he would have had it in the wall.  Who would blame him.  So would I.    Difference is I think Andy would have shared anything.. So would I.     

No one today cares anymore about the box or ownership now that we realise it is long devoid of treasures and nearly 50 years has passed since John's death and 40 since Linn died.   For myself, I only care about telling Johns Story.   That can be done with a good High resolution scan.     I only mention it because it is an exercise in idiocy to be led to believe no one knows where these items are.  But that is what my earlier generation of guy's "Who Know" tell me all the time.   Of course they know.    John's story is more important than the selfishness of men who can't even show most people some of the things they have.  This is a sad part of John's History.  HIs own memorabilia value.  It has caused arguments and lost friendships.     

 If I did build this last bridge that John worked very hard to finish that last year... and made it removable  it would only be so I could build the Half Through Span and the Steel Arch versions so they can both be filmed.    The Half Through Span would not have worked well with Johns Ceiling heights... But it could have fit if he did not build the arch terribly tight.... And there is one more fact here I have run across in my experience with Johns construction techniques, it factors in fairly heavily here.  He loved to make every bridge he made DIFFERENTLY.  Other than the heavy steel girders (and ya can't build different version of them)  Every single Bridge on his layout  (105 of them by my count so far) is different.  Every single One. !     I bet he knew a half through span arch might cramp his photographic opportunities but he might have not designed it to rise to high above the track bed and I know he would have resisted making these bridges the same.   For me.   I do not like the look of every bridge being different...  And I love the idea of the two spans looking like bookends for Scalp Mountain...  But studying his stuff John did not see things in the same way when it came to bridges at all.   
                   
To ask to see the drawings is not an unreasonable request.    And following the logic of those who knew the value of these things involved back then, and factor that into believing they are still intact is not an unreasonable conclusion either.     

Fun discussion

Randy 

 
      

 


Warner Swarner
 

As Tom has written, the Girder Span approaches were permanent.  During my visits to the G&D both approach girder spans were in place and there was a survey crew on the end of one.  The “lift out” span was to be about 36” (though I am just guessing on that dimension).  
I am beyond a doubt sure it was not going to be a suspension or arch type bridge. Regardless of “artist concept” or memories of models on work bench, the “bridge” was not a priority and practically would be an obstruction to John.  The piers were in place (look at the photos) and they would not support such a complex bridge structure.  They were not abutments that would handle displaced force from an arch or a suspension type bridge.  AND more importantly it would have obstructed the view of John’s signature art work.  AND it was the only access back into that far canyon corner.  AND the bridge was not essential for John to have fun entertaining visitors.  If he drew art work of a suspension bridge, he was just playing with ideas. He “ran” trains.  He did not turn them on and walk away.  
John knew his time was short here.  His heart condition, at that time, to him was medically terminal.  He really did not seem motivated to bridge his canyon.  Actually questions of when or how to bridge the canyon were “taboo”. 
All just my humble opinion, until there is better proof from eye-witnesses.
Warner Swarner
 


On Jul 23, 2019, at 9:03 AM, Tom Hokel (Pine Ridge RR) <PR-Line@...> wrote:

Here’s why I think the “Great” bridge would have been removable. The area around Squawbottom was not fully excavated and was covered with concrete simulating scenery. See page 98. There were “steps” on the right side of Scalp Mt. See the photo of John sitting there. This was the only access to the back side. John had no turnouts in this area, which reduced maintenance; nevertheless, there was no other way to access this rather large area.

 

According to the Book’s large layout diagram the right side span was 60”. With two permanent girder bridges on each side that look to be about a foot long each. That makes the span arch bridge about 36” long … easy for one person to handle. John would have had a difficult time trying to crawl under it. (As a reference, the elevation was 60” and Squawbottom was 30".) These bridges and trestles are actually quite strong … just like the prototypes.

 

Take a look at this photo and tell me what you see below the front of #56: http://gdlines.info/Landmark_Layouts_2012_Calendar_June.jpg  I’ve seen other photos of “it,” but this is one of the best. You can see “it” on page 24, if you know what you’re looking at. Swarner has a pretty good photo of “it,” too. There’s your proof that it was (or was going to be) a span arch.

 

I have an open access pit in back of my version of Scalp Mt. … completely hidden from view. Unfortunately, I do have a couple of turnouts in the back area.

 

How do you plan to access this area on your layout?

<GD John the drunkered from video.PNG>
--
Tom
<PR> PINE RIDGE RR


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Well each of us have different versions of this same area.  Mine is still unbuilt.   But I simply do not see a need for removal.  Either way, as long as we can gain access that is the only point of the discussion and my area will be very close in size and etc. to what John had, so I can't add much to the theory until I get there.  When I do. It is not an issue for me to adapt an make it removable if I want then.    Hell, I could mount it on small geared lifts built underneath and have it rise to the ceiling for me if I wanted.  But from my view of the area and envisioning exactly what will be there it seems all good to me.     Your big bridge is just the coolest thing ever Dave.   
My oldest daughter loves the railroad stuff...She was so surprised when I showed her your build photo's.  She has been hearing me talk about making a nice thin layer of real 3D clouds and lighting from behind for years.  She finally got to see what I was talking about.    Ya just beat me to it buddy.     You and Tom have already broken this ground in so many areas.  I am just catching up.         

Randy 


David
 
Edited

Randy-

I followed what Tom did.  I have an open access area behind my version of Scalp Mountain, I can stand up in that whole area.  I can gain access from either side from underneath the layout.  There is a long passageway that goes under the French Gulch section of the layout or I can go from the other direction through my Cold Shoulder area.  I have a motorized tram that was specially constructed so that I can ride in comfort to Scalp Mountain, it uses old Lionel three-rail track.  No, just kidding!  At least the floor is carpeted, the passageway is quite wide and has a high enough head clearance to make crawling fairly easy.  Both of my main bridges are fixed in place, I wouldn't want to lift any bridges out for servicing track in that area.  If I didn't have the passageways it would be very difficult to snake my way underneath either of the bridges.  Besides, I'm not good at yoga.

David (Dry Gulch & Western)

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019, 10:58:09 AM PDT, Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...> wrote:


Well for me, when I look at the photo of John, he is sitting where his head would be just behind the bridge.   And the space there is workable, ya just have to be careful.   I have checked my dimensions and I will be building simple heavy stairs under the scenery there and places for my hands under this area as well and behind Scalp Mountain.  They will be obvious to me but not so much anyone else...  So just like Johns concrete... I can get back there when needed.   I see your point Tom but I have done the math as best I can and I just don't have any real issue with the bridge or access.   Other than that, To be removable or not is just conjecture on our parts as he never spoke of it we only have the clues to go by now.  BTW those Support Pads are a fantastic FIND..!  I never noticed those before. 
   For me and my model plans, I feel the risk of damage and the hassle of building pockets to exactly align the track each time this bridge might be removed seems like more work for me that it would be worth.  But It can be done if it is needed.   If I was going to make this removable those concrete pads you found in that photo would be pockets to accept the legs, not pads.  And I would design some kind of friction sliding Contact that attached right to the legs themselves through the pockets on one or both sides... with wire running up and hidden in the girders.  Adding a whole new level of complications in building and etc.     
  But I will literally cross that bridge when I get there.  LOL   So far "It Looks Good On Paper"  is all I am saying.      

 My "Scalp Mountain" will have a hatch on the backside as well.. but that hatch is for access to the mechanical workings running the mine cars inside.  Crawling underneath will be possible but hard to do once all that is in there.  Again that's for one of my kids or someone else not me.  My access port in back of Scalp Mountain is not for me to access the back wall, it is for me to reach into the mountain after climbing the stairs behind.. to fix the mine workings.   I think I have thought that through pretty well.  ??  again it's all in my head. What is on paper is scaled room drawings and scale radiouses and estimated scenery depths, thicknesses and locations..   Until I actually build this I can't be 100% sure of anything.  Scenery and the changes that sometimes have to happen on the fly can add up fast.   .   All the planning in the word can only guide you and make life easier and give you some of the known parameters of your space to stay inside or outside of.... "problem solving" is the real genius behind all this stuff.  And I think you'd agree Tom....it is often the most fun as well. 
    I use my lifetime of construction and exhibit building to do my best with it all. 
 
 For backup, I do have a couple of those nice rubber grippers on a pole.  Funny but an effective plan b or c    
      
Randy
    

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:04 PM Tom Hokel (Pine Ridge RR) <PR-Line@...> wrote:

Here’s why I think the “Great” bridge would have been removable. The area around Squawbottom was not fully excavated and was covered with concrete simulating scenery. See page 98. There were “steps” on the right side of Scalp Mt. See the photo of John sitting there. This was the only access to the back side. John had no turnouts in this area, which reduced maintenance; nevertheless, there was no other way to access this rather large area.

 

According to the Book’s large layout diagram the right side span was 60”. With two permanent girder bridges on each side that look to be about a foot long each. That makes the span arch bridge about 36” long … easy for one person to handle. John would have had a difficult time trying to crawl under it. (As a reference, the elevation was 60” and Squawbottom was 30".) These bridges and trestles are actually quite strong … just like the prototypes.

 

Take a look at this photo and tell me what you see below the front of #56: http://gdlines.info/Landmark_Layouts_2012_Calendar_June.jpg  I’ve seen other photos of “it,” but this is one of the best. You can see “it” on page 24, if you know what you’re looking at. Swarner has a pretty good photo of “it,” too. There’s your proof that it was (or was going to be) a span arch.

 

I have an open access pit in back of my version of Scalp Mt. … completely hidden from view. Unfortunately, I do have a couple of turnouts in the back area.

 

How do you plan to access this area on your layout?


--
Tom
<PR> PINE RIDGE RR


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 
Edited

Well for me, when I look at the photo of John, he is sitting where his head would be just behind the bridge.   And the space there is workable, ya just have to be careful.   I have checked my dimensions and I will be building simple heavy stairs under the scenery there and places for my hands under this area as well and behind Scalp Mountain.  They will be obvious to me but not so much anyone else...  So just like Johns concrete... I can get back there when needed.   I see your point Tom but I have done the math as best I can and I just don't have any real issue with the bridge or access.   Other than that, To be removable or not is just conjecture on our parts as he never spoke of it we only have the clues to go by now.  BTW those Support Pads are a fantastic FIND..!  I never noticed those before. 
   For me and my model plans, I feel the risk of damage and the hassle of building pockets to exactly align the track each time this bridge might be removed seems like more work for me that it would be worth.  But It can be done if it is needed.   If I was going to make this removable those concrete pads you found in that photo would be pockets to accept the legs, not pads.  And I would design some kind of friction sliding Contact that attached right to the legs themselves through the pockets on one or both sides... with wire running up and hidden in the girders.  Adding a whole new level of complications in building and etc.     
  But I will literally cross that bridge when I get there.  LOL   So far "It Looks Good On Paper"  is all I am saying.      

 My "Scalp Mountain" will have a hatch on the backside as well.. but that hatch is for access to the mechanical workings running the mine cars inside.  Crawling underneath will be possible but hard to do once all that is in there.  Again that's for one of my kids or someone else not me.  My access port in back of Scalp Mountain is not for me to access the back wall, it is for me to reach into the mountain after climbing the stairs behind.. to fix the mine workings.   I think I have thought that through pretty well.  ??  again it's all in my head. What is on paper is scaled room drawings and scale radiouses and estimated scenery depths, thicknesses and locations..   Until I actually build this I can't be 100% sure of anything.  Scenery and the changes that sometimes have to happen on the fly can add up fast.   .   All the planning in the word can only guide you and make life easier and give you some of the known parameters of your space to stay inside or outside of.... "problem solving" is the real genius behind all this stuff.  And I think you'd agree Tom....it is often the most fun as well. 
    I use my lifetime of construction and exhibit building to do my best with it all. 
 
 For backup, I do have a couple of those nice rubber grippers on a pole.  Funny but an effective plan b or c    
      
Randy
    


On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 12:04 PM Tom Hokel (Pine Ridge RR) <PR-Line@...> wrote:

Here’s why I think the “Great” bridge would have been removable. The area around Squawbottom was not fully excavated and was covered with concrete simulating scenery. See page 98. There were “steps” on the right side of Scalp Mt. See the photo of John sitting there. This was the only access to the back side. John had no turnouts in this area, which reduced maintenance; nevertheless, there was no other way to access this rather large area.

 

According to the Book’s large layout diagram the right side span was 60”. With two permanent girder bridges on each side that look to be about a foot long each. That makes the span arch bridge about 36” long … easy for one person to handle. John would have had a difficult time trying to crawl under it. (As a reference, the elevation was 60” and Squawbottom was 30".) These bridges and trestles are actually quite strong … just like the prototypes.

 

Take a look at this photo and tell me what you see below the front of #56: http://gdlines.info/Landmark_Layouts_2012_Calendar_June.jpg  I’ve seen other photos of “it,” but this is one of the best. You can see “it” on page 24, if you know what you’re looking at. Swarner has a pretty good photo of “it,” too. There’s your proof that it was (or was going to be) a span arch.

 

I have an open access pit in back of my version of Scalp Mt. … completely hidden from view. Unfortunately, I do have a couple of turnouts in the back area.

 

How do you plan to access this area on your layout?


--
Tom
<PR> PINE RIDGE RR


Tom Hokel (Pine Ridge RR)
 

Here’s why I think the “Great” bridge would have been removable. The area around Squawbottom was not fully excavated and was covered with concrete simulating scenery. See page 98. There were “steps” on the right side of Scalp Mt. See the photo of John sitting there. This was the only access to the back side. John had no turnouts in this area, which reduced maintenance; nevertheless, there was no other way to access this rather large area.

 

According to the Book’s large layout diagram the right side span was 60”. With two permanent girder bridges on each side that look to be about a foot long each. That makes the span arch bridge about 36” long … easy for one person to handle. John would have had a difficult time trying to crawl under it. (As a reference, the elevation was 60” and Squawbottom was 30".) These bridges and trestles are actually quite strong … just like the prototypes.

 

Take a look at this photo and tell me what you see below the front of #56: http://gdlines.info/Landmark_Layouts_2012_Calendar_June.jpg  I’ve seen other photos of “it,” but this is one of the best. You can see “it” on page 24, if you know what you’re looking at. Swarner has a pretty good photo of “it,” too. There’s your proof that it was (or was going to be) a span arch.

 

I have an open access pit in back of my version of Scalp Mt. … completely hidden from view. Unfortunately, I do have a couple of turnouts in the back area.

 

How do you plan to access this area on your layout?


--
Tom
<PR> PINE RIDGE RR


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Well at least I have options.        Wow just think about building that monster from Brass   

And yes.. the dartboard is going up on the wall tonight Dave....   

Randy


David
 

Randy,

Pull out your soldering iron and build it out of brass!

David (Dry Gulch & Western)

PS- I know with that comment you'll have my picture taped to a dart board!

On Monday, July 22, 2019, 5:32:38 PM PDT, Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...> wrote:


Yes, now I see them ....and yes the photo you sent me was a better shot of the bridges it clearly showed both and a good shot of the larger one.    I did not realise this was one of yours.. and I thought it was loaded into one of the sites or I would have kept it in a better file.... 
   Not quite sure why you would figure John would intended to have that massive bridge removable... not in the position it ended up in... It is so high you can go under it (although not easily) and it would be impossible to make something that large and spindly into a removable feature without jeopardising its precarious, spindly beauty.   it would be a two man job at best and dangerous.   Interesting idea.... but not sure I follow  Tom   

Randy   


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Funny... totally forgot about the Book photo  Page 89...  but then again I already saw these once..   I hope Dave is seeing these, this is all new for him.  All I needed was the proof... now I need to produce the bridges..!        Thanks Tom

Randy


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Yes, now I see them ....and yes the photo you sent me was a better shot of the bridges it clearly showed both and a good shot of the larger one.    I did not realise this was one of yours.. and I thought it was loaded into one of the sites or I would have kept it in a better file.... 
   Not quite sure why you would figure John would intended to have that massive bridge removable... not in the position it ended up in... It is so high you can go under it (although not easily) and it would be impossible to make something that large and spindly into a removable feature without jeopardising its precarious, spindly beauty.   it would be a two man job at best and dangerous.   Interesting idea.... but not sure I follow  Tom   

Randy   


Tom Hokel (Pine Ridge RR)
 

Randy,

They're in the San Diego Model RR Museum album on this site. I can't remember who posted them, but it wasn't Don. There's also a good photo in The Book.

I took photos of them, too, in 2014 when I visited Don and the museum. Man, has it been that long ago! Maybe I sent you some of my photos.

BTW, I'm sure that John intended for the "Great" bridge to be removable for access purposes.

--
Tom
<PR> PINE RIDGE RR


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Hey Don, yes I do remember seeing the photo. Did not know it was you who took the shots.     I mentioned this photo to Dave Woodrel as part of my answer concerning the evidence I have found over time now, to know John's intentions for his bridge that he never finished.   I don't remember where they were posted now either.     I think Tom Hokel sent me to them once, or sent them to me?   but not sure now.   regardless.....   

What a WONDERFUL little thing.....  so glad to see it survived the mess and saw the light of day.  Several of them did.   Don do you know who donated them by any chance?   Just curious... 

I have no need to contact the museum or bother you for these photos Don I was not asking for them.    Others might like them.  I will try and find them too. 
I only ever needed to see the picture of the model that one time to solidify my choice to build his bridges the way he wanted and was secure in my choice.   

 Those kinds of items tell John's story.  I wish I could get to CA to see these things but travel will not be on my agenda anytime soon.  My only hope of seeing any new photographs is through the sharing of collections and the ability to go to the GDLines.org and the fantastic LIGHT OF DAY experience that place is for Johns work.     

Randy        


Don Mitchell <donm@...>
 

John's 3D models were donated to the San Diego Model RR Museum.  They were removed from display several years ago, but hopefully are still in the archives.

I took photos of them, but can't remember where the pix were posted.  You might want to try contacting the Museum before I have time to look for those photos.

Don M.


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Dave.     
   This tidbit of information in the drawing  has been kicked around here for many years now.  Some of thee guys hashed al this out 15 years ago....For me its about 3 years gone now.   I will be using this drawing from John's hand as one of 2 pieces of perfect evidence and proof of his intent as far as his last bridge was concerned.   The other piece of proof is in some of the photographs of the tiny scale models that survived the fire...I have not seen the original it is in California with most of his things still.   He made several models of his layout some were early concepts and do not reflect his later design... but in one of them the two bridges (ALIKE) are there on each side of Scalp Mountain.....  Now  I am glad you just stumbled upon this yesterday it is fun to learn things in here.   To speculate how a suspension bridge was ever put into print is anyone's guess.   To also consider, (contained in the pile of evidence I have for my efforts to remake his layout) is the practical fact that Johns ceiling height would not have allowed a suspension bridge or even a steel arch that cantilevered above the track in anyway to be built and have it easily photographed or any valence and lighting hidden above.  So yes... a longer, but identically designed bridge is the answer here.     
 
This topic was the main focus of my search a few years ago when I was new to the John Allen story.    I have done so much research and spoken to so many people since then, from Johns time, who know him and knew many of his friends and authors he worked with and the stores of his travels to shows and his ability to impress with his intellect and wit on many subjects or his ability to rub people the wrong way with his skill and ability to argue a point to perfection.  We all know how easily he could just create "blow your mind scenes" on his layout and with that truth, is also the fact that he could make some modelers (with rivalry driven egos) jealous with his incredible diverse set of talents perfectly suited for this medium.   He was a force to be reckoned with and a character of great hilarity and an energetic, spirited, presence that would not be ignored.  
   
   It is hard to keep tally anymore of all the names and information in my head but I have them in my book and a small books worth of stories.   The effort has been enlightening and the story I have of John and the events after his death have been eye opening as well. 

My one and only, true, desire is to see his story is told well.  This search for and conversations about old items, long since missing, is not a popular topic.  At this point I'd say who cares who has what or how or when ...  I say lets let them see the light of day...!   What could possibly be wrong with that...   That is the best way to tell John Allen's story...  This topic is above my paygrade... but it needs to be had sometime and it is very much the ACTUAL HISTORY of John Allen and his story in 2019.  One day, items on dark walls now, will be passed on to family and eventually these treasures will run out of interested inheritors.   They may see a museum then.   They may be misplaced or thrown out also..  Shame on the fools who do not see to it they are not copied NOW...   It is also a shame that our generation of fans can't see these items better now.  What reason could there possibly be to not allow good digital scans of things to come to the world.       

This is John Allen's story not ours.   Right?  


Randy 


David
 

Dave-

I agree with your observation on the "missing" bridge. A suspension bridge would be cool but would defeat the surrounding mountain scenery. Secondly, the towers image might encroach in the corner mirror. I was thinking along the same line when I was looking at putting in my "missing" bridge. I settled on another type of arch span (SF Canyon Diablo bridge) to keep any of the bridge structure well below the corner mirror.

I think your questions being answered would be very valuable for an archival matter. These questions should be pursued and answers obtained. Perhaps something would turn up that could be shared with the group. Those little bits and pieces of history are pure gold.

David (Dry Gulch & Western)

On Saturday, July 20, 2019, 7:50:24 AM PDT, David Woodrell <dwoodrell@...> wrote:


Hi, Randy,

First of all, let me say that I personally know zip about the conceptual drawing of the GD, other than it is depicted, as you said, on pages 6 & 7 in "The Book" (at least that is where it is in Hayden's reprint - my original copy is long disintegrated and gone!).  I at first thought you were talking about the overall schematic drawing of the final layout on pages 84-85 and couldn't imagine what all the fuss was about.  But, this morning my curiosity got the best of me, so I turned to page 6 and took a closer look at it and, so - voila,!!!  I now understand your interest.

I think it would be useful to list what we know about the drawing (like I said, I know nothing, other than it IS in the book). A number of questions (and one observation) come to mind:
1) Is it an original by John, or did Linn draw it (or have it drawn by a Kalmbach artist to demonstrate the overall operational scheme)?
2) When was it drawn?
3) Do we have evidence that it still exists?  Why would it?
4) If it IS a JA original why did he draw it? It's actually a pretty detailed representation of his imaginary system so I don't think he drew it on a napkin while his operators played with the "Timesaver!  Do any of the remaining operators have a recollection of seeing it displayed anywhere in his house?  Was it just a large doodle he did to show visitors what his layout was all about?
5) Did he have any other layout diagrams displayed in the house or down in the layout room?
6) Have you approached Bob Hayden about any info on the drawing that he might have come across when he was republishing the original?

I'm sure there are other pertinent questions that it would be nice to know the answers to, but my second morning cup of coffee is empty, signaling it's time to be about (in the spirit of Sherlock Holmes).  But, first - my observation:

I had never really looked that closely at the drawing before, but I did this morning.  And, while perusing I spied something that may lend some info to the speculation surrounding  "The Great Missing Devil's Gulch Bridge Mystery".  Look closely at the depiction of the bridge by the artist (whoever he was).  If this WAS John Allen's work I would say that at least at the time of this drawing's rendering he was thinking in terms of an almost mirror image of the Scalp Mountain Arch span (adjusted for length, of course) from SM to Angels Camp.  To me, that makes so much more sense than the suspension bridge suggestion, that has always seemed a bit goofy to me - wouldn't such a structure completely overwhelm the entirety of the mountain scenery?  On the other hand, maybe it WASN'T John who did the rendering and that whoever did just made the bridge design up!  I doubt we'll ever know.

Well, enough Saturday meandering - off to "honey-dos"!

Dave


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Yep...  Bridge drawings and all... 

 Someone who was friends with Linn westcott and had some high standing in the group of authors involved in this story during that time has this drawing. No Linn did not draw it.  I only said that to be sarcastic.. 
   All the discussions aside.   We know it exists.... no one threw it out.  
 
 #1... it needs to be mounted on acid free board and matt... behind UV protected glass
 #2 it should be digitally copied and on film for history's sake.
 #3 this is a centerpiece of John Allen's story... ( it would be to me)  Perhaps the most prized possession any John Allen fan could ever have.  I could care less WHO has it.. or HOW... just the fact of KNOWING it survives is huge.. These things are part of Johns story.... After fifty years of people making money off his name is asking that some of these items once in Linns possession have a good copy made for history's sake and to also send it along to the GDLines site...?   

Is my request for preservation and sharing a copy somehow the wrong thing to do?  I have been laughed at, have been met with outright rude angry notes when I speak of these things.  I say the people who have these things are not friends in any way to John Allen.   News Flash.... No one gives tiny crap how anyone got these things or when, we all know already.   I only ask that you please stop hiding them in the dark.  TIme to just do the right thing and post a copy.  No one is asking anyone to give away their treasures.  But keeping them hidden does not HONOR JOHN nor the spirit of how he lived his life. No value will be lost in a digital copy.   

As for specific people I have contacted, I'd rather not speak about who or how those conversations went.  I can remain private about many things but it is hard to stomach such selfish, miserable, greed but that is life.    Some people have honor others not so much.   
   I am only glad some very good people ended up with some of John's things and have shared their own.  Imagine If the photos found in Johns home after the fire and the sale were in the hands that ended up with the photos Linn used to publish his book, we'd all have to buy more books to see them. No high resolution copies to enlarge and look around at. close up...   for some, John is a story to bring to light...  To share and revel in...!    for others John is a money making machine even in death,his items a collectors dream and sharing is a sin.       

 That is just the simple truth of it.     That is the truth of John Allen's story in 2019....   
 We all are in one camp or the other.    
 The GDline web page from Peter and maintained by Jeff and created by so many good people is a testament to all that is right and captures the spirit of John Allen.  

I am frankly surprised nerves were not hit here and the thread shut down...  I think this was good, some things needed saying here.  I hope changes in attitudes will come from discussions like this one day.  My God, everyone should help to tell his story , Not HIDE IT....... it is so incredible and so sad.   

Randy      



 


David Woodrell
 

Hi, Randy,

First of all, let me say that I personally know zip about the conceptual drawing of the GD, other than it is depicted, as you said, on pages 6 & 7 in "The Book" (at least that is where it is in Hayden's reprint - my original copy is long disintegrated and gone!).  I at first thought you were talking about the overall schematic drawing of the final layout on pages 84-85 and couldn't imagine what all the fuss was about.  But, this morning my curiosity got the best of me, so I turned to page 6 and took a closer look at it and, so - voila,!!!  I now understand your interest.

I think it would be useful to list what we know about the drawing (like I said, I know nothing, other than it IS in the book). A number of questions (and one observation) come to mind:
1) Is it an original by John, or did Linn draw it (or have it drawn by a Kalmbach artist to demonstrate the overall operational scheme)?
2) When was it drawn?
3) Do we have evidence that it still exists?  Why would it?
4) If it IS a JA original why did he draw it? It's actually a pretty detailed representation of his imaginary system so I don't think he drew it on a napkin while his operators played with the "Timesaver!  Do any of the remaining operators have a recollection of seeing it displayed anywhere in his house?  Was it just a large doodle he did to show visitors what his layout was all about?
5) Did he have any other layout diagrams displayed in the house or down in the layout room?
6) Have you approached Bob Hayden about any info on the drawing that he might have come across when he was republishing the original?

I'm sure there are other pertinent questions that it would be nice to know the answers to, but my second morning cup of coffee is empty, signaling it's time to be about (in the spirit of Sherlock Holmes).  But, first - my observation:

I had never really looked that closely at the drawing before, but I did this morning.  And, while perusing I spied something that may lend some info to the speculation surrounding  "The Great Missing Devil's Gulch Bridge Mystery".  Look closely at the depiction of the bridge by the artist (whoever he was).  If this WAS John Allen's work I would say that at least at the time of this drawing's rendering he was thinking in terms of an almost mirror image of the Scalp Mountain Arch span (adjusted for length, of course) from SM to Angels Camp.  To me, that makes so much more sense than the suspension bridge suggestion, that has always seemed a bit goofy to me - wouldn't such a structure completely overwhelm the entirety of the mountain scenery?  On the other hand, maybe it WASN'T John who did the rendering and that whoever did just made the bridge design up!  I doubt we'll ever know.

Well, enough Saturday meandering - off to "honey-dos"!

Dave


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Interesting Chuck....   hit a nerve...?    Perhaps Gollum and all like him will be exposed one day..  That is another scenario

Randy  

On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:12 PM Charles Kinzer <ckinzer@...> wrote:

I believe there is only one solution to this consternation.

 

Somebody needs to generate a “The Box” full of credible looking John Allen artifacts and ephemera.  It will be important to make it realistic by aging everything.  Also perhaps throw in a few correct period dogeared vintage NMRA bulletins and such.  To be really ambitious, create a believable unpublished article draft typed on an old portable typewriter – wow – what a find that will be!  Take a look at some of his handwritten items at gdlines.org and forge a few notes here and there.  Make sure the box itself is also beat up, dirty, and crudely has something like “G&D stuff” written on it as well as the word “SAVE”.  If possible, use an already old box from the time frame so that an FBI forensics team won’t catch on.

 

Then, “discover it”.  And perhaps create a story to add some drama (recall “The Satchel” if you need a hint).

 

I learned there is power in writing the word “SAVE” on a box.  One such box was on the main production floor of a company where I worked.  The entire time nobody even considered getting rid of it.  Putting on my Mad Magazine thinking cap, I envision company after company moving in and out of the building and the box always remains safely there.  And then the building get obsolete, is demolished, and the box is STILL there in the middle of an empty lot.

 

Charles E. “Chuck” Kinzer

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: Rick Jones
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 7:50 PM
To: GandD@groups.io
Subject: Re: [GandD] Original Drawing Size.

 

On 7/19/2019 8:53 PM, Ken Dodge wrote:

> Worst Case Scenario - which I SINCERELY hope didn't happen: One day

> someone told a minimum wage, temp custodian, who didn't know a model

> train from a hula hoop, to "get rid of the junk in this room." He looked

> around, saw The Box, and thought, "There's a box of junk if I ever saw

> one."

 

    Alternate hypothesis - Linn took this mythical Box home and put it

on a shelf. After he passed away his wife or other family member tossed

it out as they were disposing of his effects, not knowing there was

anything there worth saving.

 

--

 

                   Rick Jones

 

Joan of Arc is alive and medium well.

 


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

Rick.... did you say Mythical...   No sir.. it is at Big K now.  But void of any of the treasure it once contained.     

Randy

On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 10:50 PM Rick Jones <r.t.jones@...> wrote:
On 7/19/2019 8:53 PM, Ken Dodge wrote:
> Worst Case Scenario - which I SINCERELY hope didn't happen: One day
> someone told a minimum wage, temp custodian, who didn't know a model
> train from a hula hoop, to "get rid of the junk in this room." He looked
> around, saw The Box, and thought, "There's a box of junk if I ever saw
> one."

    Alternate hypothesis - Linn took this mythical Box home and put it
on a shelf. After he passed away his wife or other family member tossed
it out as they were disposing of his effects, not knowing there was
anything there worth saving.

--

                   Rick Jones

Joan of Arc is alive and medium well.