Topics

Original Drawing Size.


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@...>
 

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


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@...>
 

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


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@...>
 
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


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@...>
 

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 


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@...>
 

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 

 
      

 


Randy Lee Decker <randyleedecker@...>
 

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