Planning: What Scale?

What Scale should I choose to model?  This question is probably one of the most asked questions in the hobby.  Model trains come in various sizes, from the small Z scale to the giant 7/8 in scale.  In the US, there are several major model railroad scales: N, HO, S, O, and G.  These letters are easy to memorize with a little experience.  Besides letters, each scale can also be distinguished by a ratio of numbers.  HO scale is 1:87 scale, meaning that every inch on the model represents 87 inches on the prototype.  So a model of 40 ft boxcar in HO scale is only 5.5" long.  N scale is 1:148, but is also found in 1:160 proportions.  S scale is 1:64, O scale is 1:48, and G scale is found in ratios between 1:32 and 1:20.3.

Each scale has it's advantages and disadvantages.  The smaller the scale, the less space it takes up. However, the smaller scales can be hard to see for those that do not have great vision.   Like anything else, don't buy something that you can't see or maintain.  Similarly, don't buy something that takes up too much space.  It would be wise to take a look at each scale in a hobby shop near you, or at least look at photographs if a hobby store is not nearby.  Space is a big issue for most people as well, so looking at each scale is a good way to go.  Another way to find out how much space a layout will take up is to follow the minimum curves.  Below I will elaborate more on this subject, so let's continue on.

Price is also a concern.  Here is a note; model railroading is not cheap, but it also isn't expensive if you don't want it to be.  The total cost of a model railroad varies greatly and depends on how creative the modeler is.  If you can get by with cardboard, plaster, sawdust for ground foam, and mostly used equipment, the price would be a lot less than using purely professional grade and new material.  Additionally, the larger scales tend to be more expensive than the smaller scales; however G scale is a great scale for scratch building, which can be much cheaper than using pre-built equipment.

So keep in mind how good your eyes are, the space available for use, and the price the setup will cost.  Finally, also keep in mind maintenance.  Smaller scales require more frequent cleaning of the locomotives and track, but larger scales require more time to completely clean a layout.

Do I have anyone confused yet?  If yes is the answer I'm about to go a bit easier on you.  Below I have a 1-5 star rating for each scale as well as a description for each of the following areas:

• Readability; ability to read letters on the side of the equipment
• Space; how little or how much space does a railroad take up
• Price; how much would a set up cost?
• Maintenance; how much extra work will this scale require?
• Overall; how well does this railroad fit into a small bedroom?

N SCALE 1:160

Readability: **

N scale is a hard to read scale, everything is small.  This is getting better with time as more precise printers, painters, and decal tools become available.  The high end equipment in this scale is amazing, but you still have to have decent eyes to read the letters due to the small font size.

Space: *****

N scale's small size gives it a very big advantage in small spaces.  A decent layout can be built on a 2x4 foot sheet of plywood, or can be on a very narrow shelf.

Price: ****

Because of the special tools required to make and maintain this scale, the price is slightly higher than HO scale, but is less than the larger scales.  A layout can be built for less than $250 without requiring too much corner cutting.

Maintenance: **

Although modern models do not require extensive work to be done, this scale requires a lot of cleaning because the electricity running through the rails only has a small area of contact, so one piece of dust could disrupt the flow of electricity.  In even the cleanest environments, bigger particles of material than dust will accumulate, so this scale needs to be cleaned often.

Overall: ***

If you can see, don't mind a little extra work, and don't have a lot of space or money, N scale is perfect for you.  If you need glasses for reading anything smaller than size 12 font, perhaps can afford a little more space and some money, then go larger.

HO SCALE 1:87

Readability: ****

HO Scale is a great scale for most people, which explains why it is also the most popular scale today.  Due to higher quality printing and painting, HO scale now has a variety of equipment where even the smallest numbers can be read if needed, although a magnifying glass is still necessary for some people.

Space: ****

HO scale requires roughly twice the space as N scale, but most people can afford that. A 4x8 sheet of plywood is a great starter for a layout if enough space is given, but in a small bedroom this layout is great for a shelf layout.

Price: *****

Due to the variety and amount of options available in this scale, HO scale's prices have remained low for a long time, so a layout can be built fairly inexpensively. a very good layout can be for $500 if a little balancing and budgeting is planned.

Maintenance: ****

This scale still requires frequent cleaning, however there are many easy ways to keep track and equipment clean and running. If you know what you need, parts can be bought off the Internet, while small sized screwdrivers work very well for many of the jobs needed.  This scale is just big enough that your work can be seen without aid from a magnifying glass or visor.

Overall: *****

Everything is balanced just perfectly for this scale. A small bedroom, a basic set of non-specialized tools, and a thin wallet are all that is required to have fun in this scale.  If you have a little extra space or cash, going larger is an option.

S SCALE 1:64

Readability: *****

Everything from this scale up can be read with ease for nearly anyone who is not legally blind.

Space: ***

Though it doesn't eat up the most space, S scale does require a bit of space, a spare bedroom is usually sufficient.

Price: ***

S scale is somewhat expensive, but G scale is worse.  What hurts the most is that S scale is not scratch builder friendly because everything is so specialized. 

Maintenance: ****

S scale is not as popular as most other scales, so parts are harder to find.  However, parts do not break as often as smaller scales, so this is not too big of a concern.  What is the hardest to maintain is cleaning.  A large layout in this scale will have many nooks and crannies that must be cleaned, to keep the trains running, cleaning is not as strict.

Overall: ***

Nothing against this scale, it's just that there isn't very much variety, and the track dimensions are such that really small, light, easy, and cheap set ups are difficult to design and build.

O SCALE 1:48

Readability: *****

Everything can be read in this scale even with poor eyesight.

Space: ****

O scale, if using O27, can be fit into a very small space.  If wanting true O scale, then more space is needed.  Most layouts in this scale are between bedroom and basement sized.  I built an 8' by 12' layout once in this scale and it was fun to run, plus it could fin into most bedrooms.  The downside is that track curvature needs to be very wide for large equipment, so the design is limited to around the walls or really complex walk-in designs unless wanting access hatches.

Price: ***

O scale is fun, very fun, but it is hard to get anything for cheap. Some things can be bought used, some can be made by hand, and this will affect cost, but only by 10-20%.

Maintenance: *****

Cleaning is required, but these trains will just keep going and going if taken care of properly.  Many older trains in this scale are made from steel, with little plastic used.  Quality is very high for most trains, even the lower costing set ups. 

Overall: ****

If you don't like work, if you have some money, and if you have a space that can fit anything bigger than a 4x8 sheet of plywood, O scale is for you.  O27 is also something to look into if looking for lower cost and smaller space.

G SCALE 1:32-1:20.3

Readability: *****

All numbers, letters, and even warning signs can be read in this scale. I personally can read most numbers and letters standing two or three feet away.  This scale is amazing if you have 20/20 vision, and still pretty nice if you are near or far sighted.

Space: **

Unfortunately, space is needed in this scale.  What many people do instead is take these trains outside, which is another plus.  Garden railroads are very popular for families because wasted space outdoors can be used while simultaneously leaving space inside for other activities.

Price: *

This scale is very expensive unless you are very crafty.  I have a low budget, but I still manage to do models in this scale because I make everything except the locomotives, car frames, and hardware myself.  Buildings can be made of real wood and look great, and Internet deals can be found if looking closely.

Maintenance: ****

If inside, G scale is great, requiring little cleaning, and little servicing.  If outdoors, more cleaning, plus much more authentic track work maintenance and servicing will be needed.  Many of the activities are, however, fun and quick if done correctly.

Overall: ****

About the only major drawback is space, everything else can be fixed or minimized.  If you have about $1000 to spend on a layout, a garden railroad is something different and fun to build/run/maintain.   If you have about $600 to spend on something for indoor use.  A porter engine, a few small wagons, and aluminum track will be all that is required (brass or Stainless for outdoor use).

As you can tell, each scale had distinct advantages and disadvantages.  So to answer the question, which is best?  My personal favorite is G scale due the the versatility, uniqueness, and options for scratch building.  However the choice is still up to you.  Look at you space available, amount of money willing to be spent, and look a your personal needs/wants.  I should also note that not all scales are included.  There are at least six narrow gauge scales, plus many European and Asian model train scales to be explored.  So get out and do more research, I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for in time.

One Switch Wonder, of micro origin...

One Industry Wonder

Many modelers do not have a lot of space for their model railroads. While expanding the garage, or adding on is an option, money is still a factor that will drive most away from expanding. While every modeler has a dream railroad, many modelers may never see that day when they're behind the throttle of a long train inside a thousand square foot room due to a variety of reasons; lack of space, lack of time, lack of money, other members of the family, too much maintenance, the list goes on. So rather than wait for an opportunity, modelers instead, search for other options.

Enter the realm of the micro train layout. Ever since the birth of the hobby, modelers have strove for two things; really small or really big. Modelers who went large went for large rooms, separate buildings, or formed clubs where everyone's assets could be pooled so no one man had to bear the entire burden of finances and maintenance involved with owning a large railroad. Modelers who went small figured out how to maximize space for the trains, movement within the room, and other activities. Over time, such a philosophy of modeling in the space available evolved into the micro train layout hobby. This idea even went further, and today there are contests to see who can make the smallest layout possible.

The modern micro train layout was described by the late Carl Arendt. Mr. Arendt came up with a great definition of a micro layout after viewing others' small works of model railroading, and building his share of micro layouts as well. Carl's website, carendt.com, has been maintained by others since Carl's passing. In that site, I found the best definition of a micro train layout:

"Micro layouts are small model railroads, usually less than three or four square feet in area, that nonetheless have a clear purpose and excellent operating capability." –Carl Arendt

One specific design on Carl's site is the tuning fork layout. A tuning fork, for those who don't know, is an instrument where two tongs vibrate, and the vibration makes a noise. For the less music-savvy readers, think of a steak knife with two prongs. The track plan follows the same idea, two spurs connected by one switch and tail track. The beauty of this set up is simplicity and prototype accuracy. In real life, there are many industries that have a spur on a branch line and the mainline, or require an extra siding if the industry is isolated and far from other rail lines.

These situations can be found all over the country and world, so this particular design lends itself well to the prototype. Gravel, mining, logging, other industrial, dockside, roadside transfer, grain elevators, coal depots, fuel depots, warehouses, just about any industry or industry type can be placed in a model where one or two spurs supply an industry. For an example, let's focus on something that is straightforward, yet versatile and unique; warehousing.

Warehouses are found everywhere, and handle nearly all types of freight. On top of this, warehouses also have several doors in most situations, which allow a series of cars to be unloaded and loaded. Combine this with cars being loaded and unloaded at the same time, and the need for additional cars and/or swap-outs, an operator can have a nice session doing nothing more than working a true-to-prototype puzzle.

The way I see it, there are two basic designs that can be used with a one switch layout serving a warehouse; 1, one spur services the warehouse and the other spur acts as a staging yard, or 2, one spur serves one warehouse, the other spur serves the another warehouse, or services an outdoor transfer for large objects like generators, tractors, combines, wind turbines, anything large that's moved by rail. As I had stated earlier, this design is versatile and a surprising amount of interest can be incorporated into the design.

In HO scale, this plan can be made into a micro layout, however the tracks would be very short, and would have limited capacity. To stay around 4 square feet, yet maximizing the track length, a layout would have to be about 8" wide and 72" (6 feet) long. Each spur track would have to be around 3 feet in length in order to allow enough room for the tail track. This is doable, but to me this isn't optimal. Thankfully, most modelers don't need to go this small. In HO scale, 8 feet of wall space, or a wall in the garage would be perfectly suited to this design.

If really short on space, this design and the size requirement meet in a near perfect harmony when in N scale. the same 6 feet of length, with spurs at around 3 feet in length, would hold about ten 40' boxcars, and could hold about nine 50' box cars, and would hold around seven 60' box cars. For an added challenge, an overhang or other necessary object can be hung from the roof of the warehouse, track side, and hangs over the track. If set at a minimum height, then hi-cube box cars and large objects couldn't go past a certain point. This type of obstruction, while not common, can't be called rare either. Such a situation, from an operators standpoint, can be both a challenge and a headache. Ultimately, it's up to the modeler to decide if such restrictions would help or hinder operations. One thing can be certain, however, that adding obstacles such as this complexes the operation of the layout.

While talking about an industry is fun to some (me), and talking about design is something we all do, it isn't the most exciting, so let's look at a few prototype photos for inspiration. Below are several photos of a warehouse in Brookings, SD known as The Crossroads Center. The warehouse had ten doors, each separated by 80-100 feet. In HO, an exact model of the track-side of the building would be around 10 feet in length. In N scale, this building is a bit more manageable at around 5.5 feet in length. If a spur track is to be this long, the tail track needs to be nearly as long in order to provide adequate room to shunt cars on the layout. In HO, we would be looking at about a 16-18 foot long layout, and we would be looking for about 8-9 feet in N scale.

Looking to the left, the set up can be seen as simple. One track serves the industry, and another track on the model would serve as staging or the mainline.

Try to count all the doors, there should be 10 of them. Each door has a concrete platform that sticks out which allows unloading crews to access the loads inside the box cars easily. Metal ramps, boards, and other methods of creating a ramp have been used in warehouses so that forklifts can access the boxcars and haul out large objects with ease.

This photo shows the side of the building where the tracks curve off and connect to the mainline. In this particular case, the mainline would be used as another spur, the switcher would shunt cars from the mainline to the industry and vice-verse. If wanting to model something with even more interest than a simple warehouse, another spur can be added to run parallel to the tracks in place currently. Then another warehouse, or an outdoor unloading ramp could be used for large pieces of equipment.

The map above illustrates the approximate layout of the warehouse and spur track. the white text box has a line drawn in which is roughly 200 ft, making the radius of the track somewhere between 500-600 feet, plenty big for a spur. This track immediately joins a mainline which runs through he town of Brookings. While this prototype lacks a second spur, the design can be modified to be more operational such as the diagram below.

While the prototype that I chose is far from glorious, the warehouse does offer a multitude of places to expand, and make the industry more interesting than it would appear. Modelers generally have one of two things that help us, attention to detail, and/or a sense of humor. In photo 3, windows to the warehouse office overlook the tracks, so office workers could be placed in a scene inside the building on the model. Each door can have a different scene altogether, and each scene is hidden and uncovered depending on how rail cars are placed. Ten doors means ten scenes that can be added. To keep with some variety, each door doesn't have to have a unique, funny, or weird scene, but I'd recommend adding at least a couple attention-grabbing scenes in the transfer doors.

Rail cars have a nice opportunity on this layout to be shown off. The best modeled train cars, the most beaten up, the most covered in graffiti, the most unique all have a place with this type of industry. If wanting to model a more urban environment, include a lot of trash. plastic bags, broken boxes, shattered crates, pieces of lumber, old tires, oil drums, tool boxes, hoses, shovels, picks, anything that could be considered junk can be included in the scene. Another big detail that is often overlooked is the sign. Photo one shows a large sign with the company name. On a model, modelers can simply reproduce the sign to be accurate, or modelers can take this opportunity to do something unique. Instead of a simple company sign, a pun, or a play on words can be used on the sign which would grab attention. This is especially helpful when the modeler has an audience to capture and intrigue.

On our models, it is hard to avoid showing the roofs of all the houses. For most of us, we don't like an eye-level layout because of the maintenance issues, however we usually compromise with something that stands between waist and chest level. Since the roofs will be seen, might as well make the most out of the space. A detailed roof can be intriguing because it isn't often that the public sees the roof of a large building, so the variety of shiny exhausts, ducts, and vents can look interesting. Not to mention that in addition to the normal roof details, another scene could be added on the roof of a pair of workers doing some antics while on break.

As I said, there is a lot to offer from such a simple industry.

Now for an example of what this industry would look like as a switching layout:

Above is a rough representation of a switching layout. The layout length would vary depending on the scale, but we shall assume HO or N scale is being used. For N scale, this layout would be only about 4-5 feet long and maybe only 8 inches wide. in HO scale, this is about 6-7 feet in length, but could manage on a 12 inch deep shelf. To make the layout somewhat interesting to operate, each spur would hold approximately four cars. Numbers 1,2, and 3 each have a door next to them that a car would have to be positioned at so the car could be worked. On top of this, if the goal was to arrange the cars at each door in a certain order, just like the real world, then this simple shelf becomes much more. After a few months, this might seem a bit boring (at least it would to me) but with something this cheap and small, most people wouldn't be too upset to move on to something else. This layout does exactly the job it's selected for, to entertain for the short term and/or provide a working model railroad in a small space that is both realistic and easy to create. If wanting to display your models at a train show, this model railroad would work great because of it's simplicity, and smaller size. Both add to the portability of the layout.

If prototypical realism is the main goal, the design such as the one below works beautifully.

Above is what this layout design would look like, but expanded to incorporate more of the scene and be more prototypical. In fact, the only prototypical change to this design is that the warehouse sits outside the curve of the spur, rather than on the inside which is where the layout edge is. To make the layout interesting, the warehouse could be positioned at the edge of the fascia with an open back, allowing interesting scenes to be taking place inside the building. The first spur track which serves the warehouse would hold 10 rail cars on the straight away plus about 5 more through the curve. The second spur may hold 7-8 cars, but would certainly hold enough to allow for one set of incoming cars, or one set of outgoing cars during an operating session. The tail track should hold around 7 rail cars plus the locomotive. For N scale, this design would only be about 6 feet by 5 feet with a depth not exceeding 14". In N scale, this design would be great to allow for a lot of scenery with complete scenes.

For HO scale, this is more of a room-sized plan. Although this is a far cry from a micro layout, many modelers have the opportunity to build a low profile, low impact shelf layout such as this. The measurements would be about 10 feet by 8 feet. In a living room, normally sized bedroom, or in the corner of a garage, this layout would find it's niche.

A normal day of operations for the room-sized plan would go something like this:

Operating session length is about 20-30 minutes in length. Operator starts locomotive and picks up cars on the second spur (in the corner of the layout) and proceeds to work the industry, taking out cars that need to be shipped elsewhere, and replacing full cars with empties for loading on the first spur which serves the industry. After about 10 minutes of changing out the cars, a new set comes into the layout, this time the cars are full of goods that came through with the daily local freight. The engine again switches cars, but only rearranges them instead to taking cars off the layout. Towards the end of the day, cars that were unloaded are taken out, plus any cars the warehouse got around to loading and filing paperwork related to the loaded cars. The engine then takes those empties and one or two full cars and places them on the second spur.

All movements must be done by moving a minimum amount of parked cars so that the loading crews in the warehouse have the best chance to load the cars. Loaded cars needing to be emptied may be placed farther down the spur to doors 6-10 while empty cars might be placed in doors 1-5. Doors can be assigned to each car that is incoming, while cars that are outgoing must either be left alone as much as possible, or are scheduled to be taken out. The warehouse tells the crew where to place cars along the warehouse.

While the operations require thinking a few moves ahead, the session is not too terribly hard to complete because of all the extra track space. What makes the operating session fun but long enough to be interesting is the sheer number of cars that may need to be switched. This particular industry might only need service two days a week, or may need service seven days a week. That's really up to the operator to decide.

Cripple Creek NGRR Part Two: A look at Railroad/ mining relationships.

Sometimes two things just make sense together.  The human riding the horse, peanut butter and jelly, a car and the road, the list goes on.  But nothing seems to have such a perfect fit than Mining and the railroads.

Mines need heavy equipment, and also need a way to haul vast amounts of material as cheaply as possible.  The railway needs to have industry, a reason to exist, which mines provide.  Without the railroad, mines in many places would not exist, and without the mines, many towns, cities, and many railroads would not exist.  This combination and relationship is seen very well in Colorado.  The railroad and mining grew up together, and both fell together.  At first glance, one would think that this relationship is over, however this is not true.  Railroads located near northeast Wyoming are currently hauling vast tonnages of coal fro the powder river basin to power plants and shipping centers across the Midwest.  Appalachia still maintains some mining railroad operations, and not to mention that the Mesabi range in Minnesota still has iron ore to unload.  Only in states such as Colorado does this relationship seem to be a distant dream.

There is a lot of information out on the web about gold mining and the railroads, so I'm not planning to go into great detail like the previous post, but I do want to touch all the bases, and this relationship is one of them.

The problem with mining in far-reaching areas was that it would be difficult to ship material back to processing plants.  Miners faced this in the Cripple creek district.  Even today, the pavement and gravel road that cars travel on is not exactly what you'd call easy driving.  Now imagine that instead of one tour bus, there are 50 rail cars each as heavy as a bus, and you are in charge of the train that must head up the hill from Colorado Springs, navigate the valleys which surround Pike's Peak, then you have to go over a pass on the opposite side of Pike's Peak than from where you came, and finally make a steep decent into a valley rich with gold.  Even the thought makes me not want to be an engineer (ironic right?)  But if the train engineers had it difficult imagine being the one in charge of choosing the route?  Surveyors had their work cut out for them. Below is a map from Colorado Directory webpage. Though not to scale, the map does give a general view of the area. The route the road takes on the map is roughly where the tracks went.

Image from www.coloradodirectory.com.  I do not own this image and has only been used for educational purposes.

Even after the railroads reached the mining district, there were still three problems to be solved:

1. Transfer the ore from mine to the train.
2. ship the loads safely over rough terrain to the mills for processing
3. Unload the ore from the train to the mill.

Problem one.

As talked about in the previous post, mines had several systems of mining gold ore and bringing it to the surface.  The most common method at the time would be to run a shaft elevator into the network of tunnels and haul the ore up by the bucket.  From there the gold would be sorted (at some mines) into various sizes to be shipped to various mills.  Once the gold was extrcted, it still needed to be loaded onto the rail cars.

Where possible, mines had the railroads build a spur to the mine where the gold would be dumped from large bins into waiting rail cars.  However some Mines were on terrain too steep or not stable enough for large trains, therefore the railroad would resort to either a system of chutes running down from the mine to the loading bins, or the mines would build their own, minimum gauge railway to haul ore down the hill to the bins.  Cripple Creek has examples of all three methods of loading:

Here is a system of loading bins that was directly below the mine, allowing for ore to be loaded into railcars.

We can see old trestle bents from a narrow gauge line (24" gauge or less) that ran from a mine to the tailings pile, where excess and non-gold rock was deposited.

 This chute came directly from one of the mines and ended about 10 feet above the road.  This chute either ran to a bin, or ran from a bin directly to the rail car.

Using my finger as a reference, here we see some really light mining rail that cars would have rode on.  The capacity of this rail may only have been a few tons per section (length of one piece of rail).  This is much less than rail used by larger trains that carried 100's of tons rather than a few.

Mines and miners (always being creative) built or ordered equipment specialized for mining.  the most famous of these is probably the mining tram.  Many mining trams existed, some were built in the shops, others were built in factories.  Cripple Creek has many examples of equipment on rails:

 This is one of many specialized cars for hauling ore, and/or materials through the mine shafts.  If someone knows what this car is, please tell me by commenting below as I have no clue.

 This is an end-dump hopper where the car would run to the end of the track, and then the hopper would dump off the front of the car (right side?) and either into a chute, waiting mainline rail car, or a storage bin.

 In the Cripple Creek District Mining Museum, the staff have on display a large, motorized, side dump car.  A person rode on one end of the car, and a motor would propel the car down the tracks.  This is unique because this car did not need a separate engine to move the 1-2 tons of ore within the hopper.

 A small, 18" gauge mining cart that was end-dumping is on display at a pull off half way between Cripple Creek and Victor, CO.

 Perhaps the most famous of all mining cars is the classic V-dump car.  There were many forms of this car.  This type was effective because a whole train could be assembled and pulled by a small engine.  10-20 tons of dirt could then be unloaded at once rather than 1-2 tons.  Also this car could dump off either side, meaning that piles of ore could be accumulated more evenly in a bin, or in the mainline rail car itself.

 Not quite as famous, ut certainly a hard worker was the side dump car.  Again, many forms (including the V-dump) were made, all had pretty much the same design.

 Looking closely at this V-dump car, you can see the mechanism which the car was rotated on.  acting like two gears, a special cradle accompanied by an arc-shaped assembly was used to rotate the car without the hopper falling off or offsetting the balance.

 Here we can see another motorized dump car.  Below shows the various control mechanisms.

Problem two

Although these mining trams are neat, they weren't meant to go more than a few hundred yards.  Mainline railroads needed to come to the mines, or as close as they could, for the gold ore to be shipped effectively.  Priority one was that the gold had to be easy to off-load and load.  Two types of cars could be used; the gondola, or the hopper.

The gondola is a rail car that has a floor and four sides, and is set low.  This was a good, all around car to haul materials.  It's downside is that a gondola (or most of the types produced) couldn't be unloaded easily.  The Hopper was a much taller gondola, but had the addition of emptying by gravity. through openings in the bottoms of the car.  The designs for both were pretty simple and straight forward.

I am continuing to look for photos that relate to this part of the post, and unfortunately haven't struck lucky yet, so I cannot load any photos that are available for my use.

The route the trains took to go in and out of the mining district is through the mountains on the west side of Pikes Peak.  Referring to the map above, the railroads took a route heading from divide to cripple creek roughly where the road is, and from cripple creek to victor via a route that will be discussed in part three of this series of posts.

Problem three

Once out of the wilderness and back to civilization, the gold ore had to be unloaded and processed in large mills.  Mills of this time period was processed using the chlorination method, where chlorine was introduced.

The extraction and purification of gold through chlorination is simple chemistry.  I don't need to dive too deeply into this process, but essentially when gold ore is introduced to chlorine, the pure gold particles tend to attach themselves to the chlorine.  Later the chlorine is removed, and thus the gold falls out of solution so the gold deposits form, giving miners very pure gold.  This process worked much better than previous mechanical methods of extraction which were listed in part one of this series.

What modelers want to model however, is not chemistry but the physical movements of railroad cars in a mill.  I must apologize because I have not found an adequate source of information yet, but I promise to do a follow up later on when I stumble upon reliable information related to railroad, gold mill operations.

What I can tell you is that gold mills were very large structures, usually, and required dozens of cars daily.  However just like the railroads that carried the gold, the ore mills are now gone.  One fascinating feature about the mills that I can talk about is called a stamp mill.  The stamp mill's job in the refining process was simple, crush the gold ore into smaller fragments.  Large mines had a stamp mill attached to them that would break the gold into more manageable sizes, and so a Google search about stamp mills is very helpful for a modeler who wants to model one.

So this wraps up the hardest portion of the series to write.  you may wonder why this is, and the difficulty lies in that I have no information, yet this is a topic worth mentioning, so I feel bad for not being able to come up with more examples, but unfortunately those examples haven't been found yet.  But keep a look out down the road for a follow up when I find a good source of information that is available for my use.  If someone has found a reliable source, I urge you to please comment below with a link or some sort of search phrase that can be used.

Part three will finally get to the best piece of historical information still in the area, the Cripple Creek Narrow Gauge railway!