Updated Buffalo Plan | 9 Comments - Click Here :

Riverview Depot wasn't much of a structure - more of a shelter. The period was probably the 1920s, as the locomotive has a Ridgeway spark arrester in place. Riverview was apparently the station for access to the Buffalo Park family resort, and I believe was located southwest from this point. Derrell Poole Collection

View of Buffalo from the west looking southeast early 1930s(?). The hotel is long gone, but other structures seen in the earlier view are still apparent. By this time, the highway for automobiles has been cut into the hillside north of the tracks. This is a wonderful look at the through Pratt Truss bridge and its intriguing stone bridge abutments.  You can also see the road bridge over the river at the south end of town. Several cars sit on the spur in front of the stock pens, and there are piles and piles of cut lumber. If anyone has an idea of what the tower like structure is, I'd be interested. Derrell Poole Collection

    Derrell Poole - See the revised plan below (sorry for the poor image quality, as it is a jpeg conversion from a CAD file). After I published the first plan, I realized the station of Buffalo was compressed a little more than I liked (that plan was developed over a year ago), and I noticed there were other compromises I didn't like. I also really wanted Riverview on the layout – all I had was the tank. Then, I was having reservations about the west fiddle yard. Rolling it around seems risky. I still have the east yard, but eventually I’ll build further around the corner and we’ll see what happens then.

    This plan compresses Buffalo only about 20%. It also depicts the town (at least that portion north of the river) a little better and even includes the Hotel. More research, more photos, more detail. Riverview is much more compressed – more than 50% - but at least it is there.

    All of the additional real estate I wanted forced me to get creative with the space I am working in. It soon became apparent with all of the “unrelated” stuff in the south half of the room, I wasn't going to get what I wanted if I didn't find a way to use some of the north half of the room (up is “real” south; Buffalo is oriented correctly with the room where Riverview is looking north). But how could I accomplish this? With a short section of shallow shelf supported by a few studs to the left of the furnace/water heater, I could swing the track back around behind the Buffalo portion or the layout. This would provide the length needed for Riverview.

    The physical space between the two stations leaves plenty of room for a fixed yard – technically a fiddle yard and nominally called Denver. This is of no particular prototype location – just a place to switch up trains and turn engines. The “Denver” yard is fortuitously hidden from the rest of the layout.

    The three bridges happily demonstrate 3 different styles used on the railroad. Bridge 1054 is nothing more than a single span of Pile Trestle. In fact, some documents called these culverts. A span of bridge on a C&S trestle was 16’. These were everywhere and may have made up 80 – 90 percent of the bridges used on the line. The Pratt Thru Truss, no. 1056, was much less common on the line. This one was just less than 100’ in length. Some day I hope to make a brass model of it, but until then a CV 1902 plastic kit will have to do. This bridge also had wonderful stone abutments at either end. The third bridge, no. 1057, was a twin span Strain Beam type, and while there were several of these on the RR, they too were rather rare. Also the River at this bridge will be flowing away from the viewer – unlike the other two crossings.

    I've added contours to the land to suggest some idea of how the land looked along the tracks. I still haven’t fully decided how I will contour the layout. The elevation differences between contour lines is ½” – the thickness of fiber soundboard or ceiling tiles. But I may go with the blue foam. It is more expensive but it is also about ½ the weight. I will still have to glue a more suitable roadbed material to it, as it does not hold any type of fasteners very well. On the other hand, I will have to use twice as many sheets of the fiber board so it may not be any cheaper. But the fiberboard will make a more substantial sub base to the roadbed. Both are going to be messy.  I am going to use as little plaster as possible. I don’t like plaster and may use it only to cast rocks abutments and building parts.

    I've spent the last few days getting my tools ready. My saw and joiner are all set up and the router will be mounted shortly. Hopefully I can start cutting wood this weekend.

Derrell