# New Ballast load for the SJRP



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

This week over 33,500 cubic yards of new ballast was delivered to the SJR&P. This weekend crews began moving the ballast to the high line which is under construction. It is hoped that the majority of ballast can be moved during the winter months so that operation can commence over the new section of the railroad in the spring.

Stan Ames
SJRP Operations
http://www.tttrains.com/sjrp/


----------



## Del Tapparo (Jan 4, 2008)

How many yards? I didn't do the calculation, but that must be several acre feet of ballast. How many miles of track do you have?


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

33,500 yards equals about 50,000 tons. Even divided by 20 for 1:20 scale that's 2,500 ton or 5 million pounds. I think you're off by a factor of 1,000 or 10,000 but its all in the gearing I guess







.

-Brian


----------



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

Lets see if I have the math right as I could have made a mistake in the calculation. 1 cubic yard in 1/1 scale is 20.32 yards by 20.32 yards by 20.32 yards in F scale. If the math is correct then 1cubic yard in 1/1 equats to 8390 cubic yards in F. 

Its going to take a lot of trains to move that pile. 

Sometimes it is fun to represent ones railroad in scale terms. For example representing ones curves in degrees instead of radius. For whats its worth my minimum mainline curve is 43 degrees and my railroads climbs 250 ft and after this extention is complete I will have 10 miles of track. 

Enjoy 

Stan 
http://www.tttrains.com/largescale/


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By StanleyAmes on 12/06/2008 9:12 PM
Lets see if I have the math right as I could have made a mistake in the calculation. 1 cubic yard in 1/1 scale is 20.32 yards by 20.32 yards by 20.32 yards in F scale. If the math is correct then 1cubic yard in 1/1 equats to 8390 cubic yards in F. 





No! Physics doesn't work that way! One ton in 1:1 does not equal 20 x 20 x 20 tons (8,000 tons) in 1:20 scale! Oy vey! Good thing you're not an economist (or maybe you are???







).


-Brian


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Hmmmm... if you had an object that was 20 ft by 20 ft by 20 ft and it weighed 1 ton, (a box of feathers?) then made a model of it in 1:20 scale it would be 1 ft by 1 ft by 1 ft, right? and that would be a model of a 1 ton box (of feathers). So that original 20 x 20 x 20 box would be a 8000 ton box in 1:20 scale.


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

Goodness me. 
Who would have thought. 
Brought to Earth by a pile of dirt.


----------



## Guest (Dec 7, 2008)

i tried to calculate that in metric numbers. 
1 cubic yard = more or less 1 cubic meter. 
1 cubic meter x 20 x 20x 20 = 8000 cubic meter. 
a 12 meter (40 foot) hopper roughly loads 24 cubic meter 
a 1:20 hopper loads aprox. 0.003 real cubic meter 
so the mound of stones should be about 333 loads of 1:20 hoppers. 
or, expressed otherwise 333 loads of three liters (quarts) each for the 1:20 modell. 
or 333 loads with 24,000 scale-quarts each. - or about 2 million scale-gallons of room in total. 
estimating a weight of about 8 pound per gallon for this gravel, it should be about 16 million scale-pound in total. 
so, for me the amount comes to about 16,000 metric tons weightwise, or 8,000 metric tons spacewise. 
that should be about 8,500 scale - cubic yards of gravel. 

more or less.... (used a lot of aproximations)


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

What I find disturbing is that coal hoppers could not be loaded with stone as shown in the photo above. Coal is about +/-40 cu ft per ton, whilst gravel (depending on size and moisture) is 20 cu ft per ton or less. 

In the event that coal hoppers are to be used in stone service, the fill for most was about 1/3 to 1/2 (edit, from) the top of the car, and often additonal cribbing was to be installed in between the slope sheets and ends to prevent collapse. Careful attention had to be paid to total load weight also. 

Consult the AAR's "Loading of Commodities on Open Top Cars" for further guidance in these matters.


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Garrett, 
I would agree it looks overloaded. Most ballast cars have a mark on them that says do not load above this line. More often then not the ballast is piled over the tops of the car like in the picture. At any rate the load it to big, and the rock is over sized for even mainline ballast. Ah but if we all could be nit pickers! 
Having run a work train as a engineer I know for a fact that the we get cars that overloaded, and over tonnage. It's kind of fun to dump ballast for 12 hours at 2mph!  Dumping side dump cars are even more fun as the train rocks back and forth when the MOW crew dumps the rip rap! 
http://www.herzogcompanies.com/Gallery/Railroad Services/Rapid Discharge Cars.jpg 

Craig


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I think the first post was a teaser, but Stan revealed his "plan" in his second post: 

"Sometimes it is fun to represent ones railroad in scale terms." 

20.3 cubed is indeed is 8390, and 33,500 divided by 8390 is almost exactly 4 cubic yards. 

If you start with a scale yard, and then "scale up" to 1:1, you would multiply 20.32 x 20.32 x 20.32 (a cubic yard in 1:1 if you started from a scale yard, each "side" of the scale yard would be 20.32 times larger) 

20.32 cubed is 8390, the conversion of scale cubic yards to real cubic yards. 

33,500 scale cubic yards is 4 1:1 cubic yards. I can believe Stan had 4 cubic yards delivered to his place. 

Single axle dump trucks (look this up on the Internet) commonly carry up to 6 cubic yards, so 4 cubic yards in the pictured dump truck is believable. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Curmudgeon (Jan 11, 2008)

Maybe, just maybe, this entire scenario will steer folks towards a greater understanding of the mind of the original poster, and how other facts, oh, just to be totally off-topic, let's say GEAR RATIOS can be so horribly mis-understood by some individuals (names specifically not mentioned). 

Oy, Vey my hindquarters!


----------



## StanleyAmes (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Spule 4 on 12/07/2008 11:08 AM
What I find disturbing is that coal hoppers could not be loaded with stone as shown in the photo above. Coal is about +/-40 cu ft per ton, whilst gravel (depending on size and moisture) is 20 cu ft per ton or less. 

In the event that coal hoppers are to be used in stone service, the fill for most was about 1/3 to 1/2 (edit, from) the top of the car, and often additonal cribbing was to be installed in between the slope sheets and ends to prevent collapse. Careful attention had to be paid to total load weight also. 

Consult the AAR's "Loading of Commodities on Open Top Cars" for further guidance in these matters. 


Garrett

I certainly would not like to be the cause for any disconfort. Overloaded hopper cars and poor training were cited as a cause for the derailment on the White Pass and Yukon railroad so there is a risk. The hoppers the SJR&P is using for this purpose were actualy built by the EBT to haul rock and were used in rock service for most of their life. I do not have photos to know if the load in the photo is indeed overloaded or not. Kevin may be able to shed some light on this interesting fact.

You might find the following photo of interest.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=203974&nseq=3

The C&TS has for the past year been using their K36 locomotives to haul 3 and 4 car ballast trains. The cars used are ex EBT 3 bay coal hoppers and please note the level of the loads in the photo. To protect the load up the grades the locomotive is normally coupled to the downhill side of the train and pushes the cars in much the same way as I am trying to recreate on the SJR&P.

Thinking is scale terms and at times operating your railroad like the prototype with as few model railroad thoughts as possible increases the illusion of operating a real railroad.

Its just another aspect of the enjoyment one can have in this hobby.

Enjoy

Stan
www.tttrains.com/largescale


----------



## up9018 (Jan 4, 2008)

I agree, I live along the UP and they will load their ballast cars until they absolutely cannot hold anymore, talk to any crew member and you'll find out the reason is: THEY'RE NOT MAKING MONEY HAULING THEIR OWN BALLAST!!! So naturally, they're going to do it in as few as trips as possible. Mainly the 'load line' stenciled on the side of the car is to prevent it from becoming too top heavy. But if you pile it high, you just put the responsiblity of being careful off on the train crew itself...nice.


----------



## TonyWalsham (Jan 2, 2008)

If you get a big enough sway up the crew could ballast as they go.


----------



## bnsfconductor (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By up9018 on 12/07/2008 6:57 PM
I agree, I live along the UP and they will load their ballast cars until they absolutely cannot hold anymore, talk to any crew member and you'll find out the reason is: THEY'RE NOT MAKING MONEY HAULING THEIR OWN BALLAST!!! So naturally, they're going to do it in as few as trips as possible. Mainly the 'load line' stenciled on the side of the car is to prevent it from becoming too top heavy. But if you pile it high, you just put the responsiblity of being careful off on the train crew itself...nice. 


Safety first, but if delays the train, well then throw it out the window. But if you get hurt its your fault. Interestingly enough I've broken more rules working with MOW crews on work trains then anyother time just so that we can get the job done. Work trains pay pretty good too!  Trains never wiegh what they are 'suppose' to. You find that out real fast when the train doesn't pull as you expected to with the HPT* that was listed.

Craig 

*HPT Horsepower per ton


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Sure hope you put a tie under that car if dumping through the doors. I'd hate to see you derail the train. Later RJD


----------

