Mountain Extension - Official Work Thread

[Bill Reidy]

Thanks Mike.  If I'm reading the topo correctly, it looks like the grade is fairly level or rises very gradually north->south north of the bridge.  Based on the bridge diagram, the bridge looks level, and the topo shows the grade starts to climb south of the bridge.

[Wayne Laepple]

If the bridge is raised 3 feet-plus above the current grade, to about 25 feet above sea level, in order to come back down to meet the current grade on the west side at a reasonable rate, the runoff would have to extend at least 700 feet (1% grade) north toward Route 218, reaching the current grade well beyond the end of the curve and somewhere around 300 feet from Route 218's right-of-way. That doesn't leave a whole lot of space for a runaround track or anything else. Going south, the runoff would be about 350 feet, almost level, to meet the 24 foot contour line. Neither of these back-of-the-envelope estimates takes into account the sub-ballast, ballast ties and rail. I had to do a similar exercise in order to raise a bridge over a highway to clear taller trucks some years ago, and I as I recall, we ran off each end for about 500 feet to meet the exiting grade. Your mileage may vary.

[Mike Fox]

Actually, the grade south and north rise from the bridge site, so the length required to get back down to original height is a lot shorter than Waynes estimate. Jason has it figured around 250 feet south, and about the same to the north.

Bill, the climb is steady until we get to location 9, see the map in the last newsletter, then it increases slightly and starts into some curves. Last climb from beween location 2 & 1 increases to what must be 3%.

[Jason M Lamontagne]

An important detail in figuring grade is that the final rail height would have been about 12” above current grade height anyway (grub off 4”, add 6” stone, 6” 4” rail).  Therefore the 3’ 2” is really only a change of 2’2”.  The grade to the north of the bridge indeed rises up- haven’t surveyed that but I’d estimate 12” in 200’.  So it’ll all smooth in fairly nicely.

Jason

[John Kokas]

So if I understand both Mike and Jason correctly;  if the bridge remains at the "higher" height, with some small amount of fill and then the new track, we are essentially level from the bridge north to 218.  Southbound grade get eased for the first 1000 or so feet heading up the mountain.  Makes for a good terminus and also to get a run at the mountain.  Love it when a plan comes together   

[Wayne Laepple]

Well, it all works out nicely if you have all the numbers before you. 12 inches of rise in 200 feet is a 0.5% grade. Much better than what I estimated based on the contour numbers on the map. If a transit is set up on the bridge, which is presumed to be level, and the grade is maintained level out to the point where it encounter the current grade southbound, you'd be able to get a fairly decent run for the steeper grade ahead.

[Eric Larsen]

I wonder what the grade height was originally?  We are only looking at what exists now after almost 100 years of erosion and logging operations that widened and lowered the top of the grade a bit.  I would think it prudent to have the area north of the bridge start a slow southward incline to the bridge so that it could be as high off of the brook as reasonably possible.  That would also serve to minimize the amount of the grade further south and help get a better running start.  Of course I understand that gets expensive as more fill material is required but that would be the best way to do it I would think. 

[James Patten]

I visited Trout Brook bridge site this morning, and the water has gone down quite a bit.  Here's a comparison photo of Saturday vs today:



Here's the actual photo I took:


And, for comparison, here's what the brook looked like in the summer of 2016 in the same location:

[Mike Fox]

I really like your split frame picture James. That is very interesting. Now to do a split frame of summer 2018 construction vs summer 2016

[James Patten]

Mike as long as you leave the birch stump there I'll be able to line up the shot next summer 

[Mike Fox]

2 chances...

[Mike Fox]

We had 2 seperate crews working today. Fred and I burned all the brush at Trout Brook, While Jason, Randy, Steve L, Steve Z, JB, and Eric S cut their way down the mountain. Jason was excited, as each tree revealed more and more of the beauty that the Narrow Gauge is all about. Curves and cuts. Anyway. Look at the photo series I took.

Lets start at Trout Brook. Please note, the blue can is further away from the fire than appears..









Down the Mountain (or up from Fred and I..)


Fossel Access Rd Looking North


WW&F Property Line looking North, Steve L. on the left.



Looking at Location 2, Jason on the left and Eric is in the orange chaps.


Location 2 had some flow during the last rain event, and froze to the trees.


Location 3 looking South


The Slide, Location 4, looking South, Jason and Randy working in the distance


Location 5 (Orange stake at right) looking North


Location 6 "the Pinch Point" looking South


Standing on Location 7 looking North at Location 8 (bright spot in the snow)


Looking South at Location 8


Looking North from the above photo at Locations 9 & 10. Last curve to the bridge is in the distance.

[Mike Fox]

I checked on Location 1 this afternoon. The dirt line on the right inside of the culvert would have been the water line. Looking in from the outlet.

[Bill Reidy]

Looks like the culvert size was well chosen.  Thanks Mike.

[Bill Reidy]

Once completed, this is going to be a spectacular section of narrow gauge.