Rio Grande Southern's Ophir Loop.


I also think that for me the fact that the Rio Grande Southern maybe ran a couple trains a day, is attractive. I'm a Lone Wolf operator and the outlooks for a change to this is not good.
 
I have always liked the looks of D&RGW, RGS K-27 and K-36 Mikados. I like their squat looks and smaller size, what triggered my interest in the RGS is that in the fall of 2014, the wife and I took a tour of Colorado and Northern New Mexico, while there we rode the Durango and Silverton train from Silverton to Durango. The three hour trip on the D&S put the spark of Narrow Gauge in my brain. The Rio Grande Southern had been an interest of mine for many years and with a subscribed to the Narrow Gauge and Shortline Gazette for many years, the ride on the Durango and Silverton Narrow Gauge train, sealed the deal. Although, in the end, I feel that my HO layout is good and that I love what I have done so far and will likely stay with my HO Northern Pacific Layout.

When I get done with my Summer activities away from Model Railroading, the fall always brings me back to Narrow Gauge for a short time, until I get my layout up and running again. I find the Ophir Loop to be so interesting, along with Vance Junction and the Telluride branch of the RGS. However, it might be that some day I will build and Sn3 switching layout. Maybe Vance Junction would be a good area to model.
 
Mark .. Did your travels happen to take you by the Cumbres and Toltec RR in Northern New Mexico/Colorado?
 
Sherrel, the tour stopped at Chama, at the High Country restaurant. The Cumbres and Toltec is still on my To Do list.
 
NP2626 said:
D94R,

Would the railroad your describing be the Colorado Midland. Also, I could not find a Busk, Colorado and all I could find for Ivanhoe is a Lake by that name. I don't know much about the Colorado Midland other than it was standard gauge. Could you fill us in a bit more about what you're talking about?
Click to expand...

You've got it, the Colorado Midland Railway. Busk and Ivanhoe were station stops at either end of the the Busk-Ivanhoe tunnel which was built so the CM could stop using the High Line which wound it's way back and forth over the mountain (via Hagermans Pass) the tunnel now cut through. The Busk Tunnel Railway Company owned the tunnel and leased it to the CM on a 999 year contract. So, why model the High Line between Busk and Ivanhoe if the High Line was bypassed with the tunnel? Well, I was being a it cheeky but half serious at the same time.

In 1899 the CM no longer wanted to pay the fee's of using the tunnel (50 cents per ton, and 50 cents per passenger I believe) and decided to put the High Line back in use after two years of non-use. The significance here is the High Line was shut down for 77 days due to an ongoing blizzard, hence my tongue-in-cheek statement that modeling a static model railroad would be accurate.

This crippled both the CM and the BTRC which ultimately ended with the CM buying the tunnel and the High Line ultimately abandoned.




So Busk doesn't exist without the RR anymore, you'd have to look at old RR maps, and Ivanhoe is where you found Loch Ivanhoe. Researching Hagerman Pass (the High Line) will fill you in with more detail than you can want. But this is an image of the area I talk about on the Busk side of the mountain. Busk is bottom center of the depiction and Ivanhoe would be on the other side of the pass. The Busk Ivanhoe tunnel exists now only to serve as a drainage tunnel for Loch Ivanhoe to the east side of the mountain (Busk side).
S1002706_1.jpg



W.H. Jackson took quite a few photos of the pass as well.
CM_HagermanTunnel.jpg
 
Neat Stuff, thanks for sharing. I see that Andrew Dodge who models the C&M in Proto 48 O scale, is one of the highlighted layouts in Great Model Railroads 2018 and he outlines Ivanhoe and Busk on his layout.
 
D94R said:
You've got it, the Colorado Midland Railway. Busk and Ivanhoe were station stops at either end of the the Busk-Ivanhoe tunnel which was built so the CM could stop using the High Line which wound it's way back and forth over the mountain (via Hagermans Pass) the tunnel now cut through. The Busk Tunnel Railway Company owned the tunnel and leased it to the CM on a 999 year contract. So, why model the High Line between Busk and Ivanhoe if the High Line was bypassed with the tunnel? Well, I was being a it cheeky but half serious at the same time.

In 1899 the CM no longer wanted to pay the fee's of using the tunnel (50 cents per ton, and 50 cents per passenger I believe) and decided to put the High Line back in use after two years of non-use. The significance here is the High Line was shut down for 77 days due to an ongoing blizzard, hence my tongue-in-cheek statement that modeling a static model railroad would be accurate.

This crippled both the CM and the BTRC which ultimately ended with the CM buying the tunnel and the High Line ultimately abandoned.


So Busk doesn't exist without the RR anymore, you'd have to look at old RR maps, and Ivanhoe is where you found Loch Ivanhoe. Researching Hagerman Pass (the High Line) will fill you in with more detail than you can want. But this is an image of the area I talk about on the Busk side of the mountain. Busk is bottom center of the depiction and Ivanhoe would be on the other side of the pass. The Busk Ivanhoe tunnel exists now only to serve as a drainage tunnel for Loch Ivanhoe to the east side of the mountain (Busk side).
Click to expand...


In the W.H. Jackson photo you posted, it appears like the pass is filled with trains coming down the mountain! However, upon closer scrutiny it can be determined that these are actually Snow Sheds. That's a pile of snow sheds!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been looking at the Hagerman Pass area of Colorado on Google Earth, D94R is right, this area is just as interesting as the Ophir Loop area. Hagerman is standard gauge, whereas Ophir is 3 foot Narrow Gauge.
 
I just read an article in the June 1999 Model Railroader magazine entitled "Colorado Spectacular! Ophir loop in On3" In this article written by Lee Vande Visse, the builder of the layout (Dennis Ferguson) describes operations on his his Ophir Loop as somewhat lacking in operational interest, as there isn't much switching to do, you simply enjoy running trains through the spectacular scenery. Myself, being far more interested in the building of a layout than actual operations, this sounds like exactly what I want from a layout.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I were 57, instead of 67, I would tear out my old HO layout and get going on an Sn3 layout. I know, nobody is assured of the length of their life and if I was 57, again, I could die at 57 1/2 years of age. Some of you would likely be of the opinion, "Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead", and I can't disagree with you. However, I have always been pretty cautious about the decisions I have made in my life. All I can say is that the decision to scrap what I have done and begin anew will take considerable consideration on my part to make.

In the mean time, I hope you will allow me this thoughtful look at the Rio Grande Southern's Ophir Loop area. It IS an interesting portion of the line. Another factor in the decision making process is the known fact that my layout room will not really allow me to do justice to what it is I would like to do!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NP2626 said:
I just read an article in the June 1999 Model Railroader magazine entitled "Colorado Spectacular! Ophir loop in On3" In this article written by Lee Vande Visse, the builder of the layout (Dennis Ferguson) describes operations on his his Ophir Loop as somewhat lacking in operational interest, as there isn't much switching to do, you simply enjoy running trains through the spectacular scenery. Myself, being far more interested in the building of a layout than actual operations, this sounds like exactly what I want from a layout.
Click to expand...

You sound like our Jim (HOexplorer) of PCM&T fame whose main interest is Photography of the scenes he has created and instructional how to's. Unfortunately badly affected by Photobucket's impending bankruptcy and onerous attempts to squeeze funds from it's long time members (they keep sending me offers of $10 off the $399 annual fee. I'm so tempted)
 
Well, I have broached the subject with the wife. She was saddened by the idea I would throw away what I have done so far on the HO layout; but, didn't seem averse to the idea of my starting over.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even though my wife doesn't seem surprised by the idea of my tearing out the existing layout and starting over, this doesn't mean "Full speed ahead"! There is much consideration on my part before deciding to get on with it; or, keep going with the HO layout.
 
If you proceed -- Are you planning Sn3? What are you planning for motive power? Sn3 stuff is not cheap.
After purchasing several HO locos and a ton of detail parts -- I am still leaning towards On30 where I can more readily scratch build stuff and still use HO track - could even operate my HO locos too!
 
At this time, yes I would go with Sn3 and yes, locos are not cheap! However, I would only have two to three as opposed to now, with HO, where I have 22 locos.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Toot, it was better than just "Whatever", we talked about the IDEA for 20 minutes or so. I do think she thought it bit crazy after all the hard work involved in the layout I have. In the end, I do agree with her; but, the heart wants, what it wants. I need to sit down at my drawing board and draw a scale track plan. If I can fit what I want to do in the area I have, then I can do some more critical thinking about the idea.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I used to do some house renovating. I'd hate to tell you how many times I'd be just about finished a modification which was good, only to see how it could have been much better. It's like a sore toe, you just can't ignore it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top