…are standard gauge.
Washington RR Historical Society photo, shared under fair use for education.
Because there were VAST forests of Large timber in Western Washington and many hills and mountains! There were several short lines and short lived RR here in Kitsap County alone.
E. Paul Austin said:
Because there were VAST forests of Large timber in Western Washington and many hills and mountains! There were several short lines and short lived RR here in Kitsap County alone.
Yup. Note the “throwaway” log used as a stopper. That is the size of today’s trees.
So I would estimate the diameter of the log to be about 8 foot or less.
I measured the man (extrapolated to include his legs) to the top of his hand. That is almost exactly the diameter of the log. I’m 6’ 2" and I can just touch an 8’ ceiling in a house, and I’m sure that guy is not as tall as I am.
So the picture looks impressive, but the fact that it appears to be narrow gauge, and the man is standing significantly below the log itself is what adds to the illusion it is a huge log.
Also, the diameter of the stopper looks to be under 12". I don’t know the size of “today’s logs” but I would imagine that if you can buy lumber in 2 x 14" that this is a small log even by today’s standards. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)
Greg
From the fine book; Logging Railroads of Weyerhauser’s Vail McDonald Operation; “Late in 1882, Mr. Weyerhauer incorporated the Standard gauge Chippewa River and Menomonie Railway to harvest his own timber holdings in Chipewa Valley, Wisconsin.” After depleting Wisconsin they moved south and west to the Pacific Northwest … sure was handy to have the big stuff on hand.
My Great great great grand daddy was friends with Frederick Weyerhauser back east… When we lived at Tongue Point Naval base we crossed the river to tour the Longview plant…
The book is a dry read, but very interesting if you like that stuff and great pictures. A wonderful reference for std ga. logging.
The authors are: Frank W. Telewski and Scott D. Barrett.
I got it for Christmas when it came out…
John
Which guy are you measuring Greg, the one on the ground or the guy standing on the log? Say the guy standing on the log is 6’, but he’s got at least half of his length below him on the log still, so 6+3= 9’. A 8-9’ diameter log is still a decent sized log…
Someone is trying to sell the image from a print from the WA state archives…
http://www.ebay.com/itm/MARYSVILLE-NORTHERN-RAILROAD-POLICE-HUGE-LOG-LOGGING-WASHINGTON-WA-PHOTO-/361200323854
Hi all
An interesting question, concerning the diameter of the log.
If one draws the (approximate) horizontal vanishing points corresponding to the track axis (V1) and perpendicular to the track axis (v2) and admit parallel verticals, one can see several things:
- The log is tronco-conical (and not cylindrical) - as was to be expected since it is the lower piece of the tree trunk, and the largest one, deserving the honor of a photo;
- The man in the picture is nearer to the camera than the diameter of the trunk - about 1’ in front and 5’ to the side.
The height of the man from the assumed feet to the top of its hand (HM1) is 58.9 mm (at the arbitrary scale used in the CAD program where the photo was pasted). Pushing the man to the side, to the centerline of the track, its height (HM2) reduces to 52 mm. Finally, pushing the man back to the face of the trunk cut, its height reduces to HM3=49.8mm. The diameter of the trunk in this plane is, from the loading plane of the car to the top of the trunk, Dl=75.6 mm. We can the say that the diameter of the log is 75.6/48.8=1.51 times the height of the man. So the diameter of the log is approximatelly one and a half times the height of the man. If, taking into account that a century ago people were generally shorter than today, we assume his height to be about 7’, the diameter of the log will be about 10,5’.
An impressive piece of old growth…
José Morais
Headmaster of the Lapa Furada RR
Back in Eastern Canada our logs were smaller by 1928 but the loads got bigger!
Greg, take a look at the man standing on the face of the large log. He has his hand extended to the top of the log. Assume that he is of the average height for back in the day, somewhere around 5’9". Now, redo you math.
That is a standard gauge railroad. It just looks narrow minded because the log is so large.
Come up to Washington State. Paul and I will show you around. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)
For what’s its worth it appears that at least 3 engines for the Marysville & Northern RR were standard gauge - http://www.gearedsteam.com/shay/images_ma-mh.htm.
Again this assumes that this is a picture from that RR and that appears to be true - http://www.wsrhs.org/hphotos.htm
I’ll use redneck math. I am 5’ 9.5" tall. When my hand is extended above my head the center of my palm is 7’. From ground to my knee is 1.5’; so from my knee to the center of my palm is 5.5 feet. I assume the guy standing on the log is my height. The center of that log is about his knee. so the radius of that log is 5.5 feet making it and 11 foot diameter. I don’t know about other parts of the world but in North Idaho, one of the most forested states in the Union, it would be a challenge to find even very many old stumps that size. Western Red Cedar does it but only because of butt swell (yes I know I said butt swell). The only other two trees in Idaho forests that hope to achieve this are the Idaho White Pine (Western White Pine) and Northern Larch (Tamarack).
That’s a big tree.
That is a pretty doggone big log. That guy standing up by the log is only spanning about a third of its diameter. If he can reach 8 feet then that log is like 12 feet at the butt more or less. I’m thinking it was more…maybe as much as 15feet it really is hard to tell There are not many trees like that growing anywhere any more. That tree was probably upwards of a thousand years old! That one log if cut efficiently might easily build a fair size house. The wood was probably nearly free of knots too.
Alan Lott said:
Lots of very interesting logging railroad info here:
Alan, the WI&M Ry Co is the railroad my layout is based on. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-tongue-out.gif)
Mark Hadler said:
For what’s its worth it appears that at least 3 engines for the Marysville & Northern RR were standard gauge - http://www.gearedsteam.com/shay/images_ma-mh.htm.
Again this assumes that this is a picture from that RR and that appears to be true - http://www.wsrhs.org/hphotos.htm
Oh boy, those Shay’s look pretty nice… Hum a 1/29 Shay might look pretty cool on my layout… Hum, now creating a plausible backstory for it to be preserved in Washington State.
Craig the standard guage Shays do look nice. Now to model that scene in 1:29 what code rail would that be?
Craig Townsend said:
Mark Hadler said:
For what’s its worth it appears that at least 3 engines for the Marysville & Northern RR were standard gauge - http://www.gearedsteam.com/shay/images_ma-mh.htm.
Again this assumes that this is a picture from that RR and that appears to be true - http://www.wsrhs.org/hphotos.htm
Oh boy, those Shay’s look pretty nice… Hum a 1/29 Shay might look pretty cool on my layout… Hum, now creating a plausible backstory for it to be preserved in Washington State.
Craig, there are at least two Shays at Snoqualmie. http://www.wsrhs.org/washloco.htm
Snoqualmie, WA. Shay 3Tr. Agnew Lumber Co. # 1 1904.
Snoqualmie, WA. Shay 3Tr. Agnew Lumber Co. # 3 1920.
One Heisler
Snoqualmie, WA. Heisler 2Tr. Minnesota & Ontario Paper # 2 1923.
And three 2-6-6-2, similar to the Bachmann, with a bit of bashing.
Snoqualmie, WA. 2-6-6-2 Weyerhaeuser # 6 1928.
Snoqualmie, WA. 2-6-6-2T Weyerhaeuser Timber # 108 1926.
Snoqualmie, WA. 2-6-6-2T&T United State Plywood # 11 1926.
Mt Ranier also has two standard gauge Shays, in operation.
Mt. Rainier Scenic RailRoad./ Shay 2Tr./ Rayonier Lumber Co. # 3re 5/1910.
Mt. Rainier Scenic RailRoad./ Shay 3Tr./ Pickering Lumber/ # 11op 1/1929.
Lord, looking at that list, there are Shay’s all over the place, and most, if not all, are Standard Gauge.
Road Trip! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)
Randy McDonald said:
Craig the standard guage Shays do look nice. Now to model that scene in 1:29 what code rail would that be?
Randy, maybe the common 0 gauge code 148… (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)It looks pretty small.
Steve Featherkile said:
Lord, looking at that list, there are Shay’s all over the place, and most, if not all, are Standard Gauge.
Road Trip! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-cool.gif)
I forgot how many are still running, I didn’t even think of those when I made the first posting… Dang your making this much harder. Hum, a 1/29 live steam Shay??? No, I have too many other wish list projects first! The justification for having one needs to be clarified, ‘could’ have BN ran a steam special on the Lake Washington Branch (former NP) for railfans in the 1970’s? I have seen pictures during the NP days of the Casey Jones special that ran over the branch. I blame Devon for leading me astray! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)
