• The old 10x20 layout was built in two bedrooms after the wall between them was removed and was designed as a one person layout with a very narrow aisle.

• Eventually up to 6 people were trying to operate in a very crowded area - 'WE NEED A BIGGER ROOM' became an often repeated phrase.

• It was not a linear plan - tracks passed by the operator several times in opposite directions.

• It was a partial double deck design with 22" minimum radius curves - curves were too sharp for long equipment to operate on effectively.

• The passing sidings would only hold 12-car trains, including engines and caboose.

• Although it was a walk-in design, the benchwork was over six feet deep in places - this made it difficult to reach the back for maintenance and scenery building.

• The scenery was too severe - the two hidden helixes required very steep cliffs to hide them.

• 35% of the track was out of sight because of the two hidden mainline helixes and the hidden staging tracks and their approaches - trains were out of sight too often and too long.

• It was built without a geographical area in mind - the idea of a route from San Jose to Reno was chosen later to enhance operations.

• It was designed as a shortline and built for short trains - but, I have always liked long trains.

• It was designed more for scenery than for operations - now I wanted to get more involved with prototypical operations.

• Large layouts have always appealed to me.

• The crowded conditions taught me to allow adequate room for moving around.

• The 22" radius curves restricted the size of the equipment being operated around them - broader curves were necessary for reliable operation of passenger trains, for example.

• All hidden track should be avoided if at all possible.

• Difficulties with trying to fit the old existing trackplan into a realistic geographical area convinced me to start with the location first, then work out a trackplan to represent it.

• Operating sessions on Gary Siegel's Louisville & Nashville and Jim Providenza's Santa Cruz Northern layouts sold me on prototype operations - train crews should have a job to do and a dispatcher should control the traffic - there should be a purpose for the railroad.

• The San Diego's La Mesa club layout impressed me with a mainline long enough to allow long trains to be operated - 12 car trains were fine for a shortline, but long trains look great.

• After installing all hidden staging yards and their approach tracks underneath the layout AFTER it was built I vowed never to do that again - this time I planned carefully before starting construction to avoid costly redesigns and rework.

• A shelf type 'walkaround' layout with true linear design is much more enjoyable than an island type to operate since an engineer could stay with his train at all times.

• Scenery that was six feet deep may look great in photos, but it makes it extremely difficult to lay track, build scenery, and perform maintenance, even with access hatches.

• The many duckunders and access hatches on the old layout were awkward and uncomfortable to gain access to and should have been avoided.

• Trying to paint clouds and mountains on a backdrop after the hardshell is in place was much too difficult - the tendency was to avoid painting it at all - the backdrop should be planned and painted along with the construction of the benchwork.

• Making significant changes or add-ons to the benchwork and especially the roadbed and track was too difficult to do smoothly - transitions from the old to the new sometimes caused dips or humps in the trackwork which caused problems later - plan carefully up front to avoid these changes.

• A long mainline for lengthy runs and to allow operation of several trains at the same time.

• Double deck the entire layout to maximize the mainline length.

• No hidden track on the mainline - only a few tunnels up to 3 feet long were acceptable.

• Realistic switching areas - no 'time-saver' switching challenges (the prototype balances their designs between the easiest arrangement to switch and the cheapest to construct) .

• For variety, the bottom deck to be mostly level scenery and the upper deck to be mountains.

• The three main staging yards to be visible from the aisles.

• All main staging tracks and passing sidings to handle trains of up to 3 locos and 35 cars (25 feet long).

• The staging yards at each end of the mainline to hold at least 12 full length trains. Stub-ended staging yards were acceptable but reversing loop yards were preferred.

• Some kind of reverse loops at each end of the layout to allow continuous running and to turn trains between operating sessions.

• A helix to connect the top level to the bottom to facilitate preparing for operating sessions - to be used as additional staging tracks during regular operations.

• Santa Fe to be the main railroad modeled.

• Incorporate the main yard area of the old layout and use existing Sierra Western equipment.

• 36" minimum mainline radius - 32" in the helix, Sierra Western, and a few industrial tracks.

• #8 turnouts in the yard (#7 an exception at one end of the classification yard) .

• #8 turnouts minimum for sidings and spurs.

• #14 turnouts minimum for mainline crossovers.

• All exposed track to be handlaid.

• At least two, preferably four, visible interchange locations with other railroads.

• A section of the layout to include a second parallel railroad as 'competition'.

• The geographical area to be modeled must be close enough that I could easily visit it.

• One of the new DCC systems would be installed - the old ONBOARD to be scrapped.

• Full CTC dispatching - a dispatcher's desk and panel to be built out of view of the layout.

• Once a month operating sessions should be able to accommodate up to twenty-five people - a dispatcher, a yard master, an engine hostler, a tower operator, six switch jobs, five or six mainline crews (engineer and conductor), two or three local train crews, and a division superintendent.

• Layout to be an around-the-wall plan with at least one peninsula. No duckunders to gain access to the layout to be allowed - limited use for maintenance only.

This layout was conceived as the replacement for the 10'x20' Sierra Western which was built in two adjacent bedrooms after the common wall between them was removed. Although this layout had much operating interest and ran well, it proved to be too crowded for the five or six of us who got together on Friday nights. After about two years of fantasizing about a larger layout, my wife Mary agreed to consider building a 24'x35' room over the garage and part of the house. Every time I met someone who had built up over their house, I'd ask them about the experience and cost. After several such conversations this idea fell out of favor. A chance conversation with a friendly building inspector opened up the possibility that our corner lot could provide plenty of space for an addition on the ground level. He told us that we could go out towards the side street to within 12 feet of the sidewalk and to 5 feet of the back fence. At that point we began to consider adding on to a corner of the house.

After a few more months of investigation by contacting the San Jose building permits department, a couple of general contractors, the mortgage broker we had used to buy our house, and the loan departments at our banks, we decided that this could actually work out. I sketched a 28'x58' addition to the house which was to extend from behind the detached garage and wrap slightly around a corner of the house where the kitchen/dining areas were located. The old laundry room behind the detached garage, the patio and part of the roof would have to be demolished to make way for the new room. The addition would also have the added benefit of providing direct access to the garage from the kitchen area of the house.

The new addition would include an 1,135 sq. ft. train room measuring 47' long and 28' at the widest part, a new 242 sq. ft. den/crew lounge which would include a modernized laundry area, a new direct entrance from the garage into the house, and a separate entrance into the den/crew lounge and train room opposite the front door to the main house. Access from the main house to the crew lounge/den would be through a new double door opening from the breakfast nook area of the kitchen allowing the entire addition to be closed off from the main portion of the house. To heat and cool the train room only when desired, a programmable thermostat was to be installed to close an electrically powered damper in the forced-air duct from the existing house. Considerable storage would now be available in the attic by an easily accessible pull-down staircase. An existing fence would be replaced by a new fence next to the sidewalk to provide enough space alongside the new addition to park an RV or boat, etc. A new carport was also planned next to the garage.

I obtained three bids for the construction. Suprisingly, the low and high bids were almost $20,000 apart! After analyzing the cost of the project, and talking to a neighbor who was a sub-contractor, I decided to assume the general contracting responsibilities myself. This would ultimately save me an additional $15,000 from the lowest bid ($35,000 from the highest!).

We began by refinancing our home. We timed this to take advantage of the lowering interest rates in 1994. The money saved with the lowered interest rate covered most of the cost of the addition - a crucial factor. I then hired an architect to draw up formal plans from my rough sketches and then dealt with the city building permit department (11 visits total). After paying the permit fees (at nearly $8,000, these fees almost killed the project!) and with all the necessary permits in hand I hired my sub-contractor neighbor to remove the patio and laundry room and prep the connecting walls.

On the morning of Nov. 1, 1994, the point of no return was reached with the first sledgehammer blow to the walls of the old laundry room. That evening, when Mary and I came home from work, we stood amidst the rubble that once was the laundry room and for a few minutes felt real fear that maybe this had been a mistake! I grabbed my camera to capture forever that fatefull moment. Three days later the old laundry room, patio and part of the main roof had been removed to make way for the new addition. The same sub-contractor agreed to handle all framing material orders and deliveries after I had established an account at a local lumber supply company. Through him I made contacts with most of the sub-contractors I would need for the project.

The next sub-contractor came in and did the necessary site excavation and poured the foundation. An interesting sidenote was the last minute decision to excavate and pour, now instead of later, a 5' wide by 12' long by 5' deep structure for what quickly became known as 'THE PIT'. The pit was needed to eliminate a future duckunder which would otherwise be required to gain entrance to the room. Here the track level across the entrance doorway would be 46" on the lower deck and 63" on the upper deck. The pit will allow us to build a short flight of stairs down from the crew lounge and then up into the train room. Four or five steps will be necessary to adequately clear the lowest part of the benchwork. During the necessary 'pre-pour' inspection the foundation contractor told the inspector it was to be a vault for storing valuables. Seeing the puzzled look on the inspector's face the contractor said 'I guess he must have a lot of valuables'. Apparently that was good enough for the inspector!

After the foundation - and 'the pit' - hardened, another contractor build up the floor, walls and roof framing. During this time I took a few days off and installed the new laundry room plumbing, including replacement of some problem plumbing under the existing house, and rerouted the gas line for the relocated water heater.

I hired other sub-contractors to pour the cement for the carport and sidewalk alongside the garage, an electrician to install the new relocated service panel at the back of the addition and connect it to the existing house wiring, a roofer to install the roof shingles to match the existing roof, another to install the guttering, and still another to deliver and install the windows. The last week of December the first sub-contractor came back and completed the new fence along the street side of the new addition and two more sub-contractors applied the exterior stucco and the new ductwork and damper for the heating system.

And then on December 31, New Years Eve, the last contractor cleaned up the construction debris and installed the last door and he was done. The addition was now 'watertight', a construction term meaning all outside surfaces were complete and sealed from the elements. At 5:40 I wrote him the last check, and then it was all mine! I stood in my new room and even though it was only a shell with a bare wood floor, without interior walls, ceiling, electricity or insulation, I was ecstatic! With a flashlight I imagined where the tracks would go, following them around the bare walls and mentally running my first train. That is, until my wife came out to prod me into getting ready for what was without a doubt the most unimportant New Year's party I've ever attended.

Over the next several months, on weekends and evenings, and occasionally with the help of friends, I installed the electrical wiring and outlets, the lights, the door locks, the wall and ceiling insulation, the finished sub-floor, the wallboard on the walls and ceiling, the floor tile, and the interior doors. I hooked up the washer and dryer, hung the utility cabinets, installed the sink, and painted the exterior. Then we had a 'painting party' where a half dozen of the train guys grabbed paint brushes and rollers and we painted the room in just a few hours. As soon as the paint had dried, the trim and fittings were installed.

And then finally, after six months of work, the final inspector came out, checked everything he had to check, and signed that final piece of paper that made the project complete (at least in the eyes of the tax assessor!).

Even though I had heard horror stories about remodeling projects, the project went fairly smoothly. A few problems popped up, but were quickly dealt with. Although it took constant attention, I was not traumatic. My secret? - thoroughly research and carefully plan every detail before the decision to build is made, and to religiously monitor every step along the way.

A new track plan started developing when the original room over the garage was first being considered. The plan was for a double deck, around the wall layout with two peninsulas, one each from two opposite walls. The plan included staging yards at each end, and a helix to connect the two ends. Additional staging areas were sketched in for interchange activity. The lower section was planned as gentle rolling hills with a high speed mainline with broad curves. From the halfway point, where the second deck started, the terrain was planned as mountains, with sharper curves, tunnels, a steeper grade, with possible helper action needed. The main yard was near the bottom staging yard and was planned as a crew change point.

The RailCommand command control system was being considered as a replacement for the ONBOARD system which had proven to be troublesome on the old layout. And because I like second generation diesels, and the larger layout would allow broader curves, I decided to model a 15 year span between 1960 to 1975. I could then include the longer cars which were coming into use around that time. No dispatcher desk was being planned at the time, but full signaling was to be included. Operator orientation to the trains had him facing east. Soon after the first sketches were begun I remembered the problems I had while trying to fit an existing freelanced trackplan into a geographical area as an afterthought. I resolved not to repeat that error. After much thought, I decided to take the prototype freelancing approach, with the Santa Fe as the key railroad. I also decided to research the chosen area to be modeled first, and then complete the track plan only after sufficient research had been done.

With this approach I could use prototype practices and equipment, but wouldn't be restricted to modeling exact features such as actual towns or buildings, while at the same time designing a model of a railroad that was plausible and could have existed. I would be able to use my research and ideas to design track arrangements, buildings, etc., rather than to try to model exact copies of existing structures. However, I could also use prototype practices to guide me. I also wanted to model an area close by that I could easily research during weekend visits. Since I wanted to freelance the Santa Fe, I looked to areas near my home where the Santa Fe did not reach.

An area that had appealed to me for quite some time was the Northern California/Oregon area. There are several books and articles covering the Southern Pacific through this area. Collectively, they provide much information about the geography of the area, the reasons why the railroad build there, the goods the railroad carried, the equipment used, etc. Research turned up references to old SP surveys for routes that were considered but not built. In old SP timetables and rulebooks I found information regarding track elevation profiles, grades, sidings and length, speeds restrictions, etc. Information was also available about other railroads in the area such as the McCloud River RR and the Great Northern. This information, along with the availability of detailed data about the Santa Fe itself, would prove to be invaluable in helping me design a plausible freelance railroad from the San Francisco Bay area to the Portland, Oregon. area.

Additionally, the geographic profile is relatively flat from Richmond/San Francisco/Sacramento CA. area up to Redding, CA. From there the terrain becomes very mountainous as it approaches and continues past Mt. Shasta. This matched the original concept for the two decks on my track plan. Pouring through my books and SP timetables I learned that the track grade from Sacramento to Redding was less than 1% and is relatively straight. Above Redding it increases up to 2% and becomes a typical mountain railroad, with numerous curves, tunnels, bridges, etc., to Klamath Falls.

With this information in hand modeling a fictitious Santa Fe route beginning where the Santa Fe now terminates at Richmond, California onward to the central Oregon area became a serious possibility. Add the possibility of interchanging with the Southern Pacific, the Western Pacific (Sacramento Northern), the McCloud RR, and the Great Northern, and incorporating competition for business with the Southern Pacific, the choice became clear - this is the area I would model.

Now that I had chosen an area to model, it was time to get down to specifics. I obtained maps of the areas between the Bay Area and Portland, and quickly realized that this was much too long a route even for a layout as large as this one. I bought 3-D topographical maps of the area between Sacramento, CA and the Oregon border, and studied them for total mileage, geographical features, canyons, lakes and rivers. I carefully followed the path the Southern Pacific takes and re-read the books on the areas I was studying.

As I narrowed the proposed path the competing Santa Fe would take, I bought detailed US Geological survey maps for the key areas being considered and studied those for routes through towns, across rivers and creeks, and through canyons. Fortunately, most of these maps were updated in the late sixties and early seventies, so I had information that related to the years I wanted to model. Several rough drafts and sketches of various 'dream' layouts were done as the months past by. With all the ideas coming together, a fairly complete track plan had been drawn up for the 24'x35' room that was originally planned for over the garage.

While all this research was going on, the decision to build alongside the house was made. This created a few significant changes to the track plan that had been evolving:

• The total space would be bigger - that was good. But the space was now a different shape - that was bad. In one place, I no longer had the full 24ft width I had counted on. This crowded the plan too much at a crucial spot that couldn't be squeezed any more and still retain the 36" minimum radius I required.

• The old plan had figured on a stairway coming up near the middle of a second floor room, allowing a true around-the-walls design. However, the new room would be on the ground level - the same level as the existing house. Now I had to deal with the possibility of a duckunder to maintain an around-the-walls plan. This went completely against one of my most important minimum requirements - no duckunders.

• The helix between the lower and upper levels was now exactly in the wrong place! The two doors into the room were right where the helix was planned to be, even if I rotated the plan 180 degrees.

Building the room on the same level as the existing house eliminated the luxury of entering the room by a staircase in the center and away from the wall mounted track. I was now forced to contemplate either a removable 'bridge' or have a duckunder, both very undesirable. After much consideration, it was decided to build a five foot deep pit to allow two short stairs, one down four or five steps, and one back up, that would take us low enough to clear the benchwork before stepping back up to floor level. Although not as convenient as a straight through entrance, it would be no worse than having to walk up a full flight of stairs to enter a second story room as originally planned. To allow enough room for the stairs and not crowd the aisle, the stairs had to come up in an area that would not have a lot of activity and be wide enough. This required that the flipped track plan be oriented one way only.

Flipping the plan and orienting it to accommodate the stairs also moved the helix away from in front of the doors, but now it took up valuable space in the narrow end of the room. That was solved by moving it fifteen feet and into the area where the room widened by seven feet due to the way it fit around a corner of the existing house. This would have been wasted space anyway, so the helix consumed unusable area instead of taking up valuable usable area. That turned out to be a fortunate win-win situation.

Now that all the trouble spots had been taken care of, it was time to firm up the plan and start building. I redrew the plan in a larger scale and paid particular attention to turnout angles, dimensions, and orientation. By carefully following the methods outlined in John Armstrong's TRACK PLANNING FOR REALISTIC OPERATION, Layout Design Sig articles and publications, various notes gained from talking to other layout owners, and reading about layout design and construction in the various magazines, I finalized the plan.

Decisions about layout lighting, electrical requirements, control systems, fascia colors, backdrop heights, benchwork construction techniques, etc., were made at this time. Here are just a few examples:

• To save costs, all benchwork will be L-girder construction and all pieces to be cut from 3/4" plywood. Plywood will give us five times more lumber for the same price as pine. And experiments have shown that plywood is even stronger than pine for L-girders.

• Roadbed sections will be cut from 1/2" Homasote, and will include prototypical ballast and sub-roadbed profiles. They can be slotted to go around curves.

• The fascia will be formed from 1/4" hardboard (Masonite). The thickness provides enough strength that it needs minimum support to keep it from flexing when someone leans against it.

• The lower ledge of the fascia will be a constant 21" from the floor around the room, helping to create a consistent look. The color will be similar to the fascia and valance on David Barrow's Cat Mountain and Santa Fe. He graciously gave us a sample.

• The backdrop will be formed from 1/8" hardboard. The flexibility works well around the gentle curves required on the peninsula. It will be glued to the supports with hot glue eliminating the need to patch screw holes and it installs quickly.

• SystemOne was ultimately chosen as the DCC system. The MUing capabilities and the easy to use cab (handheld keypad) were the key features that made this system the most attractive.

• A computer will be used to interface the CTC panel to the layout. It will also be used to select the best route and throw the turnouts when a tower operator routes a train through his interlocking plant.

• Unavoidably, the Richmond Staging yard will have to be hidden. To monitor the yard, an infrared (nightvision) TV camera will be mounted in the corner and will be used to watch trains as they leave or enter the hidden yard. The camera will be able to swing around to follow a train as it moves past it. A monitor will be built into the panel at the Chico Wye tower. The tower operator will control the camera position.

• Facia mounted turnout controls follow a design developed by Dennis Brown. Slide switches control the turnouts and are reached through a hole in the fascia. We've added features such as a bezel to finish the opening, electrical connections to control Tortoise switch machines where they are used, and in the future, a lockout device that will require the conductor to use a key to physically unlock select turnouts during operating sessions. Recognizing that very short people have different reach angles than very tall people, and in an effort to make the turnout controls easy to use by anyone, we studied the height of the finger hole, the hole size, reach distance for the switch handle inside the hole, and the relative position of the slide switch to the hole. A standard height, hole size, reach distance and position was determined that would be comfortable for all operators.

• At least six separate electrical and signal circuits will follow the mainline:
  • The two wire power buss that will connect to all rails to power the locos and carry the DCC signal to the decoders mounted in the locos.

  • The cab buss that carries the signal from the handheld cab to the DCC command station (the DCC system's 'brains') .

  • A 12 volt filtered DC circuit to run the switch motors, relays, accessories, etc.

  • A 110v AC circuit to provide power to the layout from a single master switch .

  • Another 110v AC circuit to provide power for soldering, drilling, sanding, sawing, ect.

  • A still-to-be-determined circuit to handle all signaling requirements .

• Compressed air for airbrushing will be available at several locations under the fascia by installing a network of piping which will be connected to a large portable compressor located in the garage. A quick-disconnect fitting at the compressor will allow it to be used for other jobs when desired.

Immediately after the final inspection in June the old layout was dismantled. The new one was officially underway at the beginning of July, 1994.

At the beginning of actual construction we made several trips to the areas to be modeled. With the track plan and various maps in hand, we followed the proposed route, taking pictures and videos. We noted the land profile and imagined what fills, cuts and bridges would be necessary in several key areas. We considered the land use in the 60's and 70's - whether it was grazing, fields , business or housing, and what impact our route would have. We looked carefully for possible areas for yards, especially the two Chico yards and the Redding yard. We followed the proposed Paynes Creek branch to the little town of Paynes Creek. When we discovered that there was no plausible reason for the railroad to go there, we modified the plan and rerouted the track to a more appropriate location - the branch has since been renamed the Massi Branch after one of the crew members. Other adjustments were made when appropriate.

Since the design evolved not as an afterthought, but as a proactive process, I have had few problems translating it into real benchwork and track. The design is being followed very closely and so far has been working out well. Only minor changes have been made since we began construction.

Notable changes include:

• Relocating the industrial branch in Chico to pass underneath the mainline at 8th & 9th streets instead of at grade across the mainline, service tracks and yard lead. This was due to the difficulty in trying to disguise the track through the backdrop in a very shallow area. By going under the bridge, and using the bridge to hide the opening, the effect works much better. The new configuration also makes prototypical sense. To give a feel of historical presence in the area we left most of the original alignment in place and detailed the area as if the grade separation was done at a later date.

• Installing SystemOne instead of Railcommand. This decision took almost two years to make. SystemOne was chosen because it is DCC compatible, the cab (handheld keypad) is easier than most, and is better suited to a large layout with many locos and lots of Muing actions. DCC technology promises many benefits in the future. We want to be able to take full advantage of any new developments.

• Increasing the functionality of the Southern Pacific tracks. Instead of two stub ended tracks at each end, three tracks and a reversing loop have been included at each end. This will prevent having to physically handle all equipment to turn it around or restage it for the next session. This required some compromising due to clearance issues for the reverse loops. A 2% grade was necessary on the SP to drop low enough to loop under the New Chico Yard. Clearances over the Valley Staging yard will be close to accommodate the SP north staging tracks. A backup movement around the SP's reverse loop under Redding will be necessary to turn arriving trains in preparation for the next session.

• The Massi Branch will have to be designed in place due to the difficulty of identifying the extent of the problems that will be encountered with the transition to hidden track there.

• Removing the Durham Highway overpass at the entrance to the Valley Staging yard and making it a grade crossing instead. This was done after an additional visit to that area determined that a bridge was not appropriate.

• The intermodal yard has been downscaled to two tracks instead of four. Available room was the main issue, as well as realization that the level of intermodal activity in the area we were modeling would have not required a larger yard in the time frame we are modeling.

• The Sacramento River bridge will not be as high over the river due to the clearance required for the approach to the Southern Pacific's staging loop beyond Red Bluff.

• The planned scene of a washed-out bridge and temporary bypass track, known as a 'shoe-fly', on the Santa Fe mainline between Anderson and Redding will have to be eliminated or downgraded due to the clearances required for the Southern Pacific's north end hidden staging tracks which will be located directly underneath.

• Narrowing the time span being modeled - somewhere between 1970 to 1975 instead of the much broader range of 1960 to 1975 originally planned. Researching the Santa Fe revealed that all locomotives were renumbered in 1970. Additionally, by the mid 70's most, but not all, locos were repainted in the yellow and blue Warbonnet scheme. The different combinations of number series and paint schemes effectively date Santa Fe locos throughout the late 60's and early to mid 70's. To complicate things, certain loco designs I like were introduced in the late sixties, and others were retired prior to repainting.

• Redesigning the throat to the south end of the New Chico yard. When construction of the yard began it became apparent that the traffic flow was not as efficient as it should be. Now, two switchers can work the two sections of the classification yard while a train moves to or from the arrival/departure yard and another passes on the mainline. Both switchers will now have full access to all three yards and the mainline. Additionally, a mainline train can now enter the upper classification yard if the arrival/departure yard is full.

We are now well on our way with the new layout. As this is being written, we have trains running, have almost all of the lower level benchwork complete, most of the sub-roadbed is in place, and most of the wiring is done. A couple of scenic areas are nearing completion. The plan is to have all basic scenery completed on the lower level before the upper level is begun.

By the time the National Convention is held in San Jose in the year 2000 we plan to have all the benchwork complete, all of the sub-roadbed in place, all of the mainline track completed, and much of the secondary track built. Basic scenery should also be in place on all levels. The priority is to have all of the track operational first. Detailing scenery will come later.

The informal 20 year plan should see all track operational within 5 years, all lower level scenery completed within 10 years, all upper level scenery completed within 15 years, and the remaining 5 years to super detail scenery and lots of operations.

These pages implemented and maintained by: Larry Moseley
Please send all comments to: Rick Fortin