Way Ahead of myself - updated track plan 10-23-08

[SpaceMouse]

Stein,

I didn't get that the track was based on the prototype, but I'm not sure it matters in the long run. Unless we are modeling the classification yards, or interchanges operations are difficult. In the case of this layout, the prototype did everything off layout. This makes operations and running trains on the layout unsatisfying.

Scarpia,

You kinda have a choice to make. Stick to the prototype, or expand the layout's capabilities. I don't know enough about the area to know what went on in the prototype, but you have to imagine what did. Once you do that, you can imagine what tracks they used for what.

If the yard tracks were not shortened, I can see how minor classification could have occurred. I don't see trains being made up in your yard, but I can see set-outs for trains heading in each direction. If you could work staging on the clockwise side of the yard, you could model that function somewhat. I can also see your yard as a engine/crew switching point. Again what you need to make that make sense is track extending beyond your yard.   

 

[steinjr]

GraniteRailroader

Stein - 

That's Waterbury Connecticut! :)

 Ah, that would explain why it looked so different - I was thinking "Waterbury in New England" - didn't think to check whether there were two different places called Waterbury in New England

 Grin,
 Stein

 

[Scarpia]

SpaceMouse

You kinda have a choice to make. Stick to the prototype, or expand the layout's capabilities. I don't know enough about the area to know what went on in the prototype, but you have to imagine what did. Once you do that, you can imagine what tracks they used for what.

If the yard tracks were not shortened, I can see how minor classification could have occurred. I don't see trains being made up in your yard, but I can see set-outs for trains heading in each direction. If you could work staging on the clockwise side of the yard, you could model that function somewhat. I can also see your yard as a engine/crew switching point. Again what you need to make that make sense is track extending beyond your yard.  
 

 

I understand that much, per the choice. I'm still at least a year away from beginning construction, so I have some time to muse over it, although I'll admit I'm kind of itching to get started. 

I think i can handle some staging to the right. Hmm...maybe even hidden under the penninsula.

Granite, I don't have much room for a main line run; so I was excluding Montpelier jct kind of on purpose. I wanted to do the double headers north to Roxbury, so that's why that town is included, other than that, I kind of wanted to get the feel for the main line. I know there are a ton of sidings (I'm not doing bolton - I don't have a 40 foot room), and correct me if I'm mistaken, but to me the idea was a well kept, single track main. Still, a siding north of WRJ would be easy enough to do.

 

Gentles, thanks again for you input. I think I'll work on this a bit more, and try another revision later this week for your approval. I'm having hidden staging anyway, why not add more?
 

[GraniteRailroader]

Scarpia - I'll be working 323 / 324 into White River starting Sunday.

I'll send you a PM in a bit...

 

 

[Scarpia]

Ok, I spent a little bit of time with the planning software, and came up with the following changes.

The biggest change was with the B&M mainline now running down to the lower level, as a loop and a reverse loop. I also added more CV staging on the North end, and connected the two staging areas so that I can run continuous if I choose to. I also added another siding north of WRJ. I'm not totally done with the yard in WRJ; I think it needs a fair amount of fine tuning, but I think it's more along the lines Spacemouse was considering.

Downsides -

I lost my workbench

a much tricker removable section (now two layer)

more $$$. 

Thoughts? 

 

Sub level