Hey Folks,
Here's a first rough and incomplete draft trackplan.
Givens and Druthers:
Pike: River's Edge Branch of the "Berkshire & Atlantic RR".
The "Berkshire & Atlantic RR" is my fictional proto-lanced road closely based on the Boston & Albany subsidiary of the New York Central Lines.
Governing Rolling Stock:
B&A mainline loop:
A-1a, A-1b Berkshires, L3 & L4 Mohawks, J1E Hudsons, K5 Pacifics, E Units, PA's, Pullmans. Oh, the occasional Niagara might strut it's stuff, to break in after shopping at Albany, on a milk train.
River's Edge Branch:
NE-2 2-6-6-2, H7 & H5 Mikes, K-11 Pacifics, EMD F units, Alco FA's and RS roadswitchers, 0-8-0's, Pullmans.
Relative Emphasis:
Operating Priorities:
Scenes: New England milltown, palisade/cliffside adjacent to River's Edge interchange yard. Interchange yard will have associated facilities and an engine terminal. I'd like to somehow tuck in a small village (lower right corner) repleat with depot, siding, village green and church.
The plan is basically a twice around single track branch intersecting with a double track mainline loop that feeds into staging and the interchange yard.
What I like: I've managed to shoehorn quite a bit into here. With a little massaging I'd like to be able to fit some of the signature scenes I've mentioned.
What I don't like: the 3+% grade resturning to the mill town terminal, Some of the clearances, scenery wise seem that they may be a bit steep as well, especially on the right lower corner of the plan.
I'm going to completely flip the layout plan over as well. The reason for this is that I'll be able to mirror the hidden staging into two corners versus just one that I have now.
I'd really like to know how to properly signal and protect the interlocks governing the entrances into the interchange yard.
Anyhow here it is for your perusal, comments, and critique.
Martin
How do you get into it? do you have to crawl under it to get to the center?..that will get really old really fast..duck-unders should only be used as an absolute last resort, if nothing else will work.
sorry, but I dont like the plan..especially if it needs to be operated from the middle..you can do MUCH better with the space..
13X14 feet right? which sides are up against walls, and which sides are open to the room?
whats your minimum acceptable radius?
Scot
scottychaos wrote: How do you get into it? do you have to crawl under it to get to the center?..that will get really old really fast..duck-unders should only be used as an absolute last resort, if nothing else will work.
Why do we continue to call them "duck-unders" when they are almost without exception "crawl-unders" since one must be on hands-and-knees to pass under the layout with typical layout heights? Nevertheless, if one enters the operations "pit" only once or twice in a session, I wouldn't consider it much of an inconvenience as long as there is padding on the floor and the framework at the point of passage (says this sixty-something fellow.).
About the only switching this plan provides is in the making- and breaking-up of trains. If that is the kind of switching you want, that's fine. However, the layout lacks locomotive facilities, an important element if one centers operations around yards. Also, there is a lot of "industry" associated with yards which you should consider: car-weighing, car cleaning, car repairing, locomotive servicing and repair, etc. which provide a lot of operations in themselves. And depending on the era and location, there is also car icing, and livestock-in-transit care and feeding.
Mark
Hi Hudson,
I'm perhaps biases toward making a trackplan have a proto operations flavor - that is I like to think about the flow of cars (and commodities) on and off the modeled area (from staging) and how those cars would be routed while on the layout en-route to a destination. So my comments below come from that view point (please forgive me if this isn't at all what you were looking for but your comment about 50/50 mainline and switching suggested to me that you were, in fact, interested in having cars routed across a mainline to a yard then distributed to industries)
There does seem to be lots of yard and interchange space but not much place for trains to go.
If I understand it correctly the bottom level (with the staging) is the mainline and the other parts is a branchline? But most branchlines don't loop around and return to the same interchange area. It would seem that the branchline might be more 'branch-like' if it were stub ended?
The interchange area seems very heavy duty but it's not at all obvious why a railroad would have put that much money into an interchange unless there would be *lots* of traffic going through there.
I think all that hidden staging is going to 1) make construction tricky, 2) be a pain to operate. You'll either need survelance cameras so you can observe when trains are in the clear on a track or have to signal the heck out of it with a correspondingly complex control panel, 3) the good Lord help you if you run a turnout backward and stuff comes off the track back there. 4) the good Lord bless you if any of the track in staging ever needs repair.
If there are not walls up against all sides of the railroad try to put staging against an open area (for access). Put all the staging turnouts adjacent to aisles (for access and visibility).
What sorts of industries would there be to justify the classification yard? What happens if you make the mainline a twice around and put the yard at the junction with the branchline? Could it then serve locals on the mainline as well as 'merging' the flow of cars on and off the branch? The yard could occupy the space reserved for those interchange tracks.
The size of your yard looked like it might be about right for the size layout you have if you were to add industries as a reason for it to exist.
You mentioned 50% mainline running and 50% switching. You'll need to be thinking about where industires could be located to get that 50% switching. Since this is B&A based you might consider having another interchange or two (dummies) with other railroads in the area (interchanges are great universal industries since they can accept and provied any type of car)
I think you will quickly find that the relatively low height of the railroad and its requirement to crawl into the operating pit will not be much fun at all. If at all feasible I'd suggest jacking the railroad up a bit more. If you can't do that make sure there's some really nice carpet with generous padding on the floor to save your knees. Also provide some good handholds to help standing up once the tunnel-of-death is negotiated. Any guest you have that aren't as spry as yourself will appreciate this a lot.
With all that steam power floating around is there going to be a place to turn it?
Keep working at it. This concept of yours could turn into quite an interesting layout.
Best regards,
Charlie Comstock
BCSJ wrote: Keep working at it. This concept of yours could turn into quite an interesting layout. Best regards,Charlie Comstock
Here is a source to see how Charlie's trains run:
http://model-trains-video.com/OSL3.php
Thanks folks for the feedback sofar............
I don't have much time to reply in detail right now, later this week definitely.
As said this is an initial rough draft. Spurs and sidings serving industry have not been added yet.
This plan is not a crawl under, it is suspended from the ceiling. Via kendorf and ladder rack.....I'll explain later. It can and will be lowered/raised.
I qualified the plan.........Specific industry trackage and tengine terminal trackage has not been defined yet.........
Charlie,
I'll get back to you shortly.........
The industry trackage sstill needs to be added, and I do plan to include a locomotive servicing/turning facility...........
It's not a duck-under either!
:)
At the Rivers Edge interchange yard, I suggest you put the interchange tracks between the B&A mainline and the branchline rather than having the interchange tracks on the far side (away from the B&A mainline) of the branch's "mainline." This will make the interchange of cars more handy, requiring less car and locomotive movements, and thus, more realistic.
Actually, quite often branchline trains originated at some point on the mainline. They ran on the mainline until reaching the junction to the branch. Thus, the facilities of the junctions were often quite limited. I believe too many modelers are stuck on the idea that the branchline trains operated only on the branch and only transited between the junction and the branchline terminal. If branchline trains start and end on the mainline, one increases the length of the journey for the branchline train, frees up much of the space previously devoted to the junction.
The plan for my bedroom-sized layout has the junction hidden (it is a single track switch) located near a small town which has a bit of industry and a double-ended spur where through freights can occasionally drop-off or pick-up cuts of cars to/from the branch, with the branchline trains originating in the same staging areas as the mainline trains. There is also a turntable and limited locomotive services at the junction, but this is mostly to simulate helper service on the mainline rather than for originating or terminating branchline trains.
I gotta agree with Mark here. More often than not, branchline trains started out on the mainline and then traveled up the branch. For instance, Southern Pacific's "Del Monte" ran between Castroville Junction and San Francisco on the Coast Division mainline and between Castroville Junction and Monterey on the branch. Monterey Branch freights originated in the yard at Watsonville Junction, which was a moderate sized yard a few miles north of Castroville. Watsonville Junction also originated trains for the Santa Cruz branch as well as main line locals.
Going to the other end of the country, Maine Central's Rockland Branch passenger trains (4 in each direction as late as 1950, with one train pair carrying Pullmans in the summer) ran between Portland Union Station and Brunswick on the mainline and Brunswick and Rockland on the branch. Eastbound freights originated in Rigby Yard in Portland and there was (and still is) a small yard in Rockland.
This is just my opinion, but I wonder if you're not trying to do too much in what appears to be a fairly limited space. I realize it's nice both to see mainline trains powered by big engines and branchline trains powered by smaller ones, but I'm not so sure you wouldn't be happier either eliminating the main line totally and concentrate solely on the branch (with connections to the outside represented by staging) or represent the branch with staging and play up the operation of the mainline trains. I'm biased, so my own personal preference would be to concentrate on the branch and go with small to medium sized engines on pike sized trains. I realize that would mean giving up the Mohawks, Berkshires and Hudsons (not to mention cab unit diesels), but a 4-5 car passenger train behind a K-11 would look pretty cool as would a 10-15 car freight powered by an H-5 Mike or a G-46 Consol.
When I first started looking at your post, the first thing I thought of was NYC's Lake Placid branch in upstate New York. There was an article in Trains (about 1950 or so, IIRC) entitled "Pacifics to Placid" that chronicled the seasonal passenger traffic on the branch. K-11's were extensively used and there was quite a bit of Pullman traffic in the summer going to the resorts. I don't know how you could obtain a copy. Mine magically disappeared years ago, but it would be good source material for your own layout if you could locate one.
Good luck.
Andre
Gentlemen,
Thanks for the replies so far...........
Charlie C.:
"you were, in fact, interested in having cars routed across a mainline to a yard then distributed to industries) "
Absolutely......
"There does seem to be lots of yard and interchange space but not much place for trains to go."
Right, I haven't added any of the auxiliary or industry specific track yet........This initial draft represents the "core" which will hopefully support the kind of operations and "railfanning" I'm seeking to accomplish.......... Their is quite a bit of yard and I'm already thinking of focusing more on the interchange as the sigificant yard and biasing the terminal (along the top of the plan) more towards purely industrial and maybe some added emphasis on servciing and turning around commuter trains.
"The interchange area seems very heavy duty but it's not at all obvious why a railroad would have put that much money into an interchange unless there would be *lots* of traffic going through there."
What I have in mind with the interchange is something akin to the North Adams Junction yard which served as an interchange for the North Adams branch off the B&A. A very significant facility.....actuall MUCH larger than what I've laid out.....
Regarding the hidden staging.....I have similiar concerns to what you've indicated...I do have some leeway in the room where if I'm careful with how I locate the staging I will be able to actually access it from the exterior side of the layout. I'm also considering swing down panels on the bottom of the layout in order to access critical hidden areas......Remember I need to be able to raise and lower the layout. As far as observing it during operations goes I'm thinking of using cheap USB camereas hooked up to a PC. I have a flatscreen on the wall of this room and I can route my PC video to it........
If I understand it correctly the bottom level (with the staging) is the mainline and the other parts is a branchline?
Yes..
But most branchlines don't loop around and return to the same interchange area. It would seem that the branchline might be more 'branch-like' if it were stub ended?
The continous branchline run is a "railfanning/trainwatching" concession...The little boy in me likes the idea of three consists orbiting unmolested through my creation...:).... I'd operate it in a "Stub ended" fashion, as well as scenically segregating it to appear so........
What sorts of industries would there be to justify the classification yard?
Classic New England. Textile mills, wire manufacturing, glass, firearms, dairy, lumber yards, stone quarries, machining, hydroelectric.....LCL, some agricultural.......
Some combination drawing from the above......as well as what I can glean from the prototype......
What happens if you make the mainline a twice around and put the yard at the junction with the branchline? Could it then serve locals on the mainline as well as 'merging' the flow of cars on and off the branch? The yard could occupy the space reserved for those interchange tracks.
Great idea.....I'm really leaning toward this because it will buy space back for me. I'm a little "afraid" of the double track all the way around (twice) like that being visually overpowering. Frankly, the "yard plan for the "large" Mill town is almost a track for track copy from an Iain Rice plan. I liked it and copied it more or less as an exercise with 3D Plan It. I'm definitely going to try and specifically tailor it for what I want to accomplish with my layout. What I like about it is the basic components are there. The branchline leading into and out of it is basically a lap siding that can also act as A/D tracks (With runaround ability) without significantly fouling the main. The ladder and drill track are isolated for fairly uninterrupted operation, their is a stub for cabeese as well as a pocket for the switcher.
You mentioned 50% mainline running and 50% switching. You'll need to be thinking about where industires could be located to get that 50% switching. Since this is B&A based you might consider having another interchange or two (dummies) with other railroads in the area (interchanges are great universal industries since they can accept and provied any type of car).
Foreign RR interchange on the B&A was limited to major division points to the best of my knowledge. PLaces like Worcester and Sprignfield, Palmer has a nice little junction with the CV and a nice yard, but the yard is CV........CV equipment is extraordinarily difficult to find, B&A is hard enough for me!
The layout height is an arbitrary # used to indicate relative elevations. I also plan to add a turning and servicing facility............
Thanks Charlie!
Mark,
Re:
"I suggest you put the interchange tracks between the B&A mainline and the branchline rather than having the interchange tracks on the far side (away from the B&A mainline) of the branch's "mainline." This will make the interchange of cars more handy, requiring less car and locomotive movements, and thus, more realistic."
That's actually what I intend..I need to edit the line thickness and color of the track to better reflect this.....
"Actually, quite often branchline trains originated at some point on the mainline. They ran on the mainline until reaching the junction to the branch. Thus, the facilities of the junctions were often quite limited. "
I understand what you're saying is very typical, but in this case the prototype has some notable exceptions. Palmer and Adams being two examples.
I believe too many modelers are stuck on the idea that the branchline trains operated only on the branch and only transited between the junction and the branchline terminal.
Not me.
"If branchline trains start and end on the mainline, one increases the length of the journey for the branchline train, frees up much of the space previously devoted to the junction."
Modellng the interchange and junction are high on my priority list. It's probably the focal point of my concept. Sure it needs refinement. that's why I posted :)
Thanks Mark!
Andre,
"This is just my opinion, but I wonder if you're not trying to do too much in what appears to be a fairly limited space."
This is definitely a concern of mine and I will compromise where necessary. I guess you can say I'm in the process of figuring that out.
"I realize it's nice both to see mainline trains powered by big engines and branchline trains powered by smaller ones, "
I won some fine examples of NYC power and it would be nice to have them running....That's why the minimum radius is so generous considering the space available.
giving up the Mohawks, Berkshires and Hudsons (not to mention cab unit diesels), but a 4-5 car passenger train behind a K-11 would look pretty cool as would a 10-15 car freight powered by an H-5 Mike or a G-46 Consol.
What's interesting about the B&A is that on many occasions relatively short passenger trains were hauled by fairly large locomotives. I could show you quite a few pictures of Mohawks and Hudsons hauling 4-6 car passenger trains. Funny but nevertheless not uncommon with this prototype.
Mainline freight trains are difficult to represent in such a small pike area, a Berk could haul a huge train. That's also the reason that the visible portion of the mainline loop is so short. I'd. like to be able to pull a 20 car train through the interchange scene every once in a while. The idea being to possibly create the semblance of large mainline traffic.
When I first started looking at your post, the first thing I thought of was NYC's Lake Placid branch in upstate New York. There was an article in Trains (about 1950 or so, IIRC) entitled "Pacifics to Placid" that chronicled the seasonal passenger traffic on the branch. K-11's were extensively used and there was quite a bit of Pullman traffic in the summer going to the resorts. I don't know how you could obtain a copy. Mine magically disappeared years ago, but it would be good source material for your own layout if you could locate one. "
The Lake Placid branch of the Adirondack Division is quite nice, but then I really wouldn't be able to convincingly run the majority of my motive power. The B&A had some very heavy traffic branches.
Anyhow thanks for all the input folks, I'll further refine and update this plan and post again shortly. I'll most definitely place some industry trackage, right now I'm gathering the footprint measurements of my structures which will be possibly placed on the pike.
Thanks Andre
Anyone have any thoughts on how the interchange yard and interlocks would be signalled?
thanks again,
In staging all of you staging tracks are off one main track. Unless all of your cars come from Albany and all of the outbounds go to New York, you'll want to put staging on both main lines.
As others have mentioned, the mainline operation is minimal, just show up for 20 ft, make a set out and make a pick up. If you put any mainline train sets on the mainline loops you will consume all your staging/track capacity for the through trains. You might want to lose the main and concentrate on the branch. Make the interchange tracks just extensions of the staging tracks and make the branch a continuous run. You could put a B&A engine on each interchange track to shove the cars out of staging into the visible layout and pull the "outbounds" from the interchange tracks into staging. If you were using DCC, the engine number could be set to the track number.
If you are going to keep the double track main you need to move the switches around. The NYC/B&A operated a lot of current of traffic (right hand running.) So on the bottom of the plan the crossover needs to be to the right of the entance to the yard and have access to the interchange/set out tracks. On the left side the counterclockwise track crossover needs to be before/above the connection into the interchange yard. That way if you have a local out of staging go up the branchline
I am concerned that the convoluted laps will put so much of your mainline on steep grades that it will make local switching difficult.
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
dehusman wrote: In staging all of you staging tracks are off one main track. Unless all of your cars come from Albany and all of the outbounds go to New York, you'll want to put staging on both main lines.As others have mentioned, the mainline operation is minimal, just show up for 20 ft, make a set out and make a pick up. If you put any mainline train sets on the mainline loops you will consume all your staging/track capacity for the through trains. You might want to lose the main and concentrate on the branch. Make the interchange tracks just extensions of the staging tracks and make the branch a continuous run. You could put a B&A engine on each interchange track to shove the cars out of staging into the visible layout and pull the "outbounds" from the interchange tracks into staging. If you were using DCC, the engine number could be set to the track number. If you are going to keep the double track main you need to move the switches around. The NYC/B&A operated a lot of current of traffic (right hand running.) So on the bottom of the plan the crossover needs to be to the right of the entance to the yard and have access to the interchange/set out tracks. On the left side the counterclockwise track crossover needs to be before/above the connection into the interchange yard. That way if you have a local out of staging go up the branchlineI am concerned that the convoluted laps will put so much of your mainline on steep grades that it will make local switching difficult.Dave H.
Hey Dave,
I plan to "mirror" the staging on the other side of the trackplan to ensure their is equal staging for both mainline tracks.
I don't exactly understand what you mean by, "If you put any mainline train sets on the mainline loops you will consume all your staging/track capacity for the through trains."
I plan to add additional staging as mentioned with which to rotate what trains are available for the mainline loops. Individual trains may be operated as multiple different trains if operations calls for it. The design intent of the mainline loop is just to act as a feed for the interchange and provide a scene where my bigger power can just roll on by.......
Re: "Make the interchange tracks just extensions of the staging tracks and make the branch a continuous run."
If I did this what would be the functional difference if any?
I understand what you mean with the switches for right hand running, I'll update accordingly...
With regard to grades, their actually isn't more than one section of track on a grade. It's the single line portion looping counterclockwise (down) from the left into the tunnel, across the bottom, continuing along the right side and then below the terminal emerging crossing the river and connecting to the interchange......
It may look convoluted at the moment but once I apply the scenic treatment I have in mind it'll make much more sense. It's only a single track twice around intersecting a double track loop......
I appreciate the comments, it helps quite a bit!
I'll be posting a major revision shortly. I've got most of the bits worked out so now it's a matter of re-arranging things and massaging the grades a bit......
Thanks Everyone.
scottychaos wrote: sorry, but I dont like the plan..especially if it needs to be operated from the middle..you can do MUCH better with the space..13X14 feet right? which sides are up against walls, and which sides are open to the room?whats your minimum acceptable radius?Scot
All sides are up against walls effectively. I'm trying to leave 18"-24" available at certain spots with which to access staging as necessary.......
Minimum radii for all main track is 30". For mainline anything smaller looks like poo to me. I prefer 36" and up frankly. 42" - 48" being ideal.
How could I do "much better"?
Thx Scot,