I'd like some thoughts about optimal under layout staging track design.
I am using a nolix with a 2% grade to ascend/decend from the main layout to the staging tracks. Also the layout design will allow for continuous running through the (partially) hidden lower level up through the visible upper layout and down and around again.
The staging level is 24 inches wide and 30 feet long. Goal is to be able to stage 5 Eastbound and 5 Westbound trains down there in staging. Trains are HO scale, modern day diesels with 50-89' freight cars and all staging tracks will be a min of 10 feet long. For staging I plan to use Atlas Code 100 track and #6 switches.
I can NOT acommodate the standard 'through' design because the mainline needs to start climbing the 2% grade so I have designed some stub ended tracks.
Option A is Byron Henderson's X-Factor staging idea applied to under layout staging. Trains would move from 1E around throught the visible layout and back down to staging track 1W and then be 'turned' through the help of the fiddle track. An advantage of this design seems to be mainline running with only 2 #6 switches. As these tracks will be low under the main layout and 'buried' behind staging tracks - bulletproof operation is a goal.
Option B is a bit more complex. Trains would still move from 1E throught the layout to 1W and then be 'turned' through the help of the fiddle track. An advantage of this design seems to be longer staging tracks. A disadvantage is that the Mainline would now run through 7 turnouts and I worry about derailments.
Thoughts on these designs or ideas/examples of what works best is appreciated. Would also love to see pics or track plans of your under layout staging.
I'm not sure why you would need the fiddle track to turn trains. An eastbound from 1E could as easily back into 1E after traversing the visible layout. Getting from 1W to the fiddle track would involve more complex manuvers than just backing in and being ready to go again when needed. The fiddle track would seem of most use when setting up new consists, not turning existing ones.
Option A clearly provides the lowest nolix grades into and out of staging and potentially the best "headroom" over the staging tracks. You lose that in Option B.
In A you don't need to use the fiddle track to restage, just back one train out on the main to free a track, back a train from the opposite side into the now vacant track, pull the train on the main past the turnout, and back it into the now vacant track on the opposite side. Repeat 5x to swap all the staging tracks.
A fiddle track is good to make up extras on the fly. If you don't plan on doing that, I'd eliminate that track to bring the staging tracks closer to the edge for easier reach. Also, if the main has climbed sufficiently at the ends of that 30 foot wall, you can extend the staging all the way to the very ends to get some additional length. To trade off length vs width, you can use #6 turnouts on a #5 angle which will make staging a bit wider but gain length. Each staging track needs a slight curve at the turnout end for that to work, but since it's staging not a working yard, it's less of a potential problem. All curves in such an arrangment can be above your minimum radius.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
In reading your post and looking at your possible plans, the question I have for you: Are you looking to ‘store’ entire sets of trains on the lower level or switch them out like a freight yard?
I have lower level staging tracks on my layout. There are 9 tracks and can be entered from either direction. I run modern engines with the same type of equipment as you want to do. There’s no breaking down of trains to build new ones, all of that is done on the upper level in the freight yard. If you must break down trains in order to stage them on the lower level, then I would consider using plan ‘B’. Have you considered using the thru track staging scenario with slightly shorter trains? I wanted to have many freight cars on trains, but realized that I should keep them a little shorter and do more switching on the upper level freight yard. Also, I have 2-4 sets of rerailers on every staging track below to help with derailments as there are some areas underneath that can be a little tough to reach. What is your spacing between levels? That would also be a factor as you say the tracks are going to be ‘buried’.
Neal
In option #2, you can also re-do the west staging yard to mirror the east with a separate ladder and running the main in between them. Would only have 3 turnouts to go through then. The fiddle track is also more user friendly in option #2. You could assemble a train on it and pull it straight out of the yard eastbound. To "turn" trains, you could still follow Randy's basic suggestion by backing the train out of one end, running down the main past the switch for the other yard, and back in to that one so it is ready to roll again.
Mike
rrinker In A you don't need to use the fiddle track to restage, just back one train out on the main to free a track, back a train from the opposite side into the now vacant track, pull the train on the main past the turnout, and back it into the now vacant track on the opposite side. Repeat 5x to swap all the staging tracks. --Randy
Thanks Randy,
If I start off with a train in track 1E heading out eastbound on the main I want to end up in track 1W with the engine facing forward and ready to head out westbound on the main Not sure how that would work without manually moving the engines. Any thoughts?
nealknows In reading your post and looking at your possible plans, the question I have for you: Are you looking to ‘store’ entire sets of trains on the lower level or switch them out like a freight yard? Neal
Thanks Neal. I am looking to ‘store’ entire sets of trains on the lower level. All switching will happen on the visible layout above. Spacing will be 8 inches below. And before everyone piles on with the comments telling me that it is not enough room, it is all I can achieve at 2% without a helix. It also places my visibe layout at a comortable 50 inches.
Water Level Route In option #2, you can also re-do the west staging yard to mirror the east with a separate ladder and running the main in between them. Would only have 3 turnouts to go through then. The fiddle track is also more user friendly in option #2. You could assemble a train on it and pull it straight out of the yard eastbound. To "turn" trains, you could still follow Randy's basic suggestion by backing the train out of one end, running down the main past the switch for the other yard, and back in to that one so it is ready to roll again.
Perfect!!!! Is this the idea?
With most of your designs you either have to back in, or else head in locomotive first and then use a second locomotive to rearrange the train. These scenerios can be more easily accomlplished by double ended staging tracks, especially if this is to be under the table. Not much to look at there, you want to keep it simple...
Derailments and hang ups occur where you cannot reach them. If you back in, how do you know that your train is not too long for the siding. If you go in head first, how do you know where to stop.
Silly LION bothers not with freight, but only with pax trains. Him has had in the past several such hiding places, but him was using push-pull equipment. Him had hidden loops for the long distance trains to hide up in. Train would go "off stage" as a southbound on the Gondor track, and after a time it would return as a northbound on the same track. But name trains always run with the same consist, and so it worked just fine. The train was manually rebuild at Fornost for the return trip south, but that was above the boards at the Fornost Station.
LION likes through loops. Empty unit hoppers run east to west, loaded unit coal runs west to east. You cannot tell if model tank cars or grain cars are full or not. You cannot tell anything about unit COFCs as the train rolls by. Modern trains run with locomotives at both ends anyway.
For LD pax trains the LION had two complete consists one going east the ohter going west, you knew there were two trains because the both met at Bree along with the two north-south trains. The east-west consists never changed direction, the north-south consist did physically change direction on the same rails.
Oh well, I told you more than what you wanted (yet again), but LION is not impressed with hidden staging that is not also through staging. Big break-up and re-assemply classification yards, which is what it looks like you are trying to build, belong on the top of the layout, not under it.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
I have 9 1/2" of clearance (reachable) between levels. I would reconsider any type of stub tracks and try to work out a plan with thru staging tracks. On some of my staging tracks, I made shorter trains, and put 2 trains on one track (I'm using DCC), and the other tracks have one long train. FYI my upper level is at 50" and lower is at 38" top to top.
nealknows I would reconsider any type of stub tracks and try to work out a plan with thru staging tracks.
I would reconsider any type of stub tracks and try to work out a plan with thru staging tracks.
Given the need to start the nolix up to the main layout and the limited number of trains that thru staging allows - I am not sure that a plan with thru staging works.
What is your concern with stub tracks and a design like the ones presented?
trafficdesignPerfect!!!! Is this the idea?
Yep. You got it.
As nice as double ended staging is, stub ended is workable too (Is what my layout has). With double ended, trains can be re-run over and over without the need to handle them between runs. If you don't mind jockeying them around between runs, and need to minimize the grade out of staging to make it work, then do it, but do think carefully about it as making changes on an under the layout area with so little clearance would be maddening!
My concern is that you have limited space between levels and if you can't reach the areas to take off and put on cars, thru tracks are the safe bet. Don't get me wrong, I like the stub tracks for staging where reachable. I have 8 stub tracks on the lower level and they're within 12" of reach and up front. My freight yard is a double ladder with a built in run-around so you can switch one side of the ladder and run a train in and out of the other. Both ladders connect on each end.
I wanted to store entire trains in my layout too; I have a 10x18' room in the basement that has an around the wall no-lix design, large staging yard under one side holding trains ranging from 13 to 22 feet long - double ended yard with 11 tracks total - grade up to the top is 2.9%. Follow the link here to see photo's and scroll down to see progress - the staging yard is exposed in some photo's before the other yard was built over the top with 7.5 inches clearance over the staging yard.
http://atlasrescueforum.proboards.com/thread/3737/jims-layout-progress
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Looking at option A, for fiddle track read runaround.
Arriving train pulls into track closest to center, then backs to clear runaround switch. Loco(s) cut off, run around train, couple to other end. FRED is moved by the Mighty Hand of God. Train then backs to clear ladder switch, pulls forward onto main and may be backed into any open spur.
By dropping the blind ends of all spurs they can be lowered far enough to clear the mainline curves, thus allowing them to go all the way out to the wall at both ends. It would also assure that cuts of cars stored without a locomotive would stay where you put them.
The 'dead' triangle between the leads could be used as an engine terminal, and each train arriving would get new motive power. The 'fiddle' track would be available to get the caboose from one end to the other. (One way to keep steam running smokebox first without a reverse loop or turntable.)
Others have mentioned my major heartburn with plan B - too many turnouts on the main through track. Not recommended unless you hand-lay absolutely bulletproof specialwork.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
trafficdesignI can NOT acommodate the standard 'through' design because the mainline needs to start climbing the 2% grade so I have designed some stub ended tracks.
There is no rule that says staging tracks have to be level. Why not start the ladders on the grades? As long as you don't have a vertical curve under a turnout they will work fine. The only concern would be if you need to park a train without a locomotive you have to do something to keep it from rolling.
My lower staging is on a 1.2% grade. It is arranged with a reversing loop on the low end and climbs up to the visible part of the layout.
BTW, If you arrange your ladders so the turnouts are toward the front of the shelf, they will be more easily accessible.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
LION carefully builded the current layout of him with two sets of four holding tracks each on the lower level. There sere installed before the upper level was built on the layout. There is 12" vertical space between the lower level and the next (middle) level.
THEN LION CHANGED HIS MIND and converted to a 100% subway operation. Out came the lower level staging areas and in went a four track main line with stations. Hard working un so little space. LIONS may look nimble, WTHk, LIONS are nimble, but dexterous big furry paws him has not. Only clumnsy big furry paws him has. Job is finished, and I found some words that I have never used since I was in the Navy.
Oh well. It works now. ALWAYS LEAVE PLENTY OF SPACE. Things must always change.
LION has pondered the idea of a no-lix in such a limited landscape. Design done it can be, but thinking must be thunked through and through. LION would start the nolix at the right rear corner of the layout, and it would descend on a ramp outside of the 4x8 (or whatever) table and drop down around the front of the table until the back it reaches again there to put whatever staging tracks are kneaded as they make a return loop under the table to come back up again on the nolix ramp.
EWE then have the rest of the table to make your industrial or whatever sort of layout. You can make the main lion of the BNSF (or what ever favorite class 1 ewe like) cut across the middle of the layout. Of course mostly for looks is that unless you can find more space in your house.
tomikawaTT The 'fiddle' track would be available to get the caboose from one end to the other. (One way to keep steam running smokebox first without a reverse loop or turntable.)
The 'fiddle' track would be available to get the caboose from one end to the other. (One way to keep steam running smokebox first without a reverse loop or turntable.)
Happily, I model the modern day freight operations on the QGRY shortline between Montreal and Quebec City, Canada so no steamy issues or cabooses for me! You can read about my exploits here: http://qgryinhoscale.wordpress.com/
tomikawaTT Others have mentioned my major heartburn with plan B - too many turnouts on the main through track. Not recommended unless you hand-lay absolutely bulletproof specialwork. Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I am leaning towards 'Option C' that addresses the 'turnouts on the main issue' as pictured below. What are your thoughts on the plan below?
Only suggestion I have is to equalize the lengths of the staging tracks. The diagonal stretch of main can be moved somewhat to the left, and tracks 1-5E could be lowered just enough to clear the left end curve. Unless you are deliberately modeling unbalanced traffic the staging tracks should be the same length at both ends of a train's run.
You could modify the left end of the fiddle/runaround track by installing a crossover and arranging a cassette dock - much easier than placing cars on the rails from above, and keeps the mitts off the equipment.
My own staging arrangements are much more complex, predicated in the facts that I run shorter trains of shorter cars, have to hold up to fifteen freights, have through staging for seven loco-hauled and DMU passenger consists, a mix-and-match arrangement (semi-automated) for EMU and a rather complex hidden branch line for exchanging loaded and empty coal trains. The passenger yard and three freight yard throats can be unbolted and removed as units for maintenance or correction of situations, and my cassettes hold full length local freights. (The cassettes have tracks 56 1/2 inches long. Wonder how that happened... )
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with beaucoup hidden staging)
tomikawaTT Only suggestion I have is to equalize the lengths of the staging tracks. The diagonal stretch of main can be moved somewhat to the left, and tracks 1-5E could be lowered just enough to clear the left end curve. Unless you are deliberately modeling unbalanced traffic the staging tracks should be the same length at both ends of a train's run.
OK. Did some balancing and measuring and figured the following staging track capacities (based on an 8" average freight car).
1E 17 cars 1W 20 cars
2E 18 cars 2W 19 cars
3E 19 cars 3W 17 cars
4E 21 cars 4W 16 cars
5E 22 cars 5W 16 cars
Are you suggesting that 1E should match 5W in capacity? Or that all tracks should balance at 16 cars?
trafficdesign rrinker In A you don't need to use the fiddle track to restage, just back one train out on the main to free a track, back a train from the opposite side into the now vacant track, pull the train on the main past the turnout, and back it into the now vacant track on the opposite side. Repeat 5x to swap all the staging tracks. --Randy Thanks Randy, If I start off with a train in track 1E heading out eastbound on the main I want to end up in track 1W with the engine facing forward and ready to head out westbound on the main Not sure how that would work without manually moving the engines. Any thoughts?
To do that you will need the staging tracks on a reverse loop. Or manually swap the loco and caboose or FRED car, if you want the train that just went East to next hit the layout going West.
I like the very first option in this post.
The main line runs thru onlt two switches.
It runs thru the switches in the straight position.(not the curved route)
All switches are reachable from the front easily. if there is a derailment on any switch you do not have to reach over or move any trains to reach it.
Steve