Hi all,
My N scale track plan is 95% complete and at long last benchwork has started. I'm in the final phase of eliminating excess switches that aren't really needed from the mainline, which pretty well finalizes the plan except for some details on industrial sidings which can wait for now.
My layout is a double-track mainline and when first designed, I included many mainline crossovers so trains on either main could reach all industrial and interchange areas regardless of which side of the mainline they're located on.
However, after converting my plan to TrainPlayer so I could virtually test my operating scheme, that scheme has been revised and refined somewhat, and some areas are now to be serviced only by trains going in one direction. (A super useful tool for that, TrainPlayer. Virtually running my operations before ever laying a piece of track really helps me to cut down on a lot of excess track that otherwise just isn't needed. Plus of course it helps for ensuring sufficient passing siding lengths, establishing general lengths of locals, determine a rough ETA for various jobs in the operating plan, and can even help in developing the basic timetable. Really a great tool, can't recommend it enough.) In all but one case, this entails a train traveling the main, working an industry/interchange on its side of the main, and continuing onwards. No problem there; eliminate the crossovers, and then only that main can access that area, and the other main is 100% unobstructed. Cool. (I should mention, in all such switching areas, the working train can completely clear the main. Only potential interference is when using the main for run-arounds.)
But I have one interchange which is also the terminating point for one of the local switch jobs. In this case, the local travels on one main, works the interchange, then needs to return to its point of origin on the other main, so one crossover is obviously needed.
My question is: would the railroads typically have left just this one crossover? Or would they have included the opposite crossover as well, just to maximize their options? I know modern practices usually dictates that whatever can be eliminated should be eliminated, but in a more prosperous era like the early transition period, would this same logic have applied?
Thanks
-Jason
There is a location near me where the Norfolk Southern has back to back crossovers
In the New York Central days on the double track commuter district of the Harlem Division, most of the crossovers were trailing point switches favoring the normal direction of travel. I remember once when some trackwork was ongoing, the passenger train I was on had to back up thru the crossover to use the alternate track around the construction. This was probably more common on classic double track, current direction of traffic, vs. modern CTC two track mainlines which would have double crossovers as a standard.