Track plan versions 3.4 and 4.0 Ready for review.

[Anonymous]

I finally got a handle on XtrkCad and it allowed me to do a lot more than I was able to do with RTS 7.0 I reworked my last pan after scrapping everything except the bench work. I now have one yard that wraps around the top right corner and is "Cincinnati" on one side and "Georgetown" on the other. I tried to simplify the sidings and industries.



Then I took everyones advice and looked at what I could do with an around the wall setup in this room. It is truly point to point and I managed to get some hidden staging. The staging is off of the PRR interchange and only functions from one direction but it is modeled for both.



Click on the link to see larger versions of the layout plans on my web site.

http://garden.bukwrm.com/trackplan.htm

The last track pan is still at the bottom of the page in case anyone wonders if there was any improvement. I think there was a little. Any suggestions are welcome.

[tfuqua69]

Pics aren't coming up....

[selector]

Looks quite interesting. Lots of action to keep you busy. Will be a nice exercise to landscape it.

I don't see the purpose of that wye in the lower right. Also, the tail, at bottom of the yard, of your reversing loop is too short. Pick either the loop or the wye.

The only other caveat could be the s-curves at top centre near where the track coming from the big yard, at right, joins another yard spur.

One other item: I like how you have incorporated that nice long sweeping curve at bottom. You must have done a lot of reading. Only recommendation is to flatten it enough to recede the track from that close bench edge by another 2" for safety. As it is, it looks like you could be asking for a three-piece loco.

[ereimer]

nice !

one thing sticks out as odd ... the loop around the turntable/roundhouse . i don't know what it's purpose is since this seems to be a point to point plan and there is a turntable at one end and a wye at the other for turning locos . the mainline setup makes it pretty much impossible to just get a train running and leave it for continous running so why the return loop ?

[Tom Bryant_MR]

bukwrm, definite improvement!

Personally I like the around the wall version better than the U shape, but, you need to decide. Your web page has car stats at the bottom. Are these for the U shape or the around-the-wall plan?

You might peek at jfugates web site http://siskiyou.railfan.net/#. Look under Model -> Layout Design -> Layout Design Stats. I took the formula and built a spreadsheet and then loaded my layout numbers in it to see how yard size, spur sizes, # staging tracks and size all affected operations such as how many cars could one have on the layout before it was saturated, how many cars could a yard design really handle and the max number of cars that could be expected to move during an operating session.

Good progress !

[Anonymous]

Unless you plan to use car forwarding all the time I can't see a point to point layout of this size. You could continuous run the main by hooking the Cincinnati loop to the Pennsy interchange then running through the hidden staging then past the back of Bethel and through the backdrop to Georgetown. I wouldn't hide the hidden staging and I would add run around tracks for the Cincinnati, hidden and Georgetown yards. Overall it has a good look to it but I think you should pound out a couple more revisions before laying track.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Looks quite interesting. Lots of action to keep you busy. Will be a nice exercise to landscape it.

I don't see the purpose of that wye in the lower right. Also, the tail, at bottom of the yard, of your reversing loop is too short. Pick either the loop or the wye.

The way I see the yard operating on the lower right a train pulls into the yard, the locomotive uses the short tail to escape into the service area. The wye is to turn the steam locomotives and and passenger cars that need to be turned.

QUOTE: The only other caveat could be the s-curves at top centre near where the track coming from the big yard, at right, joins another yard spur.

One other item: I like how you have incorporated that nice long sweeping curve at bottom. You must have done a lot of reading. Only recommendation is to flatten it enough to recede the track from that close bench edge by another 2" for safety. As it is, it looks like you could be asking for a three-piece loco.

Those are both very good points. I thought I was a little close to the edge but I never even saw the S curve. Thanks for the help.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ereimer

nice !

one thing sticks out as odd ... the loop around the turntable/roundhouse . i don't know what it's purpose is since this seems to be a point to point plan and there is a turntable at one end and a wye at the other for turning locos . the mainline setup makes it pretty much impossible to just get a train running and leave it for continous running so why the return loop ?

Looking at the area the railroad as is existed in 1936 and bringing it forward to the 1950's most of the trains were passenger and express freight and most of the passengers were going to or leaving from Cincinnati. The loop is for fast turn around of passenger trains. I will still have to cut out a coach or two for interchange with PRR but other than that all the servicing delays can be handled on the other end.

The lack of continuous running is my one problem with this layout.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tom Bryant_MR

bukwrm, definite improvement!

Personally I like the around the wall version better than the U shape, but, you need to decide. Your web page has car stats at the bottom. Are these for the U shape or the around-the-wall plan?

You might peek at jfugates web site http://siskiyou.railfan.net/#. Look under Model -> Layout Design -> Layout Design Stats. I took the formula and built a spreadsheet and then loaded my layout numbers in it to see how yard size, spur sizes, # staging tracks and size all affected operations such as how many cars could one have on the layout before it was saturated, how many cars could a yard design really handle and the max number of cars that could be expected to move during an operating session.

Good progress !

Thanks Tom.

The stats were for the older design. I need to calculate some numbers for the new designs but the yard on the U shaped layout is massive, I don't think I will ever own enough cars to fill that up. The around the wall design is much more limited in room. I need to look at it closely.

I used Joe's methods to figure the capacities on the older design but I think he is a little conservative with 4 N scale cars to the foot. I used 3 to the foot, a number I came up with after counting the cars in a 5 foot long train.

Thanks again for the encouragement.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lee678

Unless you plan to use car forwarding all the time I can't see a point to point layout of this size. You could continuous run the main by hooking the Cincinnati loop to the Pennsy interchange then running through the hidden staging then past the back of Bethel and through the backdrop to Georgetown. I wouldn't hide the hidden staging and I would add run around tracks for the Cincinnati, hidden and Georgetown yards. Overall it has a good look to it but I think you should pound out a couple more revisions before laying track.

OK. Now I have to figure out car forwarding. Seriously, I haven't been here all that long what is it?

[Anonymous]

Start here to read up on car forwarding. It's a ways down the page.
http://www.gatewaynmra.org/designops.htm
Understanding what people are doing for operation will help you design a better layout even if you don't buy in on using car cards.

[Anonymous]

OK. Way bills, switch lists the pin system, serious operations. I had read that before but I guess it did not stick. IT was several months ago, when I started on version 3 that I decided to design for operations. I was thinking of a combination of timetable for the passenger/express freight and switch lists for the freight. I think I have a few years before I really have to worry about setting the system up.