Thanks to both of you on your latest replies. I have a few questions/clarifications for both of you:
Would a scrap paper dealer bring in waste products by barge? I would love to create a dynamic tying the pier to the nearby plants, so would the waste paper come in by barge and out in the boxcars? Something like that to create some small local moves (justifying the existance of an independent industiral switching railroad) rather than moves that bring cars on and off the layout from staging and the outside world.
Also, the lead to the transload facility - if you only count up to the edge of the ajoining industry - is about 40" so I'm planning to remove my current staging track to push Hardwood Furniture further "east" and have my staging feed off of the yard lead just aove George roberts printing with a cassette style track.
On the double tracking, I like the idea (I was originally working with that type of concept originally) but now I'm finding myself tight on space. I'd love to get rid of one of the 3-ways just for the sake of asthetics but I'm having a heckuva time figuring out how to run a parallel track close to the transload that leads into a switch just east of river city textiles. I cant seem to make the space work so any thoughts on how I could get that to go would be listened to.
Thanks agian to everyone who has offered assistance...
On the top of the plan if you brought the track with the two industries on it straight across and tied it into the tail, you could gain an additional 1 or 2 cars of tail room on the switchback.
The tail on the left side switchback is very short, I doubt you could pull or spot a full track, let alone two if there was a car in the hardwood furniture co. I am wondering how you are going to spot those tracks anyway. Lets say you have a mix of 50 and 60 ft cars (boxes, flats and covered hoppers, typical transload cars) 3 in the back track, 4 in the middle track and 2 in the short track. You have 1 to put in the back track, 2 in the middle track and 2 in the short track. How are you going to do it?
I wouldn't do an incinerator. If the garbage comes in by barge, then the ashes probably go out by barge. If you want decay, then do a scrap dealer that barges out the scrap or uses the site of an old industry that recieves metal from scrapped ships and piers and loads it into gons. Another decrepit industry is a scrap apaper dealer that compresses waste paper and cardboard into bundles and ships it out to paper mills in 50 ft boxcars (like the IPD cars.).
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Hi All-
So I've made some further adjustments (quite frankly, looking back at my last design it's clear I didn't do enough in my last draft to make changes. So I've posted my latest version and the highlights of changes are below along with some requests for knowledge from others who might know more than me:
Incinerator - I orginally modeled my industrial pier district on the marine repair facilties found along my inspirational prototype but the more I looked at it the less I liked how it was looking. So I spent some time thinking, and wanting to keep my "mid to late 70's urban decay" motif I had a "eureka" moment. It's garbage incinerator time! The gargabe incinerators will be fed from barges offloaded from the pier into open gondolas. I was looking for any kind of prototypical example of this happening, but I can't find much of anything in the way of online resources about incinerators whatsoever. If anyone can help point me towards some resources on this it would be much appreciated. Also, I'm thinking I should change out some of hte buildings that are part of the complex, but I'm a little unsure as to what would be more appropriate
Transload - I've also brought back the transload facility that was on my very first (and very flawed!) layout design. My thinking is that there would be plenty of businesses in this heavier industrial district not served by their own sidings but instead by a heavy use team track like this. I've also relocated the two backdrop industries that were by the now-incinerator that were in a hard to reach area, but there wasn't a way to do it as far as I could find without having a facing point siding. I also chose to run the switching lead around the incinerator plant as it gave me about 3-4 extra inches to reverse, but I could cut them out if people still think this would pose operational challenges.
Thanks again for your thoughts, I look forward to hearing more.
Best,
Rich
Hi again, Rich ---
Still think you will have trouble reaching cars to uncouple and couple if you have a big building between you and the coupling/uncoupling point. You arms are long enough that probably can reach something that is up to maybe 30+ inches away. If there are no obstacles between you and the track.
But can you you really get your hand in there to couple and uncoupe when you have to go over the roof of a building that is between you and the track ? And can you see what you are doing there ?
Potensial trouble spots that still are there - see my last recommendations :
1) Between Purple and red building in upper right hand corner. Not only is the track hidden behind a building at the edge of your reach. Is it also potensially in a small "canyon" between two buildings. Those buildings are separated only by the width of one track. How tall are those buildings ? Can you even get your hand in there ?
2) Medusa. Adding Reliable warehouse between you and the Medusa track makes reach issues worse instead of better. I think it would be very hard to reach cars between Reliable and the wall, and you have almost no access to the track in front of Medusa. I would recommend just dropping Reliable warehouse rather than put it here, and maybe bring Medusa south a bit.
3) Hardwood furniture. Same recommendation as the last time.
I recommend making some mockups of cardboard and testing your reach past buildings here.
Smile, Stein
Thanks to all for their advice. And my apologies for the VERY SLOW reply on this one. Unfortunately real life got in the way of progress over the past month in the form of a vdery hefty vet bill.
Nonetheless, I have returned undeterred. I even went out and bought some 1x4's on sale in anticipation of starting benchwork in the relatively near future! So I've come back with my latest tweaks, incorporating a fwe of Stein's suggested tweaks - namely relocating the warehouse thereby eliminating the need for depth by the entrance to the "docks district" in the north - that helped eliminate alot of the hard to reach areas.
It's also worth noting that I will only have walls on two sides of the layout; I'm assuming they will be along the "North" and "West" side but I can turn the layout any way I want; I have a large open basement, so I can orient things in whatever fashion is most convenient. On balance, I can always came over the backdrop to address a derailment, access for cleaining, etc.
So as I said just a few minor tweaks (moved the engine house in to reduce the depth along the west wall was another suggestion I made arrangements for) but barring anything major, I would love to start benchwork on this one.
Thanks again to everyone for their thoughts!
Hmm - you could also do something like this in the lower left hand corner :
Depends on what effect you want - letting the train disappear behind a building makes the layout look bigger.
Btw - if you pull the medusa track out from the wall, the medusa/engine house area could end up something like this:
Just a few ideas - you have to figure out what works for you and sew it together in one unified design.
Looking forward to seeing your next sketch!
rfbranch wrote: Sorry for taking so long on this one, real life definitely got in the way of posting the latest iteration of my plan, but based on the input I've had so far, I think this is a pretty solid final plan.
Sorry for taking so long on this one, real life definitely got in the way of posting the latest iteration of my plan, but based on the input I've had so far, I think this is a pretty solid final plan.
Hi Rich --
Like the flow of tracks here - good merging of advice and your own design.
Little more nitpicking - reach past buildings might be an issue a couple of places. You can reach maybe 30" at max - depending on layout height and whether you have to reach across buildings etc, but try to keep most tracks at 24" from edge or less.
NE corner: might be hard to reach past big purple building to couple or uncouple cars at red and green industry. Two suggestions for your evaluation:
Left side. Maybe move enginehouse to innermost of two tracks here and move it up a little north ? Would possibly improve these things:
Also possible that you should move medusa a little south for improved reach. You can fill in the corner behind medusa (NW corner) with industrial structures, roads etc to make it look like a place that needs more rail traffic. And yes - you could have an extra storage spur or two here.
SW corner: Just a suggestion - but think about
McGraw is a small and flexible set, while Hardwood is a big bulky box, 4 stories high, 10 5/8" deep. A loading dock the inside (wall side) of this building will be hard to reach, but you don't have enough space in the corner to let the track curve around to the front of this 10 5/8" deep building.
Heritage furniture (http://www.walthers.com/exec/productinfo/933-3164) is also four stories deep high, but only 4 3/4" deep. If you move the building a little right (towards the interchange), you have room to do an S-curve into the loading dock. Or you can do like I have done here and cut it down to a triangular shape, so you can come straight out of the corner curve:
Either way - I would recommend opening up access to the industry where you now have Hardwood a bit.
Btw - did I mention that I really like the south end of your yard ? Great combination of straight and curved turnouts down there - I am going to copy that idea from you some day!
There is a cement producer in Maine, Dragon Cement, which has a plant in Thomaston near Rockland on the Maine Eastern Railway. They ship cement out on barges at Rockland Wharf which requires a rotation of cars stored on a nearby storage yard. It makes for interesting operation. Its a prototype I considered but decided I wanted something with a little bit more in the way of online customers.
Examples:
http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?2008010520391724793.jpg
http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?2005100316361523990.jpg
http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?200301051742591602.jpg
http://photos.nerail.org/showpic/?2003053101135916713.jpg
Its also very visible in google earth.. but I am not sure how to provide google earth links.
I just throught this was interesting since you are modeling a cement industry in a marine environment. I am not sure it would really be relevent to what your doing. I always thought it would make a great little transplant to a freelance layout since you could model the dock and the yard and just have the cement plant be in staging. I guess they are the only cement producer in Northern New England. The cement cars are quite unique.
Chris
Sorry for taking so long on this one, real life definitely got in the way of posting the latest iteration of my plan, but based on the input I've had so far, I think this is a pretty solid final plan. I've more or less incorporated all the suggestions offered, and made one addition and wanted a suggestion on one other idea:
A. I've put an additional storage track in by the repair shop complex (it is in the front of the engine facility) with the idea that as the primary customer of the railroad (the frequent moves between various shops justifying the need for a railroad to service their needs, but the other industries in the area providing economic viability for a short line and therefore remove the need for the repair facility to have it's own switcher) and the need to keep things moving between the shops I thought it likely the facility might have an extra track for cars with miscelaneous shop supplies or as a track to keep their flat cars when not in use (I was thinking of having a flat car or two that will be owned by the repair shop to move heavy machinery from the ships on the pier to the different buidlings within the shops).
B. While I haven't implimented it, I was also wondering if my railroad might also have a few storage tracks off the Medusa Cement lead. My original prototype had them, and I thought it might be a way a shortline could squeeze out some free revenue by laying a few extra feet of track. The obvious point of discussion is that it would require several reverse points for a train to service, but I thought since these tracks wouldn't be used much it might not be that far from reality.
With the snow up here, I think I'm going to start my benchwork this weekend, but again any thoughts on this latest version of my layout would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
~Rich
rfbranch wrote:the more literature I read about designing industrial switching districts, the more I see that I can always plan for "tight" corners, but I haven't seen it spelled out exactly what that means anywhere.
Iv'e been 18" radii as my minimum, but if I'm pusing around trains with 4-5 maximum of a 70's vintage, as this too severe (I don't think so) or can I go tighter with mycorners?
I will be using a small 44 tonner as my switchign loco, so my motive power will have a pretty minimal wheelbase. Any direction I can get on that would be appreciated.
Many thanks for the time, effort, and detailed suggetsions Stein!
I will incorporate some of this tonight when I get a chance to tweak my design a little more. I've already put in a 3 way switch leading to the docks as per your previous suggestion, and I will incorporate your further advice into my revisions. I can see the advantages of what you have laid out, you are doing "more with less" as it were so again my thanks.
One futher question: the more literature I read about designing industrial switching districts, the more I see that I can always plan for "tight" corners, but I haven't seen it spelled out exactly what that means anywhere. Iv'e been 18" radii as my minimum, but if I'm pusing around trains with 4-5 maximum of a 70's vintage, as this too severe (I don't think so) or can I go tighter with mycorners? I will be using a small 44 tonner as my switchign loco, so my motive power will have a pretty minimal wheelbase. Any direction I can get on that would be appreciated.
Again thanks to all for their time.
I've tried to make a sketch showing what I meant by my comments - this is just an illustration of concept - you must tweak it to work for you:
Main changes:
The north end switching lead (the piece of curved track from the north end of the yard) is the key that keeps it all together - it serves many functions:
As it stands now, the only two industries that you must reach by a switchback move is Medusa and Reliable. Everything else can be reached directly by an engine pushing a cut of cars ahead of it out of the yard.
Not at all bad!
Still a little heavy on the use of shortish switchbacks, though. I count at least 5 on the layout - yard lead, track next to yard lead, engine house, pier and behind Medusa.
H0 scale, right ? A foot of switchback in H0 is just barely enough space for a short switcher and one car. Makes it tedious to pick up two cars and drop off two cars at a siding when you just can move one car at the time.
Try to use some special turnouts to make things flow better - e.g. like in this example:
Room this layout is in is 6.5 by 11.5 feet - ie comparable to your room which is 8x9 feet.
Some general ideas :
Don't know if it makes sense - but maybe worth considering.
Again - looks pretty good now. A little tweaking, and you have a runnable layout here!
I've gone ahead and modified my track plan to fit around my redeisgned benchwork. The image is attached again below (I'm hoping using photobucket will allow the link to work successfully). Just a few quick notes and questions:
I. GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS
I've laid out my tracks roughly as outlined in my previous schematic, however due to some space limitations some things ended up in different places than planned (Engine House and & MOW "east" of the yard rather than "west" of it - assuming a North-up orientation). Given my space, this seemed a better use of the dead area that would end up between the near end of the yard and the edge of the benchwork. It allowed me to squeeze a couple of industries in the back area, so on balance it looked to be a better use of space. Additionally, I can lengthen my benchwork in the bootom right corner another 6" if needed to accommodate a longer yard lead, but given the general length of consists, I don't know that I need it. But again, let me know if that's a potentiall pitfall I'm overlooking. Finally, I didn't include the double slip switches in the yard like the prototype (although I should really say this is a freelance that I'm trying to incorporate aspects of a prototype into) but if it makes sense to have them running along the straight edge of the tracks to allow easier switching, please let me know. I did capture the curved yard as mentioned, but have decided against the floatbridge interchange. I could still capture it if I wanted by simply widening the peninsula with the docks and waterfront if my layout is too operationally limited.
II. TURN RADIUS AND TURNOUTS
I'm guessing that I may be overly conservative, but I've planned the entire layout with Walthers #5's and 18" track radii (this that the plural...my guess. If I'm mostly moving around a maximum of 4-5 cars behind a 44-ton center cab, can I tighten things up to allow for more operational freedom? John Armstrong's book has aschematic of Prot Trackage but really only says "curves can be very sharp here" but I don't really have an idea of I an tighten things up at all. Can I go all #4's? Can I tighten the curves? I won't be running 80' auto parts cars or the like, and I figure short consists should be able to get around fairly tight curves but the experience of the group would be greatly appreciated. I will of course test things out once I have benchwork in place, but for planning purpose I'd like to know what I can realistically expect.
III. STAGING
In short, I don't have any at the moment, but there isn't a reason I couldn't helix down to tracks located below the layout if need be. My only issues is operationally I don't know how I would use them. The company itself will only have 1-2 locos, so I would be sending the unit off layout to bring a string of cars back. I assume the "cassette style" staging implies a piece of track I take on and off the layout? It's another possibility, but I don't know that I lose any operational aspects by just using the rather extensive yards I have now. I would love some thoughts on that.
Again my thanks to all, below is the link to my trackplan.
steinjr wrote: Pure guess - the link contains a .th part. Could be for "thumbnail". Try to remove that - thus: Smile, Stein
Pure guess - the link contains a .th part. Could be for "thumbnail". Try to remove that - thus:
ahhh well done , thanks !
Looks like you are on the right track, as it were. I like how you have organized it and it will really put your wharf scene in a prominent position. Your interchange is positioned such that you could even use a cassette system of some sort to add and remove cars.
I look forward to seeing your completed track plan!
rfbranch wrote:I've gone back to the drawing board and come back with a new vision for my layout. ... I've taken the same 9x8 space in my basement, and have changed it to a wraparound layout that I think better uses the space and better complements the flow of the layout.
Seatrain at the bottom, turn off to the bottom left goes to the Bethlehem shipyards & rest of layout. The shipyard looks like a 4x8 all by itself, and then the HBS floatbridge and General Foods Maxwell house looks like another...... Just make the layout a series of scenes. Even one of the bluge around the Stevens Institute (castle point) would be cool.
You're definitely on a better tack with this benchwork shape. I would suggest that you try to overlap layout elements a bit more, rather than segregate them into "chunks". Real railroads are relatively long and skinny, and that's even true for terminal and switching areas, for the most part.
Here's a small shelf-style layout (about 2'X12' in HO plus the removable car float), but it illustrates the way the different functions (yard, switch lead, industries, runaround) overlap to some degree in the same linear space.
Note how each element overlaps some other element. The industry tracks (bright green) serve a series of flats, both against a backdrop and toward the aisle ("fascia flats"). In your case, you have a bit more room, so you can mix in larger 3-D industries. But you can still overlap with yard tracks, switch leads, etc.
An improved version of this concept was published as a folding 1'X6' N scale design in Model Railroad Planning 2005. It's inspired by the erstwhile real-life Alameda Belt Line. Here's the version I submitted to MRP, their artwork was much nicer. You can also read more on the web here.
Again, note how many elements overlap to pack more operating interest into less linear space.
ByronModel RR Blog
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
ereimer wrote: i think this works ... what i did was paste your link in my browser to get to the imageshack page with your drawing , then down at the bottom of the page there's a box with HTML , Forum , Alternate Forum etc.I clicked on the text next to Forum and it highlighted (blue in my browser , your's may be differnt , or you may need to double click the text) then i went under the Edit menu of my browser and selected Copy . then i came back to my reply here and clicked into the reply window then went under the edit menu and selected Paste .then i wrote this text try it , see if it works for you EDIT: hmm interesting , when i click on the link while editing the text the imige shows up full size , when i click on it after i post the message it stays small anyone have any ideas why ?
i think this works ...
what i did was paste your link in my browser to get to the imageshack page with your drawing , then down at the bottom of the page there's a box with HTML , Forum , Alternate Forum etc.
I clicked on the text next to Forum and it highlighted (blue in my browser , your's may be differnt , or you may need to double click the text) then i went under the Edit menu of my browser and selected Copy . then i came back to my reply here and clicked into the reply window then went under the edit menu and selected Paste .then i wrote this text
try it , see if it works for you
EDIT: hmm interesting , when i click on the link while editing the text the imige shows up full size , when i click on it after i post the message it stays small
anyone have any ideas why ?
Sorry I end up in some myspace page, no layout plan.
Dave H.l
So after a round of veyr helpful advice, I've gone back to the drawing board and come back with a new vision for my layout. The first and most noticable change is to the basic design of the layout. My initial design was a modified 4x8 but it's clear that was abad use of the space.
So as a result, I've taken the same 9x8 space in my basement, and have changed it to a wraparound layout that I think better uses the space and better complements the flow of the layout. I started to aly track, but I realized that I was perhaps putting the cart before the horse as it were. So I took the basic dimensions of the table, and colored areas that occupied significant operational areas of the railroad.
I'd love to see if others thought this framework more workable, and if so I'd invest some time on my end in a more flushed out design. Here is the lin, because I'm having one helluva time getting an image inserted in the forum:
http://img527.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rfblayoutnr9.png
Again my thanks to everyone who has given their time and advice so far.
Many thanks for the suggestion cuyama, I already own it. I purchased that, the Realistic Yard book, as well as the benchwork and wiring book (probably could have passed on those, plenty of info on the net that's contained in there) but it's been a reference Iv'e been using. Now if only I could apply it better
My main challenge has been the unique nature of what i want to do, I'm having some trouble applying it to this specific situation.
Again thanks for the pointer.
~rb
rfbranch wrote: Please keep the comments coming, I'm going ot try and integrate them into a new "master vision" and then attack my layout again.
Please keep the comments coming, I'm going ot try and integrate them into a new "master vision" and then attack my layout again.
Most newcomers hate it when I suggest it, but I haven't learned my lesson yet. Creating an engaging track plan with which you'll be happy in the long term is not a matter of brute force and repetition. Sometimes the best way forward is to step back and spend some time learning about how real railroads (and good model railroads) work.
John Armstrong's Track Planning for Realistic Operation is an excellent resource. Spending some time learning some background will pay off in a plan that won't frustrate you and gets the most out of your space.
If you really are keen to design your own layout, some hours studying and learning will pay off a lot better than a dozen iterations in CAD, IMHO.
Again, my thanks to everyone for their advice. To spacemouses point, I can understand the frustration that people here must get over time with "please tell me everything I must do because I refuse to try on my own". Also, thanks to Don Z for the larger image, I was having a lot of trouble getting things properly sized.
Benchwork: I’m in no way wed to the shape I have. I was actually only going to make a 4 x 8, but as I started to lay out track I ended up extending the “L” to accommodate the docks etc. It just grew into the giant amorphous “L” you see before you now! Based on the comments posted, maybe it’s not realistic to think I can work in the corner of the layout effectively so I would be more than willing to reshape things.
Track Layout: Obviously I will need to rework the interchange which opens up a lot of space and I think if I switch to more of a “G” format as suggested I could streamline operations quite a bit. I could then put my yard on the “north end” (top of the image) with a north-south mainline that goes down the “G” terminating at the pier. I could also put a runaround track on the stem of the "G" to reach inland industries located back on the base 4 x 8 section. That would more or less cut my back and forths down to only 1 (unless of course I want to reverse into any assocaited industries.
My only challenge will be that i want to maintian a "primary customer" in the marine repair shop, so I don't know that I will have enough space on the G to model it in a prototypcially realistic space.
This is something I will have to work on. I guess it's a sign the wife is on a business trip Wednesday and Thursday!
Thanks again to everyone for their help and the kind words from Spacemouse (although I think that's only because I said nice things about his website).
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
SpaceMouse wrote: Texas Zepher wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: created a vision of what you wanted to do then set out to recreate it. Yeah, How about using this railroad for the next layout contest?What I was pointing out is that he brought more to the table than the typical first-timer who comes here and says, "I got me a train, now what's a good layout?" He has an idea of what he likes and what he is trying to accomplish. Just because he failed in his first attempt, doesn't detract from the fact that before he's done, he'll have a plan that meets his needs. He has what it takes to get there, a vision of what he wants.
Texas Zepher wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: created a vision of what you wanted to do then set out to recreate it. Yeah, How about using this railroad for the next layout contest?
SpaceMouse wrote: created a vision of what you wanted to do then set out to recreate it.
What I was pointing out is that he brought more to the table than the typical first-timer who comes here and says, "I got me a train, now what's a good layout?" He has an idea of what he likes and what he is trying to accomplish. Just because he failed in his first attempt, doesn't detract from the fact that before he's done, he'll have a plan that meets his needs. He has what it takes to get there, a vision of what he wants.