R. T. POTEETOne other point need be raised . . . . . switches are always the danger point in any operating environment; if the back side of your layout is not open providing access to P0 and P5 then sooner or later you are going to come to griefs because these two switches appear to be about 30-32 inches from the front of your layout. That's a long way to reach!
after considering how to eliminate the switch at the backside of the layout, i thought i could make a (half) switch (see photo) to the front of the layout, and run gantlet track in the 15" curve. the track would separate in the back of the layout (requiring a frog).
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
It's great to find another point to point fan. I'm one and I find that it allows for more realistic scenery and much more interesting operation (because you never get to stand back and just watch). Your track plan reminds me a little bit of mine:
The drawing is not precisely to scale, but the grid is 1 square = 6".
My layout is 4' wide and 16' long with a 2' gap for the furnace (bridges get the train past the furnace - there's a bridge in the front and in the back). By making the layout a little wider than yours, I ended up with a little bigger minimum radius. The helix at the right end is half in tunnels and half on trestles. The bridge where the upper level exits/enters the helix limits the height of locos and lolling stock, but I like things light and small, so it's not an issue. I did try running my 46-year old F-7 on it once (this loco was a gift on my 6th Christmas). The F-7 wouldn't make it under the bridge. I did have a 70 ton shay that fit under the bridge just fine.
Originally, the layout stopped at the right side of the furnace, but I developed a desire to turn locos, so I added the other piece with the reversing loop and turntable. That made things a lot more fun.
The distant corners of the layout are out of reach, but the tunnel eliminates the need to scenic that section and a curved backdrop eliminates the left-hand corner from the sceniced section. You'll notice that the non-loop portions of the layout are narrower that the ends, that gives me a reasonably easy reach to the far side. I also built the layout at 42" high (lower than many folks). Sitting in a chair while operating makes this about right, yet it is also easy to work on (standing).
In the event that I ever have a derailment inside of a tunnel, there are openings underneath to allow me to retrieve the equipment involved (it has been years since I had a derailment anywhere on the layout, but you never know).
Based on my experience I do have a couple of suggestions for you: Widen the loop section to allow for at least 18" radius curves and build your layout at a height that will allow you to reach where you need to reach.
Finally, I'll close with a couple of pictures so you can see how things turned out for me.
I wanted more layout, so I built around the furnace. By the way, the vent on the rear-facing light on the Heisler (lower left) prevented it from making it under the bridge. With a little creativity, it now makes it (barely).
This mountain saves me from having to do scenery on this distant corner.
This bridge limits the height of equipment, but not to the point that I find it a problem.
A curved backdrop will hide the distant corner.
Phil, I'm not a rocket scientist; they are my students.
Hi Greg
You were very specific about the era, the railroad, the locale, the kind of trains you want to run and what they do. I feel you started with track planning right away. Some folks just step back now and start researching what the Reading did way back.
Start with the coalmine, it could be a small one or a very big one. Where do you think the Reading made a railconnection? The small mines used trucks to bring the coal to a dumpside. The dumpside will be somewhere along the "main", the tracks to the bigger mine could be on a branch.
Coal came out in various sizes, so it was transported to a crusher in the valley. Several mines could share the same crusher; they were big. Coal was "washed" too, near the mine or near the crusher.
Cars from several crushers were assembled in a yard and sent to customers. Keep in mind loads went down the hill, empty's up.
Modeling all this takes a lot of space, and railroad related industry's were big. Hence the advice for using N-scale. You have to go your own way, all we can do is giving you information you''ll need.
Suppose you only build a coalmine and washer complex, you still need to get the coal out to the crusher. This is where staging comes in; just a few tracks out of sight would do the trick. You run your train with loaded hoppers into staging (so, off the more visible part of your layout) and a cup of coffee later a train with empty hoppers, bound for the mine, is leaving the staging area to go up again. Staging can also be done by hand (to fiddle) or casette, but usualy on a less visible spot. (Staging represents the rest of the world or the Reading, if you like)
What i described has a underlying reasons.
What do you really want?: Is it a good representation of coalmine operations along the Reading or do you want to show off your engines on a nice turntable next to the yard down in the valley. (Hazard county?) Or can you fit in both? In your space in HO or N? Smaller mines did exist, in the Rocky's but along the Reading?
What do you really want? Running your trains as the Reading did or creating some nice scenes with a railroad in it?
You have to take the decissions, i only tried to give you an idea where all the questions are coming from.
The dispatcher is running the show from his desk. He gives train A permission to go to the crusher and tells train B to wait till A has arrived. How this was done in the 30"s without a phone system and somtimes without signals as well is a different story and there were more trains involved.
Have fun, good luck, smile
from Holland, Paul
some very unexpected and thoughtful suggestions. Thanks. Guess i should have mentioned that it is HO, a tunnel between P0 and P1, P20 about 1" above P1 and P5 another inch higher.
R.T.PoteetI see the two branches but I don't see how you have to get from one to the other!
Paulus Jas are you new in the hoby? do you know (and like) the concept of staging? are you after building some nice scenes or do you want to model a (real or fictitious) railroad. If you are running your little trains, which job do you prefer? (engeneer, dispatcher, trainwatcher...................) What kind of trains do you like to run? Do you want to run your trains often? Some prefer building scenery or building their engines from brass. Where, when and why are your trains running ?(locale, era and theme) why not draw the room of your build as well?
West Coast SConnect P5 with P22 , this will create a run around siding with a switchback scenario, this siding should not have any elevation whatsoever.
West Coast SDo you really require the capacity to turn locomotives?
HHPATH56A point to point railroad does not lend itself to maximum mainline length. Why don't you forget the roundhouse and turn-table and make a double loop,(or reverse loop), a train length round about, with two crossovers and a few spurs for industries. This will give you a lot more interesting and longer mainline for operation and railfanning.
Paulus JasOnly after people get the whole picture you can start a proper discussion about what's for you the best way to go.
With a 3'x11' layout space, it is obvious that you must use N scale, rather than HO scale. A point to point railroad does not lend itself to maximum mainline length. Why don't you forget the roundhouse and turn-table and make a double loop,(or reverse loop), a train length round about, with two crossovers and a few spurs for industries. This will give you a lot more interesting and longer mainline for operation and railfanning. As mentioned by others, keep the switches closer than 30" from the front of the layout. The layout,as shown, will get boring very soon. Please show the room doors and windows, so that we can make comments. Bob Hahn.
Here's my observations:
Elimanate turnouts P20 and P26
Connect P5 with P22 , this will create a run around siding with a switchback scenario, this siding should not have any elevation whatsoever.
Run the branch (blue) over P1, this would require a short, steep grade given your space. I would consider a tunnel for P1 which ties in with my next observation:
Continous backdrop between yard and mine area, terminate said backdrop at layout edge where P1 tunnels under mine branch and and at layout edge where tail track currently wraps around the turntable.
Do you really require the capacity to turn locomotives? I would consider eliminating this in favor of a run around siding and retaining one stub for car storage. really no point as there are no turning provisions located elsewhere.
Unlike the majority, I am of the opinion that stagging in certain situations is is overrated, that above mentioned stub could be used to "fiddle" equiptment on and off the layout as needed.
Just my thoughts.
Dave
Dear Greg
It surely added length, question remains did you consider other options? Is this the best for you? A bit of lap running could even get you more "distance". Which scheme fits best?, answering that question needs far more info from your side.
i'll ask you a couple of questions: (don't answer them right now, meant just to read through; and don't be afraid their are many more)
So many questions, but asked with a reason. I mentioned laprunning, not because i want you to do that, but to find out about the things you considered yourself allready; share them please. Only after people get the whole picture you can start a proper discussion about what's for you the best way to go.
Have fun, good luck
Paul
Glad to have ya' aboard podna'!
If you are a Joe Fugate type and interested in shoving a lot of cars around then your plan has significant merit. Several features associated with your track plan lead me to believe that you are considering doing this layout in HO-Scale however that presents a slight problem -- your three foot measurement is on the right side of your drawing and to get a turnback curve -- the red line -- pressed into three feet requires 15" radius curves and those are categorized as "very sharp curves". Very sharp curves require very small engines -- 0-4-0 or 0-6-0 steam or end cab diesel switchers -- and short freight cars. If you are willing to live with that then your plan will work.
This plan might work a little better with N-Scale! With N-Scale you could utilize a 16" radius curve on that 3' end; that is a broad radius curve and there are really no restrictions with curves of that radii!
One other point need be raised . . . . . switches are always the danger point in any operating environment; if the back side of your layout is not open providing access to P0 and P5 then sooner or later you are going to come to griefs because these two switches appear to be about 30-32 inches from the front of your layout. That's a long way to reach!
Maybe I'm missing something but I don't quite understand your statement
gregc. . . . . . . . . . I've created two branches from a small engine terminal so that cars from the one branch have to go through the yard to get to the other branch, and one branch has a switch back from a station siding to reach two mine facilities.
go through the yard
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
I'm planning a 3'x11' point-to-point layout and am trying to make the effective track distance as long as possible. I've created two branches from a small engine terminal so that cars from the one branch have to go through the yard to get to the other branch, and one branch has a switch back from a station siding to reach two mine facilities.
Am i right in assuming this effectively lengthens the layout and will lead to more interesting operations, even though the tracks on the different branches may be only inches apart and at different elevations?
Are there drawbacks to this approach and what other options might i consider?