Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Compound Ladder

18716 views
24 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Colorful Colorado
  • 8,639 posts
Posted by Texas Zepher on Saturday, March 12, 2011 9:57 PM

odave
One thing to keep in mind about compound ladders is that they're not seen on the prototype very often

Depending on the era, another reason a compound is not used is if the turnouts are controlled from the yard tower rather than on the ground.  It is much easier to design and build the mechanical control rods from the tower to a standard ladder than it is a compound ladder.

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Colorful Colorado
  • 8,639 posts
Posted by Texas Zepher on Saturday, March 12, 2011 9:53 PM

dante
There are #4s and other #4s, apparently.  Repeating a previous observation I made in another thread:

"I have a Walthers/Shinohara #4 (DCC friendly with dead frog) on my test tracks being used to confirm criteria for the layout about to be built.  My 6-axle Proto 2000 E-8 and PA-1 and BLI heavy 2-8-2 take the turnout with ease, whether traveling fast or slow.  

 

You are exactly right.  The frog angle is only part of the equation when it comes to how "tight" a turnout is.  Another factor is how "curved" the departure rail is. 

Then one must also consider the "advertised" size vs. the real size.  For example the Atlas Custom Line turnout frogs are not really #4 but closer to #4.75.  That might not seem like much but when it comes to practicallity it is a huge difference.     I have many pieces of equipment (mostly SD units) that will go through an Atlas Custom Line #4, or Peco "short"  with no problem but short on a Shinohara #4.

Likewise I've seen curved turnouts advertised with a frog #.  That is just silly to me.  While I know the math to compute such a curved frog, it is irrelevant.   The important thing with curved turnouts is the difference in the two curvatures.  The bigger the difference the sooner the tracks will be separate from one another. 

  • Member since
    April 2002
  • 921 posts
Posted by dante on Saturday, March 12, 2011 9:29 PM

There are #4s and other #4s, apparently.  Repeating a previous observation I made in another thread:

"I have a Walthers/Shinohara #4 (DCC friendly with dead frog) on my test tracks being used to confirm criteria for the layout about to be built.  My 6-axle Proto 2000 E-8 and PA-1 and BLI heavy 2-8-2 take the turnout with ease, whether traveling fast or slow.  

The probable significant factor is that the radius of closure rail (RCR) is 26" as measured by Ribbonrail templates.  That is significantly better than the 15" and 22" indicated for a #4 and #4-1/2, respectively, in John Armstrong's book on track planning.  The frog is definitely a measured #4....

The obvious suggestion is to test your equipment on the turnouts you expect to use."

Dante

 

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Finger Lakes
  • 561 posts
Posted by TBat55 on Saturday, March 12, 2011 7:02 AM

Brakeman safety concerns crossing tracks to throw  switch AND time delays if a train passes.

For us, a compound design may mean switch machines instead of manual throws if cars are in the way (gets worse with more trracks).  I'm using ground throws with the ladder almost parallel to the aisle for easier reaching.  Also like that an engineeer can always see the switch targets with a ladder.

Terry

  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: US
  • 4,648 posts
Posted by jacon12 on Saturday, March 12, 2011 6:58 AM

Before I knew I couldn't... I did.  My yard has 3 tracks, a double ended compound I guess you'd call it.  I used Peco medium (don't they just about equal an Atlas #4?), and I have no problem with 4 and 6 axle diesels as well as steam engines up to Mikado size.  Now, my class A 2-6-6-4 (that's it in the picture behind me below)... that's another matter.  It's very rare that it will make it into the yard without derailing.  One end of the yard is arranged so that it is a pretty straight shot to back it in and then straight down the track, across the TT and onto it's track at the roundhouse.  50' cars and under have no problems with the compound ladder and I don't run anything longer.

Jarrell

 HO Scale DCC Modeler of 1950, give or take 30 years.
  • Member since
    January 2008
  • From: Central Georgia
  • 921 posts
Posted by Johnnny_reb on Saturday, March 12, 2011 6:28 AM

One of NS's largest hump yards, Brosnan Yard is located just up the road from me (Macon Ga.) and has a compound ladder construction to the yard. More information can be found at the link below.

http://www.georgiarailfan.net/macon.htm

Johnnny_reb Once a word is spoken it can not be unspoken!

My Train Page   My Photobucket Page   My YouTube Channel

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Fenton, MI
  • 289 posts
Posted by odave on Friday, March 11, 2011 9:00 PM

You're welcome.  One thing to keep in mind about compound ladders is that they're not seen on the prototype very often.  One reason for this, I read, is that the brakeman would have to keep crossing the tracks to line the switches, which becomes a safety issue.  But on the model, sometimes compromises to the prototype look can buy you a lot more operations - it's a balancing game.

--O'Dave
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Friday, March 11, 2011 5:47 PM

odave

I don't have access to 3rdPlanIt right now, but the turnout for the 5th yard track would go roughly here:

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk134/odave807/ModelRailroad/CompoundLadderComparison5Track.jpg

Thanks, everyone.

O'Dave, that's exactly what I was looking for.  Thank you.

It is amazing how much additional usable track space you can pick up by using a compound ladder rather than a simple ladder.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • From: PA
  • 63 posts
Posted by tschwarz on Friday, March 11, 2011 11:31 AM

cowman

Thank you for the responses.

I am modeling the transition era, so no really long cars or big locos.  However, unless space is really a major issue, will try #6's to reduce frustration.  If I do concider #4's I won't totally secure them until I have done more than a few test runs.

Thanks again,

Richard

If your doing the transition era I would HIGHLY suggest you use the #6 turnouts unless you are not going to run anything larger than a Consolidation.  I think even a Mikado would have trouble through the S-curves that you would have when using the #4 switches.  I have never tried the #4 compound ladder and it is just an opinion but I wouldn't use anything that tight. 

I am running #8's on anything that I can that will see my large locomotives or using the straight part of a #6 turnout when possible for those areas.

Tom

 

Modeling the Pittsburgh Division of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad from Glenwood Yard to New Castle Yard following the old P&W Mainline.

Visit my website at: http://www.baltimoreandohiorr.com

 

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • From: PA
  • 63 posts
Posted by tschwarz on Friday, March 11, 2011 11:23 AM

cowman

Thank you for the responses.

I am modeling the transition era, so no really long cars or big locos.  However, unless space is really a major issue, will try #6's to reduce frustration.  If I do concider #4's I won't totally secure them until I have done more than a few test runs.

Thanks again,

Richard

If your doing the transition era I would HIGHLY suggest you use the #6 turnouts unless you are not going to run anything larger than a Consolidation.  I think even a Mikado would have trouble through the S-curves that you would have when using the #4 switches.  I have never tried the #4 compound ladder and it is just an opinion but I wouldn't use anything that tight. 

I am running #8's on anything that I can that will see my large locomotives or using the straight part of a #6 turnout when possible for those areas.

Tom

 

Modeling the Pittsburgh Division of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad from Glenwood Yard to New Castle Yard following the old P&W Mainline.

Visit my website at: http://www.baltimoreandohiorr.com

 

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • 947 posts
Posted by HHPATH56 on Friday, March 11, 2011 9:53 AM
Each of the seven tracks of the stub ended compound ladder on the left has access to every other track via double slip switches and lengthy enough track to stre eight freight cars. The overhead loop of the main line is connected to the compound ladder with two curved lengthy drill tracks, so that the switcher never has to tie up the mainline. Bob Hahn
  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Fenton, MI
  • 289 posts
Posted by odave on Friday, March 11, 2011 9:25 AM

I don't have access to 3rdPlanIt right now, but the turnout for the 5th yard track would go roughly here:

--O'Dave
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Friday, March 11, 2011 9:19 AM

dehusman

You could probably build a straight #4 ladder in the same space as a #6 compund ladder.

Two reasons for me not to do that.  One, I already have the #6 turnouts.  Two, from past experience, the #4 turnouts are too tight on the divergent route, and I will never use #4's again.

 

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Friday, March 11, 2011 8:38 AM

You could probably build a straight #4 ladder in the same space as a #6 compund ladder.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Friday, March 11, 2011 6:48 AM

odave

Here's a ladder comparison I drew up some time ago, and I think I used Atlas #4s (darned old CRS syndrome!)

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk134/odave807/ModelRailroad/CompoundLadderComparison.jpg

I have no experience actually running on ladder that uses #4s, but I would assume longer equiplment will have problems as noted above.

My current storage yard looks just like the diagram on the right only with #6 turnouts.  I would like to change it to reflect the diagram on the left but with 5 tracks coming off the mainline instead of the 4 tracks shown in the diagram.  Where on the track diagram would I install one additional turnout to accomplish this 5-track arrangement?

Thanks.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central Vermont
  • 4,565 posts
Posted by cowman on Thursday, February 24, 2011 5:50 PM

Dave,

That's the great thing about these forums, you can learn by seeing other folks questions and the answers they get.  Sometimes you don't even know that there was such a question, but there's the question and answer to something you are coming to soon in your layout building.

Hope you will be happy with your new configuration.

Have fun,

Richard

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 15,797 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:49 PM

Richard

Thanks for asking your question. It gave me pause to go back and look at my yard ladders. I had designed them with Peco small radius turnouts and at the time I was concerned about the inherent 'S' curves when I set it up. So, after reading your post, I went back and changed the small turnouts to medium and discovered that I lost very little space in the process. I had to space the yard tracks about 1/4" further apart to do this but that was easily accomodated. I am modeling the late 50's so I can avoid anything longer than 50'.  I feel much more confident in my future yard operations thanks to you and the responses you garnered.

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: 4610 Metre's North of the Fortyninth on the left coast of Canada
  • 9,352 posts
Posted by BATMAN on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:43 PM

What about #5s.

Brent

Brent

"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central Vermont
  • 4,565 posts
Posted by cowman on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:35 PM

Have a couple of those.  Was thinking of using them elsewhere, but will see where they work best.  Still in early planning stages so have plenty of time for trial and error.

Thanks,

Richard

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by Hamltnblue on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 7:55 PM

I just built one with 3 tracks on the side and found that the PECO 3 way switch worked great and takes up very little space.

Springfield PA

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central Vermont
  • 4,565 posts
Posted by cowman on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 6:46 PM

Thank you for the responses.

I am modeling the transition era, so no really long cars or big locos.  However, unless space is really a major issue, will try #6's to reduce frustration.  If I do concider #4's I won't totally secure them until I have done more than a few test runs.

Thanks again,

Richard

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Fenton, MI
  • 289 posts
Posted by odave on Tuesday, February 22, 2011 8:32 AM

Here's a ladder comparison I drew up some time ago, and I think I used Atlas #4s (darned old CRS syndrome!)

I have no experience actually running on ladder that uses #4s, but I would assume longer equiplment will have problems as noted above.

--O'Dave
  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
  • 1,484 posts
Posted by Paulus Jas on Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:56 AM

hi

a compound yard is a space saver; it can be done with #4 switches as well. The lower numbered switches will limit the use of longer cars and engines; 50 feet cars and 4-axel diesels or small steamers will not have problems.

Paul

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Clinton, MO, US
  • 4,261 posts
Posted by Medina1128 on Monday, February 21, 2011 10:35 PM

Unless you're only running 4 axle diesels and short cars, you'd end up with "S" curves that will cause you grief if you try to run longer cars or steam locomotives.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Central Vermont
  • 4,565 posts
Compound Ladder
Posted by cowman on Monday, February 21, 2011 10:10 PM

I have seen plans for #6 compound ladders, but never for other #'d turnouts.  Has anyone done one with Atlas #4's?  I presume it can be done, though may have to use flex track between the turnouts.  Any experience, comments or thoughts appreciated. 

Thank you,

Richard

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!