Long trains look cool, but they require long sidings. Good operation requires as many passing points as you can work in. OTOH you eventually get to the point where you loose the look and feel of a single track railroad and you might as well be double track.
If you are modeling class I, single track railroading, how did you arrive at a balance of train length, passing siding length and count, and still maintain the feel of a single track railroad?
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
One other suggestion that they recommend is having a minium of 1 train lenght between towns.
This makes building a small layout tuff in trying to get everything in one wants and still make a good operating layout.
If one wants long trains - then modeling less towns is about the only way to make it happen.
Or build a larger room/layout.
BOB H - Clarion, PA
cmrproducts If one wants long trains - then modeling less towns is about the only way to make it happen. Or build a larger room/layout. BOB H - Clarion, PA
The layout design I am currently working on is designed around 30-35 car length trains. I am going with fewer towns and a long mainline run (450 ft). It's a three level mushroom design in a 28x32x10 ft room.
Modeling an HO gauge freelance version of the Union Pacific Oregon Short Line and the Utah Railway around 1957 in a world where Pirates from the Great Salt Lake founded Ogden, UT.
- Photo album of layout construction -
Class I railroading could be a lot of things-- do you mean town-to-town operation? Switching? Local vs. through traffic in a single town? Urban vs. rural setting? A big junction, a passing town or a sleepy terminal on a branch? Or numerous other possibilities.
I think whatever space we have as modelers, if we want realism we will find an appropriate context for it, and fit in the sacrifices we have to make for our needs-- the balance of train length, siding length, etc., fits the bigger balance question of space, aesthetic sacrifice, and operating style.
"Good operation" requiring many passing points would depend on how many trains you're running, no? I think most small layouts (tabletop to spare bedroom-size) sacrifice long train lengths, or run fewer trains, for the sake of more realistic operation-- if you have to have two towns on your layout and the engine is in one while the caboose is in the other, either you shorten the trains or you live with that look. The space compels you, and not everybody has room for a basement-filler. Not everybody has a basement, even!
Some of the best layouts I've found modeling single-track had very little track and spare use of turnouts. One, maybe two runarounds. Trevor Marshall's S-scale Port Rowan layout is a favorite that I keep coming back to, but I tend to prefer quieter layout atmospheres. The opposite works, too, just in a different context-- Steinjr's layout, which I came across many times when I first discovered this forum, was also great. It had a lot more track but focused on industrial switching (IIRC jam-packed into a closet.)
My little 6x9 donut will have Class I railroading-- DRGW certainly counts-- but my intended focus is on a small town and local operation interrupted by through trains, so the purposes are different than they might be if you want to see a long train snaking across some expanse. I have one runaround. Probably 5-6 freight cars max per train. But that's a function of what I want as a modeler and how I fit that into the small space that I have. (Plus, there's some Class III railroading in there as well. And I can run it roundy-round if I really feel like it, at the sacrifice of a little realism. )
P
cmrproducts One other suggestion that they recommend is having a minium of 1 train lenght between towns. This makes building a small layout tuff in trying to get everything in one wants and still make a good operating layout. If one wants long trains - then modeling less towns is about the only way to make it happen. Or build a larger room/layout. BOB H - Clarion, PA
The recomendation's I have read all say three times train length.
With only one your locomoive is in one town while the caboose is in the next town.
This destroys the sense of the train going somewhere and realisam
So the minimum has to be at least two train lengths between towns
Your only options are to tailor train lengths and town numbers to the space avalable,
or you revert to spagheti bowl track plan with suitable scenic seperation to gain track miles if you want non town station crossing loops as well that is going to increase the track miles required even more.
regards John
John BusbyThe recomendation's I have read all say three times train length. With only one your locomoive is in one town while the caboose is in the next town. This destroys the sense of the train going somewhere and realisam So the minimum has to be at least two train lengths between towns Your only options are to tailor train lengths and town numbers to the space avalable, or you revert to spagheti bowl track plan with suitable scenic seperation to gain track miles if you want non town station crossing loops as well that is going to increase the track miles required even more. regards John
The bottom line is we have to work with the space we have so, for many/most of us, that realism gained by 3 train lengths between towns is simply not possible. Those who are blessed with a fairly generous layout room and can design to those ideals, the rest of us have to muddle along and do the best we can.
I've got a smallish 10x18' room, and can't achieve "realism" for a class 1 D&RGW RR, but I'm still building to allow me to run 25-30 car coal trains with 2-4 loco's powering that I can stuff into 11 staging tracks and run a round a no-lix up and over and back down. A yard with some switching opportunities is going in above the staging area - that will have to do until or if I ever get a significantly larger space.
As is normal, modeling a RR realistically depends much on 1) money, 2) space, and 3) a good plan and 4) some skill and knowledge.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
John BusbyThe recomendation's I have read all say three times train length.
I haven't seen that in print anywhere that I remember. It's great if that much space is available, but for many it is not an option. For Timetable and Train Order (TT&TO) operation, even more length between towns might be optimal, but for other styles of operation, less may have to do.
I often design layouts based on what master track planner Don Mitchell dubbed "lineals" -- basically these are the typical train length. Obviously, passing sidings should be one lineal in length and it is handy if one or more of the yard tracks is also that length. (Staging tracks also, of course).
Then I work around the layout, generally trying to get as many lineals as possible between each passing siding.
For the Original Poster, it may be a matter of reducing the number of passing locations overall in the layout, allowing more of the adjacent locations to be represented by staging. An alternative is reducing the typical train length.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I dealt with the same question for me fictional HOnUP/Amtrak railroad in a 20x16 room with peninsulas. I determined after much thought that my lineal will be 6 feet. That gets engine plus five super liner cars ... a short but prototypical train. With 50' boxcars, you get about 8-9 plus engine. Ok for my situation since I am not modeling "large scale railroading" but rather a feel where railroads are moving goods within the layout.
I have some a few 8' tracks in my yard/staging and one 8' passing siding just to run a train with two SD70s which will look ridiculous with five cars. These trains are for railfaning and are hard to "operate".
NP
John Busby With only one your locomoive is in one town while the caboose is in the next town. This destroys the sense of the train going somewhere and realisam So the minimum has to be at least two train lengths between towns Your only options are to tailor train lengths and town numbers to the space avalable, or you revert to spagheti bowl track plan with suitable scenic seperation to gain track miles if you want non town station crossing loops as well that is going to increase the track miles required even more. regards John
Not counting the staging yards and reverse loops at each end, I've got 10' of single track, a 16' passing siding, 77' of single track, a 14' passing siding, and 22' of single track. My longest trains of 2-3 diesels, 20 100-ton hoppers and a caboose are about 13' long. That gives me almost 6 times train length between passing sidings.
I like long trains as well, although a long train for me might be different than for you. I am planning on one major town on a multi level layout and a couple of small towns that might have a siding or two and that is all. Long trains for me would be more than a scale mile in length, 60 feet in HO. The actual distance I will be modeling will be less than 20 miles of real world realestate so I will be running trains from staging to a yard or on to staging. The only trains that will get passed will be the locals which might be in the 40 to 60 car range. I will run real time no fast clocks and trains will arrive at the yard with intervals of about 30 minutes between them, that way switching can take place with out looking like a nascar event and the trains will not look like any power that does not have sw as it's first initals is a complete waste of horse power.
In the area I plan on modeling I could never see the entire train at the same time and being able to do that on the model would spoil the illusion for me. At normal speeds it takes between 4 and 8 minutes for a 160 car train to pass a given point.