Yard shapes...we're debating...

[Jacktal]

At the club I belong to,we are planning on improving our yard.We are discussing different ideas and are trying to come up with the best possible plan.One idea(mine,by the way) is to build a curved yard to accomodate our benchwork and create a much longer yard.However,some say that a curved yard isn't prototypical and wouldn't be easy to operate anyway.

I'm just curious to know if there are indeed curved prototype yards,designed to make best use of the available landscape,like let's say along a river bed,or around the base of a mountain,or other restrictions.Thanks.

[Big_Boy_4005]

The answer to the question of curved yards is yes for prototype, but they are usually very wide sweeping curves. I would say that it is not wise or recommended for modeling because of coupling problems. If you wanted to have arrival / departure tracks on a curve, that might be OK, but you need to keep the classification and working tracks as straight as possible.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Thanks Mark, and welcome back to the world of little trains.[swg] Are you going to find the time to get back into modeling?

I'm guessing that the danger and inefficency would come from having to have a man on the ground constantly aligning couplers. Yikes!

[Anonymous]

A very good book to look at is "North American Railyards" by Michael Rhodes.This book has just every railroad yard used by all the railroads today. Its a good reference tool for modeling the yards. Hope this will help your club.
Andrew

[Junctionfan]

To me the best way to accomidate a large amount of cars was a stump yard. It didn't take too much room. It was a large yard that was slightly larger than a one car garage. It was a large yard that with two lead tracks in the middle. A double slip switch in the middle. The middle tracks went into different direction curving into a wye and each curve had a passing siding to switch the engines location from front to back of train. Each half that was seperated by the middle leads, laddered down until the last track became a lead. At the lead, you switched the track went forward into the passenger yard that could hold as much as 6-4 car passenger trains plus engine. On the other side of the stump yard was the engine shops which we had 15 or more engines. The car shops was in front of it located by the otherside's lead. The wye of the yard became became the run for the departure and arrival tracks. The whole thing looked like McDonalds' golden arch. The middle part was where the classification, engine, passenger yards were as well as the car shop. The left part was where we had steam era stuff including a turntable and roundhouse. The right part was where we had the automotive and intermodal yards. The top part of the m was the staging with the double track mainline behind it. All together our yard facility could hold 500 cars. Although we had steam, we did not have any rollingstock that was not running from the 1980s to present so all the boxcars was 50 to 60 with 86 footers in the automotive yard along with the autoracks and automax cars.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Gee Mark, sorry to hear that you've given up modeling. I don't think you would have any real trouble getting back into it, if you ever became interested again. It's kind of like riding a bike. Beside with your knowledge and experience with real trains, you could design great layouts.

I hope that all of your posting on this little MR forum isn't just a brief fit of boredom. This is a very under used resource compared to the general discussion section, and many people don't post their questions here because they don't get viewed as much, even though they are fairly specific to prototype issues.

Andy comes around sometimes and answers some questions, but usually just one or two and then he's gone, back to work. So, if you have the time, I'm sure the modelers will appreciate the help, even if they don't know who you are.[;)]

Then there's me, who for a wide variety of reasons spends way too much time here. Sure I could be doing something more constructive with my time, but I really enjoy sharing what I know about the hobby and trains in general with people who are interested.

By the way, I just happen to know as a result of a previous post, that the person asking the question is in an N scale club. It takes less curve in modeling than you think, to start causing the need for human intervention. Model couplers are designed to self center, and because of their size can easily miss.

[mvlandsw]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill

To add to Elliot's comments: Yards on a curve used for classification are extremely rare in the prototype. They're dangerous and uneconomical. The "yards on a curve" you see are principally used for crew changes, power changes, staging, storage, interchange, or arrival/departure -- the trains receive little or no switching.

They may be uncommon but certainly not rare-at least in the Pittsburgh area. I've worked in at least five yards used to switch or classify cars on the B&O and can think of several on other railroads. The curves do create problems but in many locations no better alignment is available.

[Anonymous]

Avoid Curves like the plague on MMR yards, you'll learn to hate them really fast if you use them.

If you've got the space, try using a Hump yard, they're large, but sectionalized, so you could get away with putting westbound yard seperated from the east bound yard in an L shape, if you have to. This would allow you more versitility in locating the yards than a flat Yard would.

[dknelson]

Mitchell Yard on the UP (ex CNW) in Milwaukee on the south side might offer an idea. It is a small classification yard for local service at a lower level than the main line (which continues on to Butler Yard, the "big" yard in Milwaukee for the UP/CNW), and the yard leads parallel the main. At the far end of the yard is a curved track that goes to the Belt Line which serves local grain/malt plants and which is also an interchange with the CP (ex Soo ex Milwaukee Road). My point is that the situation rather resembles what model layouts often have to deal with as a compromise. At least at one time the interchange trains would come right into Mitchell Yd to drop off their cars, so it allows foreign road engines and cabooses as well. A few through freights would also drop off and pick up cars, at leats in the good old C&NW days they did.
Although it does not provide a plan for the yard itself, the general area was the subject of a great article by Gordon Odegard in Model Railroader for May 1973, called "Down By Mitchell Yard." A general schematic of the yard is available in one of the binders of track chart reproductions sold by Dave Conrad of Madison WI. I think he advertises in Trains classifieds. He has many RR's track charts avaiable for sale.
Dave Nelson

[Anonymous]

if you want to seethe most of unusual curved Yards come to Saint John New
Brunswick and see our CN Rail/NB Southern leased Island yard.I have wondered
about the design as basicly a tea spoon with reciving yard curved with tracks that
reach forward.there are three long tracks at centre with the shop and engine
on the other side.at one time there was two tracks on the left side looking east that
was used for in bound or out bound passenger trains of CN and later VIA.they are
now used as inound freight holding till shunted into yard to be again shunted for
local transfers.

We need to be thanking GOD
for the freedom we have..

David

[johncolley]

For a 5 or 6 track curved yard for separating blocks of cars going north to Beiber to interchange with Great Northern, East to Portola, or West to Oakland, see the Western Pacific yard at Keddie, CA

[Anonymous]

Speaking of Milwaukee...it's hard to think of a Milwaukee Road yard in that city that wasn't curved! The principal yard, Muskego Yard, was an s-curve. The often-photographed Everett Street passenger station's yard had sharp curves at both ends, and all of the following Milwaukee Road yards had curves through the body tracks and/or the lead tracks: Chestnut Street; Walnut Street; Humboldt; Port; Rock; both Bluemound yards; Soldier's Home; Davies; Adams and Reed Street. The hump yard body tracks were straight, but the lead tracks were curved, as were the lead and body tracks of the parallel Air Line arrival yard.

Were they inconvenient, even dangerous to work? Sure. Did we have to "go high" to pass hand signals? Yup, and used fusees rather than hand lamps many times at night. Did we like it? Nope. Were we very, very careful? Definitely.

[dehusman]

Actually every hump yard with more than a dozen or so bowl tracks is a "curved yard" because the bowl tracks have to curve around the middle bowl tracks.

I would discourage a hump yard. They are complicated to build and a regular flat switching yard works as well or better for model purposes.

A curved model yard wouldn't be that bad as long as the minimum radius in the yard is broad (30" radius or bigger) Especially if you are modeling steam era. Most couple alignment issues on curves are because of different length cars and different couple to truck center distances, which cause different amount of "overhang" on curves. If you use predominately the same size cars, you will have less of a problem. If you have a steam era layout and 90% of your cars are 34-50 feet long you will have less problems than a modern era layout where you will have to couple 34 ft twin covered hoppers and 90 ft pig flats or auto racks.

Dave H..

[johncolley]

Oh, and another curved yard that springs to memory is GN's Appleyard in Wenatchee, WA and it is a big yard with traffic East, West, North, and South. They're out there folks and some do indeed do classifying. Mind you the curves are big, not the puny toy like curves on a typical model layout of 18 to 24" radius. If you want it to look realistic and workable, try 42"or 48" on up with about 72" mainline minimum.