Layouts and layout building

If you are going to simply copy others' track plans and post them, please at least give them credit. This is the Third Street Industrial plan by Bill Baumann from the November 1985 Model Railroader and the Kalmbach book 48 Top Notch Track Plans. The layout has a number of limtiations and challenges,as we discussed here the last time this came up.
http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/p/139817/1558416.aspx

Wolfgang Dudler has built a version
http://www.westportterminal.de/thirdstreet.html

 ... sorry - I forgot the credits - yes, it is a track plan from Bill Baumann. I like the idea of the industrial line underpassing the main quite a lot as a scenic feature. I have not checked the operational challenges, yet.

Also, the grade is a little to steep for my test - I guess that may be one of the reasons why Wolfgang Dudler made it much longer than the original 10´. 

Thanks, cuyama, for the links!

 Over the last weeks, I have been playing around with a lot of ideas on how to come up with a simple, but also scenic design for a small shelf switching layout. The forum provided a vast number of contributions as food for thought, so did a lot of surfing the internet for small layout ideas. A lot what I had posted here was "borrowed" , either copied or adapted. Somehow all these ideas did not create this "wow - that´s what I want to build"-feeling in my stomach. So how to proceed from here?

I negiotated with SWMBO to get some extra space - if I make the layout not as deep as 2ft, say only 18", I can get a couple of feet extra in length, up to 11´ or even 12´ in total - plus a 3´ switching lead for staging, if it is detachable. Her desk can than go under the layout!

 I am fascinated with Lance Mindheim´s work - his East Rail project is just fantastic. I like the simplicity of the design, yet complex and highly detailed in the execution. His East Rail gives me that wow-feeling!

As I cannot build an L-shaped layout, I took some "modeler´s license"  to adapt some features of his East rail into a straight shape and "relocated" the whole thing to the Milwaukee area.

This is what it looks like:

 Most of the buildings will have to be scratchbuilt, but that´s part of the challenge. I welcome any improvements!

 Thanks for bearing with me!

Sir Madog:

 Over the last weeks, I have been playing around with a lot of ideas on how to come up with a simple, but also scenic design for a small shelf switching layout. The forum provided a vast number of contributions as food for thought, so did a lot of surfing the internet for small layout ideas. A lot what I had posted here was "borrowed" , either copied or adapted. Somehow all these ideas did not create this "wow - that´s what I want to build"-feeling in my stomach. So how to proceed from here?

I negiotated with SWMBO to get some extra space - if I make the layout not as deep as 2ft, say only 18", I can get a couple of feet extra in length, up to 11´ or even 12´ in total - plus a 3´ switching lead for staging, if it is detachable. Her desk can than go under the layout!

 I am fascinated with Lance Mindheim´s work - his East Rail project is just fantastic. I like the simplicity of the design, yet complex and highly detailed in the execution. His East Rail gives me that wow-feeling!

This is what it looks like:

 Most of the buildings will have to be scratchbuilt, but that´s part of the challenge. I welcome any improvements!

Strictly personal opinion - the new design will be great fun to build.  Things are spread out enough that you can truly capture the essence of the prototype with attention to detail.

But....will you be satisfied with efficient but boring (IMHO) operations for very long once the layout is built?  The real railroads prefer track arrangements that are efficient.  Routine is a good thing, because it means predictability in schedules for both the railroad and for customers.

In the model railroading world, there is an influential group that is very down on designing in intentional roadblocks to efficient switching in small layouts.  Their points are that the prototype prefers efficiency, and does everything within monetary reason to get rid of roadblocks.  And that we should be modeling that efficiency.  A switching puzzle track arrangement epitomizes the wrong approach to this group.

Depending on your personality and desires, it may or may not be boring to operate a small layout prototype style.  And don't get me wrong, a specific impediment to efficient switching can be become boring, too.  A hurdle like a switchback that has to be used on nearly every move, or a runaround that only clears one car at a time may become just as old as all spurs stacked in the same direction as your suggested plan has.

Bottom line:  the lack of a runaround and having all spurs face the same direction concerns me, but it might be just fine for you.  If you are concerned about boring operations, the given track arrangement with attention paid to spur lengths could contain an Inglenook "game".  If you have no worries in this area, enjoy building. 

my thoughts, your choices

Fred W

 FredW,

my first version of this plan had a switchback, which mad a run-around necessary. I gave up this concept for reasons of simplicity - was I wrong? Where would you put a run-around, without stacking up to much track again?

Help

I agree with Fred.  If I remember my John Armstrong correctly, he suggested having all spurs in an area facing the same way except one.  If you want a spur in the opposite direction from the rest, I think it could be fairly easily done at the Feed & Grain by moving the "main" down one trackspacing unit.  You'd have to do some fiddling with the track downstream, or maybe put the main on an angle, which is not necessarily a bad thing. The runaround could be worked into the trackage northeast of the canal, maybe a crossover going from lower-left to upper right around the 9' - 10' gridline 

 Fred and O´Dave - I took up your recommendations and tried to incorporate them into my plan. This is what came out of it:

With the above changes to the original idea, operation seems to be more interesting. What I am not yet fond of, is the single track staging. I was thinking of building a 3 - 4 track traverser in order to have the option of running a "morning train" and an "afternoon" train, without taking loco or rolling stock from the rails. Unfortunately, there is a window on that end which needs to be opened now and then. So something detachable is a must.  I guess I need to think it over...

 While looking at the plan, some more changes come to mind. If I move the tracks west of the canal a little more to the left, I can make the canal a little wider und put a tug and a barge in there, plus some loading/unloading facility. How´s that?

... and here it is!

What do the experts say?

I'm far from an expert, but either one looks good to me.  There seems to be a good balance of scenery and trackage, which is what gives me a "wow" too.  The only things that jump out at me are:

A. Your grade crossing looks like it's going across the points of a turnout.  You may want to nudge the road either way to make the crossing easier to model.

B. You may want to think about how the Feed & Grain is going to do its work, either with a single loading spout/unloading pit or multiples. 

If the elevator has only one loading spout/unloading pit, then it should be located in the middle of the spur, with the total spur length being long enough for 2X the number of cars you expect to handle at the facility.   This is because a cut of empty cars would be spotted with the first car under the spout, and the rest of the empties "upstream" of it.  As the cars are loaded, some kind of motive device (bulldozer, trackmobile, cable & winch) will index the next car under the spout, with the loaded cars moving "downstream".  So if you want to load 3x40' boxcars here, then the spur track needs to be at least 36" long for this kind of operation. 

I think you can pull this off by mirroring the elevator, and extending the spur underneath the overpass and into your staging area.  It might interfere with your traverser idea, though.  Maybe it could coexist with a sector plate better. 

 If you have multiple spouts/pits, then the cars can be loaded/unloaded without indexing and there's no issue.  But I think that kind of operation is found generally at larger facilities.  Your call.

 O´Dave,

you are right with the level crossing - I will move it a little when building the layout. Thanks also for the info on the grain elevator - I cannot get info like this on this side of the big lake. Hopping by and taking a look at real life takes a minimum of 9 hrs flight, not to mention the cash involved.

odave:

f the elevator has only one loading spout/unloading pit, then it should be located in the middle of the spur, with the total spur length being long enough for 2X the number of cars you expect to handle at the facility.   This is because a cut of empty cars would be spotted with the first car under the spout, and the rest of the empties "upstream" of it.  As the cars are loaded, some kind of motive device (bulldozer, trackmobile, cable & winch) will index the next car under the spout, with the loaded cars moving "downstream".  So if you want to load 3x40' boxcars here, then the spur track needs to be at least 36" long for this kind of operation. 

 well, if he wants to be really tight about space, loading three cars from a single loading spout can be done with room for just five cars - the position under the spout can hold the first empty car when empties are spotted and the last loaded car when they all have been loaded.

 Ulrich - I like those plans. These are yours, and they look good.

 To get a longer track for the elevator - could you extend the runaround on the left end, and let the track to the elevator branch out from inside the runaround - ie just swap the position of the two leftmost turnouts ? Might help with not having the road cross at the points as well.

 Smile,
 Stein

I like this one a lot better - but that's me.  I find it much more interesting oeprationally without sacrificing the scenic possibilities you had before.

As far as the removable staging is concerned, you could use 4-5 cassettes as a manual replacement for the desired traverser.  Have each cassette with a train loaded sit on a shelf, along with a few empty cassettes.  When a particular train is wanted, simply attach the desired cassette to the staging point.  Use an empty cassette to remove cars or a train from the layout.  Build a shelf above the layout to provide layout lighting, dust protection, and a place to store the cassettes that are not in immediate use.

Which is exactly how I plan to have some staging.  My cassette will fit in the 31" space between the layout and the door (in closed position).  The door will have a hangar to support the far end of the cassette, and the layout will support the near end.  There are various examples of using cassette staging at http://www.carendt.com/.

yours in small layouts

Fred W

steinjr:

 To get a longer track for the elevator - could you extend the runaround on the left end, and let the track to the elevator branch out from inside the runaround - ie just swap the position of the two leftmost turnouts ? Might help with not having the road cross at the points as well.

 Or just use a double slip and do something along these lines ? :

 One potential operating challenge is the lack of an industrial support track or two on the layout - where you can have a little "work space" to stash inbound and/or outbound cars while you swap them around.

 But that can be simulated by first picking up outbounds and pushing them under the bridge to a "siding" (ie a cassette) a little down that way, before swapping cassettes, and returning with new cars to spot at the industries.

 Edit: actually - you do have room to stash about four-five 40' cars temporary on the curved track past the top of the water's edge, about four 40' cars on the mainline at the bottom left, and four-five cars in the runarounds in the center of the layout - enough space to temporarily stash cars while working:

 With 3 feet of staging cassettes you won't have much more than 6, maybe 7 cars in a cassette anyways.

 Industry sizes, harbor etc doesn't look half bad. I have used 4" wide roads and buildings that are a multiple of 4" (e.g. Walther's modulars come in 2" and 4" sections). Barge is a copy of mine, which is about 4"x12". RR freight cars are 40' cars. Turnouts Peco code 75.

Smile,
Stein

 Hi Stein,

you are up early this morning again - hope, you are ok?

I like the changes you made to the plan, you are definetively an expert! I guess we have a good basis for further thoughts now. Will post the amendments here during the day...

Sir Madog:

 Hi Stein,

you are up early this morning again - hope, you are ok?

 Yeah - just a summer morning in southern Norway - sun rises way early (even with the clock turned an hour forward) - about an hour earlier than in Hamburg, and about an hour and a half earlier than in e.g. Minneapolis, and that starts a lot of birds singing right outside our bedroom window.

 Somehow, I figured that my neighbors wouldn't really appreciate it I got a shotgun and started blowing away little singing birds in the wee hours :-)

 Besides - better enjoy it - in another couple of weeks the days start growing shorter again.

I like the changes you made to the plan, you are definetively an expert! I guess we have a good basis for further thoughts now. Will post the amendments here during the day...

Hals und beinbruch - as long as you don't take it too literally

 Grin,
 Stein

 ... that little folk wakes me up also quite early - usually around 4 o´clock. My wife feeds them in winter, but I´d rather - boom!