hi ,
a misunderstanding maybe,
i was talking about the last plan the OP had drawn, inspired by the plan of Stein. That one needs a cassette, the original plan by Stein does not.
Another example 7 x 2, drawn with #6 switches; between brackets the number of 50 feet long cars a spur can hold.
Paul
I've adjusted the size of the set out spur, and also drawn the plan with 50ft boxcars as those are the size I will be using.
The main business is the Recycling yard at top right, there is also a team track at bottom left served by trucks driving directly onto the vacant lot there, I've also added the suggested extra business spur on the bottom right, this is probably going to be a junkyard.
The left hand side is blocked off during home operation, the right hand 'through line' leads to a removable fiddle yard/cassette long enough to handle a pair of four foot long trains.
I've retained the small engine 'depot' on the top left as it is really just a place to park some of my engines so that they are not all 'off stage' at any given time.
Scenic breaks are provided by a freeway overpass on the left and taller buildings & road bridge on the right.
This is to be a modern day setting, partly influenced by the DCON, but with the main engines being NS and CN emd gp types. I will have a small GE 44 Ton switcher for the Recycling co.
Here are a few images of the DCON to show the sort of thing I will be basing the scenery on. I won't be going quite as far down the 'derelict' route as the real place, I will be portraying it in a slightly more vibrant state.
A lot of these reference images are taken in the winter, it would be great to find a way to model at least a light sprinkling of snow on the scenery! :)
These little GE 44 Ton style switchers will be cool, seen here hauling a single gondola, perhaps bound for the Scrap Dealers?
Here's a larger SW1000(?) switcher on the same line:
Freeway overpass/road bridge scenic block will be something like this:
Plenty of scope for larger buildings to get the urban vibe I was seeking:
More large Buildings:
Refueling area could be something like this (complete with freeway overpass):
Ok, now that you have the scrap yard in, it looks like you'll only be able to handle two cars at a time on the dedicated switching lead south of the team track. That means a 2-for-2 swap (2 loads out, 2 empties in) will take a good deal of zig-zagging, which might get tedious.
Maybe it's not such a good idea.
I have seen industries served by a similar switchback arrangement (GM Pontiac Assembly, for one), but in that case there's enough tail track and some facing support yard tracks to help optimize the moves.
Also, I'm not sure you need that setout track by the recycling facility. Can the main be used for the same purpose?
...And ADBF 836 is an SW8. IIRC it's been moved to DCON because there were problems with the GE units.
Yeah the scrap yard is a bit of a fiddle, but I'm going to make it an occasional industry rather than a regular switch so it should be ok. I'm planning to have that track be really overgrown to give it that Dcon feel right there on the front.
I'm planning to spend a decent amount of time operating this plan virtually before I commit to it, and hopefully that should help to cement my decisions :)
JL UK
Mmm - suggestions:
- Drop the scrap dealer track (lower right) and the engine tracks (upper left). Park your engines on the track below the team track - along the aisle.
Drop the road going across the layout. Instead let access to the team track come from the left, under the overpass. Your road would be constantly blocked anyways - whenever you leave cars on the siding or do any form whatsoever of switching, it will block the road.
Smile,Stein
hi gentlemen,
i agree with stein, though i would like to see industries against the backdrop.
The team tracks are long enough to hold a couple of cars; the waste oil / recycling plant is connected so three 50 foot long cars can be handled at once.
That's some really good suggestions there guys, I like the layout of those two examples, especially the idea of splitting up the team tracks more.
I do miss having the industry 'recycling' area with the different car spots. I wonder if there is some way to get that sort of spot switching back in there at the rear.
I have to say I am loving these cad programs for track planning, it definitely beats buying a load of track and trying to come up with something in situ! :)
JL UKI do miss having the industry 'recycling' area with the different car spots.
I think you could certainly do this with the "waste oil dealer" on Paul's suggestion. Simply designate the spots on the two spurs - maybe they are for different grades of oil. The main can be used as the "for now" track when sorting cars to/from their correct spots.
Just for grins - another prototype suggestion for inspiration would be the Belt Line Branch in the Conrail Shared Assets on Detroit's east side. I'm not as familiar with this line, but it appears to have more of the "urban canyon" effect that you're looking for. Industry types would be similar to what's found on DCON, with the addition of automotive traffic. Power would typically be NS geeps, or if you set the time period back a few years, geeps still in Conrail paint.
The part of the branch that would fit best with what you're looking for starts here and continues south, going down to Warren Ave.
This site has some good background information on the Detroit Conrail Shared Assets, and modern Detroit railroading in general.
Have fun!
NS Geeps are exactly what I am interested in. I just bought this Atlas model which happened to be in the window of a second-hand toy shop local to me (very unusual to see something like that in a London shop!) Dirt cheap too, which was good! :)
Stein always has some brilliant ideas.
Mine is definately NOT superior in any way, but when it comes to limited shelf layouts, I find laying the main line across the diagonal most beneficial in two ways:
1: The diagonal is the longest piece of straight track you can create
2: Moving at an angle from the layout edge adds visual intrest.
With that in mind I quickly drew this up... You could switch 2 cars at a time, but there are no curving leads, no bad S curves, and plenty of space for industry layout or servicing. (Like I said, this pales compared to stein's work...but here goes)
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
hi Griffin,
The Idea's of Stein are always good, yours are not that good.
The drill track is on both sides 8 inches long; just long enough for an engine. No cars at all can be taken from industry track 1 and 3.
The runaround can't even hold one car and contains 2 S-curves. Adequate spacing on the run-around is not present.
You have chosen an angle that's making the addition of a cassette impossible. And at last why do you add a yard. The OP wanted to have a small yard on a cassette, a way better place.
Curving leads are no problem ever, the spots where coupling / uncoupling is done need to be (almost) straight.
Youch Paulus
In defense of my layout...
I claimed it was an alternative idea. Not a better solution.
It's in HO track not N as the original poster did. With this in mind there is plenty of space for a lead and 1, 2 cars
The S curves are #6's which is perfectly acceptable. The second curve coming off the #4 is a R36 which is also acceptable. And there are two #4's in between the run around which will hold two cars.
For small industrial area operations with limited track, yards are almost a given in one way or another as cars have to be shifted in and out of industries. You can do this off site on a casette if so necessary.
You can also use industry track 2 as your lead in from a casette.
Curving engine leads are not common on a prototype. A slight curve in the beginning of the lead, yes. However constantly curving leads is rare.
DigitalGriffin
hi griffin
no defense needed; all your remarks are bull.
All designs were in HO.
The drill tracks are 8 inches long, no space for any car beside an engine.
You stated no S-curves, there are two, the result of using #6 switches is not enough spacing in the run-around. No parallel straight remains, so car capacity of the runaround is nil.
About yards is bull again, the main and the passing siding form a two-track yard if you like
Industry two as cassette connection is even worse; only two 40-foot cars can be handled at one time; and please draw a cassette if you want to involve one in a plan. The more usual connection would be to the main, just use a different angle. More attention to your drawings is needed.
The last point might be right for the prototype , in model railroading space restrictions are severe. I used a 40"radius, so coupling and uncoupling was reasonably easy.
If you want your design to be applauded use your own thread, not some one else's
Guys --
It is fair to point out challenges with a plan. But let's try to stay away from questioning the competence and motives of other posters as persons, eh?
Don - Paul was pretty rude in the way he responded to your proposal, but the challenges he pointed out with your plan were real:
- too steep an angle on the mainline, so not possible to connect a cassette on the right in normal at home operations, or a mainline at both the right and left during exhibition running with a temporary continuous loop
- Too short switching lead at lower left, at least for home use
- Too short a runaround
The trick to run the main at an angle so the spurs can go straight out from the "stem" to avoid S curves doesn't really work here.
S curves can be bad in many situations - especially like when you need to run (and back up) long cars like passenger cars while using sharp turnouts (like #4s). Ouch.
But for doing crossovers between parallel spurs, you tend to get some S-curves. And parallel tracks down a narrow "corridor" between the buildings is a big part of the look and feel of many types of urban scenes.
You can do various tricks to avoid having S curves, but they introduce other challenges.
The next drawing has no S-curves for the siding (cars are 53-foot H0 scale, engine a GP40-2). But here the main does not go through the straight path through the turnout on both ends of the siding. Might still be an acceptable compromise to get more siding length out of a small layout. (This one obviously need a switching lead off the actual layout - like a cassette or staging on at least the right of the layout):
Here there is an S curve at the right end of the siding, but not at the left end, using the same trick - straight in towards the turnout at the far left:
Here there is an S curve going from the main into the siding with spot D/E/F and into the set out spur, but it is made gentler with the use of Peco Medium turnouts (you can mentally think of then as a sort of #6 turnout with a curve on the deviating path), and not having the siding parallel to the main at minimum distance from the main. And by using 40-foot cars and small switchers.
Paul has used similar tricks in his sketches.
hi gentlemen
In my first comment i just pointed them out, if real challenges are simply denied or talked away competence or worse is at stake.
Some tricks of the trade:
The length of industry 2 seems to be 30"; due to the contra curve on the crossover usable length is about 24".
Finding a balance between the length of spurs and the length of the leads, without turning your pike into a switch-man's nightmare, is difficult on a small switching layout. It's personal too; what would be a nightmare for me, could be a nice challenge for some one else.
Be aware of coupling / uncoupling on curves; the contra-curve drawn on the pike above is 40"; more then 5 times the length of a 50-foot car. The 1:5 ratio is according to NMRA standards.
There's been some great input on this thread so far, I really appreciate everyones input. I'm currently hard at work in Xtrkcad revising (again!) :) Thanks guys.
After fiddling with the plan for a while, running cars back and forth, I started to feel like my runaround loop wasn't quite big enough in my version of the plan. I've rejigged things more in line with the most recent suggestion by Paulus.
I've still got the extra business at the front, kind of a cut-down version of Steins recycling area, and I've got rid of the engine facilities in favour of a small oil terminal or liquid processing plant of some kind.
The front spurs can only recieve a maximum of two boxcars at a time due to the short length of the track on the left, and even then only from the lower runaround track, but I'm thinking that isn't too much of a problem as the maximum train length is four 53ft boxcars anyway.
And this is a further revision using small radius switches to increase the size of the dead track to the left and allow a GP and two cars to be switched together instead of a GP and one car as with the previous version.
I've also added a three-way turnout to retain the length of the recycling spurs.
hi
a couple of remarks:
1) i am not sure if you will add a cassette, you hinted at it, but never draw it in your plans; is hard to respond to.
2)With a cassette a long lead at the left is not needed, without one switching the waste oil-depot is almost imposible.
3) i still think your layout is track heavy at the right side.
4) i added some remarks in the drawing
5) my plan is drawn with #6 switches
6) beware of a big building between the front of your layout and important and much used switches; empty spots are normal on industrial sites.
7) the usable length of your passing siding will be shorter then you assume due to clearance issues.
One thing that I have found is that any length of track that is to be used as a switching lead, such as "A" in the above or the other end heading into the cassette, can NEVER, EVER be too long! This extra length is never a waste of space unless it sacrifices usable siding access or length. There is no point in a 30 car long lead track if your siding only holds 3 cars but at the same time a siding that holds 30 cars had better not have a lead that can only hold 3. You get the idea.
IF there is so much room available for the layout that such a large cassette can be used to the right, I'd be more in favor of shifting the entire layout plan over that direction a little bit to get more length at A on the left side and actually use a true cassette rather than having nearly half of the layout fold out of site. I don't like puzzles or unneccesary moves. By having extra length at A, it would allow for more switching options in regards to how the team tracks and warehouse switching are treated. You wouldn't need to shove a whole train back through the crossover just to switch the other industries. Having just enough room for an engine to runaround only makes it a puzzle and at some point it will become more frustrating than fun and you'll wish you could pull several cars through there instead.
I am personally also not a fan of having a large cassette that has a yard on it. I believe that a cassette is a simple one or two track removable piece and that is it. Under 4 feet in length is pretty reasonable. We are trying to get some usable extra space. We aren't building a huge classification hump yard! When you start getting into 3 and 4 tracks and having switches involved, it is no longer a cassette but is now a removable yard of considerable size. A 12" X 66" removable piece is no longer a cassette! To some people that is an entire layout! A 6" x 48" removable piece is a cassette. I would set it up as 2 tracks that can be moved so that either track can serve either of the "main" lines as necessary (or whatever you want to call them). Just shift the cassette over a track as needed. This allows for far more flexibility. If you need a large multi track yard off stage then convert the cassette into a train elevator and have a yard under the main layout.
I also don't object to having the right (or left) side seem "heavy" in regards to balance between left and right. You should save at least a third of your layout for nothing but scenery to give it a sense of distance and size.
In regards to road placement, sometimes it just doesn't seem to make sense. Tracks go where they work best and in some places the roadways go where they can rather than where it makes the most sense in regards to track placement. I know of one place in Des Moines where a road (not a driveway to a business) goes right through the center of a 16 track yard with 2 of those tracks being the working sidings of a grain elevator. Oops! At an industry having tracks sit where switching interrupts traffic in the area isn't uncommon. It isn't ideal but it happens. In Galveston, TX, there is a yard that switches the port area that has tracks literally through the center of a yard as well. The road does get blocked fairly often forcing people to go around. Fortunately it is only an access road to a few industries and those using that road are going to be employees. There is another way in and out. The road doesn't seem to make sense in the location yet there it is. You always see the hoppers on that siding cut in the middle just so cars can pass. Another yard, the BNSF yard in Galveston has a road cut right across the yard lead itself. It is blocked very often. In situations like this, there is always another road somewhere. It may not be seen on your layout though.
I'm not saying I don't like the above plan or the others that have been shown. Not saying that at all. There are some good attributes in it but it sacrifices some things to get others as they all do. First and foremost remember that it is a railroad you are designing. Plan it out for easiest operation and fun. Worry about the other technical realism fine point issues later. It may actually seem more authentic that way. There are many good ideas in this thread and none of them are perfect but none of them are bad. That's pretty much true of nearly all model railroads!
Yet more great feedback thanks guys. :)
I am definitely assuming a removable cassette (two side by side tracks) on the right side of the layout in all my plans, this cassette will be put in place while operating and removed when the layout is not being used.
I agree the plan I have is probably a bit track heavy, I guess I am afraid of being stuck with too simplistic of a plan and ending up bored with the layout too quickly. I'm oprating it in Xtrkcad and trying to imagine the finished article.
Here is another iteration on the plan, this time I have combined the oil spur and the recycling area.
The buildings and both sets of spurs across the back will be an industry similar to the EQ Waste Disposal in Detroit (http://www.eqonline.com/)
The two spurs on the lower right are a team track and a food wholesale business. All the foreground buildings are low profile to prevent blocking the view or hampering operation of points etc.
The street across the middle of the layout is a dead end, terminating either side of the tracks in a similar way to Frederick Street here http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r1tvfg82cd9d&lvl=19.13974244038459&dir=353.0260096072509&sty=b
I have included a simple cassette on the right, just to clarify the plan and make sure it is obvious there will be one.
All boxcars here are 53ft but I intend to use shorter 50ft cars in my trains, so the clearances on the ends of the runaround track will be less tight than as drawn.