Waterfront Track

[Anonymous]

I'm going to build a waterfront branch with tracks turning off onto piers, into warehouses, etc. I've seen some pictures that have some pretty sharp curves and turnouts, and naturally I want to get the most track into the smallest space, so what size turnouts should I use, what size rail, and what's the sharpest curve I can use? I will be using four axle switchers and no cars over 40'.

Thanks for your help,

[Anonymous]

#4 Switches, 18 inch radius curves. You could use 15" if you can find em but that is extreme.

Be aware to build a small interchange area so "Big Engines" can drop off and pick up cars from the waterfront.

Take the biggest 40' car (High Cube?) and check your clearences as you go. Try and test fit everything as you go.

Good Luck

Lee

[Anonymous]

I think it was John Pryke who did a series in MR within the last few years on a warehouse district. You might want to look it up in the index of magazines at the top of the page...

I would second the #4 turnouts, or perhaps the Peco "small" turnout (I don't know if it is actually any smaller). If you use flex track, you can custom fit your curves. As far as what size rail, it doesn't really matter, since you will probably "pave" over the tracks in a district like this, since there will be a lot of truck traffic too... (depending on the era I guess).

Andrew

[ndbprr]

The PRR in Philadelphia must have tried every trick in the book when it came to entering piers on Delaware ave. First of all the street was extremely wide. As I remember 3 or 4 lanes on each side of the tracks which ran down the center and the whole thing was cobblestones. Several piers had very wide doors for the track to curve through and some turnouts actually branched away from the pier before crossing the straight track to gain more curvature - the way some drivers do by swinging out before turning (idiots but that is another story [:)]). Some even had ramps with bridges so the tracks could enter on the second story. I believe they were the ones that dumped bulk loads like coal and covered hopper contents. One thing for certain was the engine size. Originally switched by 0-4-0 steamers the 44 ton GEs could not handle the same number of cars or work as efficiently. One amusing anecdote: Every year you could read the story in the papers about the drunk who would come out of one of the bars at night, get in his car and decide he would show that big motorcycle with the blinding headlight who was in charge. The drunks never won. They sure did mess up their autos though. If you have never seen a PRR A5s switcher you have missed a truly remarkable machine. From the front you would swear you were looking at something at least as big as a 4-6-2 or 4-8-2. They are huge - just short! they even had power reverses and were loved by their crews.

[Anonymous]

I used to haul Perishables out of Philadelpha's City Dock and there is some trackwork there. But you ought to try Chicago, Buffalo or Baltimore I know of a specific case where there was room to buy bannas (Spelling??) but no room for track, so they floated barges over with reefers full of them. People would go thru them and take pick.

There was a newspaper operation somewhere in the New York state where I found myself walking thru 3 boxcars inside the building it's self on seperate tracks. (Curved docks 3 total room for one box car each) and signs said "No room for man on car" they MEAN NO ROOM! between the boxcars and the building.

Good Luck!

[Jetrock]

Look for Peco's "Setrack" turnouts. They are roughly a #3 frog--sharper than Atlas #4's and they don't need a switch machine. These are Code 100 but rail height doesn't matter too much as it would probably be covered by concrete (styrene, plaster, cardstock, etc.) and thus not visible--for the odd spur not in concrete, you could use a bit of Code 70 or 83 track with adapter rail joiners.

For small switchers (GE 44 and 70-tonners, etc.) and 40-50' cars, 15" is plenty! 12" is feasible as well, if you lay your track carefully (I recommend girder rail or guardrails on such sharp curves) but you might have problems with something the size of a GP-7 or SW-xxx or Alco S-series switchers. Many such roads were electric, and used GE or Baldwin-Westinghouse steeplecabs, which can take curves that would make a 44-tonner wince, but of course that means building trolley wire overhead!

I do not understand why people insist that 15-18" curves are for use only in extreme situations--maybe if you're modeling plains railroads, but for industrial/urban modelers 15-18" in HO is downright generous!

I'm building a dockside scene of sorts myself--on my prototype the trains were separated from the river where freight boats and barges traveled by a large complex of warehouses (trains on one side, boats on the other) which simplifies my modeling somewhat. There are plenty of great prototypes, though--the San Francisco Belt Line would be a hoot to model! MR did an article on it (and the Alameda belt line) in the 80's and even provided track plans!

[Anonymous]

Hello!

I have over the times toyed around same ideas, first fueled by Odegards articles on MILW switching line and San Fransico Belt Line. The latter is still very interesting theme and I am collecting infor from that area. In my scenario I will use SP power on the line as I like the railroady looks of Scarlet and Grey, set in 70-80.es. In my version this will feature also some transfer runs using power of GP 35.s or smaller units from SW7, NW2, SW1500, S1 -S4.s , this as I lke the units with Spartan Cabs. I can also use more modern cars at least 50' but I am not planning to use 87' cars anyway. Perhaps I could use them to sort of loading area some where if space would permit this.

A bit of comentary on Odegards S.F.B.L., If you compare his trackplan with the adjoining photos and smaller maps or track plans on details. His version is much slimmed of the original thing. I never visitted the site but my guess is that the west end of thee line is multi tracked with cross over little here and then and eventually narrowing down to single track at the ferry slip. To keep my version a bit busier, my version will have connected to larger port at unmodelled east end of layout. I guess eather way there will be lot of buildings to be built. But trains crawling in the urban areas, with some animation and sound would make it not only look but also breath the smell of salty ocean and diesel......

The idea of railroading in manscape instead of landscape is great idea as the scenic elements are easily made credible as long dimensions are right on buildings and details, even if you slice of lenght or a store of buildings the surroundings lookes creditable As I would in my scenario use a bit larger power than on real life I would settle on #4 on the cramped areas as storage tracks of the yards and to the streets. Perhaps when newer aricles by Robert Smauss comes around I would get more ideas on designs on buildings that are modified to handle train movements.

There is an interesting city in Europe that has and still have a lot of docks and railroads, this is Hamburg in Germany. As most cases the infrastructure of railroads and ports are pretty much similar, you might have interest on German Magaziin called MIBA which ran four issue article on Altonaer Hafen Bahn in late eighties that might give even more ideas.

Best Wishes!
Ollie Ahokas
Sweden

[Anonymous]

Hello!

I have over the times toyed around same ideas, first fueled by Odegards articles on MILW switching line and San Fransico Belt Line. The latter is still very interesting theme and I am collecting infor from that area. In my scenario I will use SP power on the line as I like the railroady looks of Scarlet and Grey, set in 70-80.es. In my version this will feature also some transfer runs using power of GP 35.s or smaller units from SW7, NW2, SW1500, S1 -S4.s , this as I lke the units with Spartan Cabs. I can also use more modern cars at least 50' but I am not planning to use 87' cars anyway. Perhaps I could use them to sort of loading area some where if space would permit this.

A bit of comentary on Odegards S.F.B.L., If you compare his trackplan with the adjoining photos and smaller maps or track plans on details. His version is much slimmed of the original thing. I never visitted the site but my guess is that the west end of thee line is multi tracked with cross over little here and then and eventually narrowing down to single track at the ferry slip. To keep my version a bit busier, my version will have connected to larger port at unmodelled east end of layout. I guess eather way there will be lot of buildings to be built. But trains crawling in the urban areas, with some animation and sound would make it not only look but also breath the smell of salty ocean and diesel......

The idea of railroading in manscape instead of landscape is great idea as the scenic elements are easily made credible as long dimensions are right on buildings and details, even if you slice of lenght or a store of buildings the surroundings lookes creditable As I would in my scenario use a bit larger power than on real life I would settle on #4 on the cramped areas as storage tracks of the yards and to the streets. Perhaps when newer aricles by Robert Smauss comes around I would get more ideas on designs on buildings that are modified to handle train movements.

There is an interesting city in Europe that has and still have a lot of docks and railroads, this is Hamburg in Germany. As most cases the infrastructure of railroads and ports are pretty much similar, you might have interest on German Magaziin called MIBA which ran four issue article on Altonaer Hafen Bahn in late eighties that might give even more ideas.

Best Wishes!
Ollie Ahokas
Sweden

[IRONROOSTER]

I would suggest you check the NMRA recommended pradctice page for curves at http://www.nmra.org/standards/rp-11.html For HO you can go down to 14" curves. You might want to get John Armstrong's book "Track Planning for Realistic Operation", it has a section on docks and tricks for tight spaces.
Enjoy
Paul

[MisterBeasley]

Look at some satellite photos of real dock areas on the web. terraserver and now google have free photos available for most of the continental US.

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by olliehokas

Hello!

I have over the times toyed around same ideas, first fueled by Odegards articles on MILW switching line and San Fransico Belt Line. The latter is still very interesting theme and I am collecting infor from that area. In my scenario I will use SP power on the line as I like the railroady looks of Scarlet and Grey, set in 70-80.es. In my version this will feature also some transfer runs using power of GP 35.s or smaller units from SW7, NW2, SW1500, S1 -S4.s , this as I lke the units with Spartan Cabs. I can also use more modern cars at least 50' but I am not planning to use 87' cars anyway. Perhaps I could use them to sort of loading area some where if space would permit this.

A bit of comentary on Odegards S.F.B.L., If you compare his trackplan with the adjoining photos and smaller maps or track plans on details. His version is much slimmed of the original thing. I never visitted the site but my guess is that the west end of thee line is multi tracked with cross over little here and then and eventually narrowing down to single track at the ferry slip. To keep my version a bit busier, my version will have connected to larger port at unmodelled east end of layout. I guess eather way there will be lot of buildings to be built. But trains crawling in the urban areas, with some animation and sound would make it not only look but also breath the smell of salty ocean and diesel......

The idea of railroading in manscape instead of landscape is great idea as the scenic elements are easily made credible as long dimensions are right on buildings and details, even if you slice of lenght or a store of buildings the surroundings lookes creditable As I would in my scenario use a bit larger power than on real life I would settle on #4 on the cramped areas as storage tracks of the yards and to the streets. Perhaps when newer aricles by Robert Smauss comes around I would get more ideas on designs on buildings that are modified to handle train movements.

There is an interesting city in Europe that has and still have a lot of docks and railroads, this is Hamburg in Germany. As most cases the infrastructure of railroads and ports are pretty much similar, you might have interest on German Magaziin called MIBA which ran four issue article on Altonaer Hafen Bahn in late eighties that might give even more ideas.

Best Wishes!
Ollie Ahokas
Sweden

April 1980 Model Railroader had a article on the "San Francisco" Belt Railroad with with track map by Charles and Barbara Nickle and Gordon Odegard'a boomerang-shaped track planwhich is a quite accurate representation of the line.

In the same issue there is an article on the Alameda Belt Line by Barry Wood with a track map.

[Anonymous]

John Pryke's series of articles was on the Union Freight RR in Boston a few years back in MR (3 parts I think, Sep-Nov '00?). There's also a great book that about the UFRR -- The Railroad That Came Out At Night -- I got my copy at ABE.com.

This is the type of layout where you definitely want to go with as tight a radius as you can squeeze a 40' car around. When the UFRR had to deliver any cars over 40', they had to uncouple them before they could use the engine to shove them around the corners! Get some flex track and some 40' cars and experiment. The UFRR also had to do 'wrong-way running' to get into some of their sidings, from the right hand track, the turnout would feed into a diamond across the left hand track and then into a sharp 90 degree curve to fit down the alleyways. The wrong-way running was extra entertaining since this track ran down the length of Atlantic Avenue on Boston's waterfront; and drunks coming out of the bars late at night would meet a train coming at them in the wrong lane of the street. This didn't surprise the 'regulars', but quite a surprise to foreigners.

Some folks like to complain of the problem that manufacturers modify engines to take too small a minimum radius. Atlas went the other way with a radius problem with their new N scale shays. The UFRR used 3 truck box-cab shays for a long time. The Atlas N 3 truck Shay can only handle a minimum radius of 9.75" -- way to wide to accurately model the UFRR trackage [:O]

A 40' box car can squeeze around a 6" radius in N, so 12" is probably what you're looking for in HO. #4 turnouts are the largest you'd want, smaller if you can find them or make them. #2.5 wyes will help wherever they might work out in your trackplan.

Cheers,
Maureen