Cheers Paul.
Sir Madog, like your plan.
Doc in CT, useful comment.
Horsepower is good.
Sir MadogYou can open WinRail files in RTS.
Perhaps that is true for version 8 of WinRail (which you are using) but not for WinRail 10, which is the latest version and the only one available on their web site. This makes sharing RAL files difficult if the recipient only has RTS.
CAD programs do facilitate the design process since it is faster to try out things in software than on pencil (and get the spacing/dimensions right). And, you can copy piece parts that work or just to relocate them.
Alan
Co-owner of the proposed CT River Valley RR (HO scale) http://home.comcast.net/~docinct/CTRiverValleyRR/
Mind, if I correct you, Alan?
You can open WinRail files in RTS. You can actually work with the files, even if you have used, say, Peco track. Of course, you can only add Atlas track to the file.
Actually, I think that WinRail/RTS is a versatile tool and not to difficult to handle. It has its limitations, though - just like any CAD tool, it will just help you draw a plan and not design it. I am still on WinRail 8.0 and therefore have no 3D functionality, but that´s OK for me.
This is one of my latest plans I have drawn:
The track plan is for a British outline switching layout, which, with the heavy use of traversers and sector plates, opens up a bundle of operational challenges. It is meant to be a show layout, with a small, but highly detailed scenic bit in the middle.
The plan is completely drawn in WinRail, using the draw function for the structures and trees and the line function for fences etc. It is a bit fiddly, but once you have the knack of it, does not take much time!
Paulus JasRTS-freeware or Winrail, actually the same.
RTS is a good deal for the price (free) and will handle a lot of basic layout deisgns. WinRail ($60) is superior to RTS with lots of extra capabilities and features (and the same annoyances); the only drawback is that WinRail files cannot be opened in RTS (RTS files can be opened in WinRail). The other advantage of WinRail is that it includes a large number of track and structure libraries; RTS is strictly Atlas products. So in WinRail you could use PECO or Walthers No. 4 turnouts rather than fudging it with RTS.
PS, like the second design Paul.
Hi Andrew,
RTS-freeware or Winrail, actually the same. The drawing was made with Atlas #5's; so the yard throat could be made more compact using #4's and curved switches.
The left addition can be done on a cassette.
Paul
Paul,
Thanks for the ideas, I really like the second 1 as it will allow a lot of use without the extentions north or south.
Yes I was thinking of having the barges removable so as to have new freight coming in going out.
What program are you using for your drawings just for refererence.
Cheers
Andrew
Hi ponti,
Just to illustrate my point:
The ferry drill track does double duty; it is also used as warehouse drill.
Leaving the row of warehouse at the right out or considering them as abandoned would solve the runaround issue too.
A lot of (un)coupling has to be done on the curved part of the ferry yard, so I made the water scene less wide.
Did you consider to make the barge removable?; so you can swap barges as a form of staging.
Hi Paul,
No problems, I like getting idea's and advice for things that I have overlooked. I have had a slight tweek of the plan to add a line along the front of the pier to the left and have included the start of a run round below, there can be a hidden cassette off of these. I have also changed round the points at the far right, I'd not relised I'd put opposite facing points in.
hi Ponti,
Ponti I was using a bit of artistic licence leaving the warehouses on the right
Just to be sure, I did not argue about leaving or not the warehouses. IMHO, if you try to serve the row of warehouses you will find your engine is at the wrong side of the train. The track in front of the warehouses is meant to be a spur; filled with cars being loaded or unloaded. For every move in the ware house zone you would have to remove these cars first. The extra moves can be omitted if there would be a run-around possibility elsewhere. .I did argue about having a run-around facility or not.
Stein/ Paul, the 4 boards are each 1m x 40cm
Paul, You are correct that I said I could run a cassette from the left, I hope that someday I could extend the layout either left or right and add more piers
I was using a bit of artistic licence leaving the warehouses on the right, as the layout is portable as it has to share my spare room( wish I had a real railroad room) The thinking was that the warehouse and engine shed would act as a nice backdrop and a way of hiding the joints.
Also this is meant to be somewhat freelanced, just using Fulton as a basis to work from, so a line into or along side a warehouse on the pier could work.
steinjr Sounds like a cool thing to model.Got any pictures? The Bush terminal in Brooklyn also had a somewhat simular situation - where the trains had to "tunnel" through the corner of a building on the corner of 41nd street and 2nd Avenue (I think it was) in Brooklyn (http://www.trainweb.org/AbandonedLIRR/bushterminal/bush2.JPG).
Sounds like a cool thing to model.Got any pictures?
The Bush terminal in Brooklyn also had a somewhat simular situation - where the trains had to "tunnel" through the corner of a building on the corner of 41nd street and 2nd Avenue (I think it was) in Brooklyn (http://www.trainweb.org/AbandonedLIRR/bushterminal/bush2.JPG).
Have no pictures. It may be on pier 21 or 23, but I'm unsure. Unlike the Brooklyn picture, the San Francisco example doesn't have a cut-away corner: the track goes through the building a short distance in order to run on the pier's edge.
Mark
markpierceThat Marklin layout offers a lot of running but not much switching.
That Marklin layout offers a lot of running but not much switching.
Yup. We all tend to suggest or advocate track plans that do contain the kind of stuff we like, and don't contain the stuff we are not too fond of. Judged from several past suggestions, I'd say that Bob probably likes track plans with lots of continuous running on loops, and he is not too fond of switching. Different people just have different tastes.
That Marklin layout is nice in it's own way, but it is not your typical NYC car float type of layout
One architectural element I delight from San Francisco's piers is where a railroad spur cuts through the corner of a pier's warehouse. The access track parallels the street on the shoreline side and the spur makes a sharp turn for the pier. There is a door on the left-front corner of the building as well as one on the left side, the track passing through the building a short distance so as to quickly parallel the pier and its warehouse.
Smile,Stein
Hi Ponti and Mark,
Of course tracks alongside or running into warehouses are very prototypical; alas pier 12 had no direct rail access.
Mark do you know where I could find a picture of the warehouse you mentioned?
Paulus Jas And though not prototypical, a track running into the pier warehouse would be nice.
And though not prototypical, a track running into the pier warehouse would be nice.
Hi Ponti,
Steinjr remembered one of the nicest sources of NY pics.
There is a huge difference between the situation until the 60's and the period from the 70's till now. When the row of warehouses was demolished the yard was straightened out and traffic patterns changed.
You picked the trackplan from the 70's but kept the row of warehouses in. Looking at the older plans, these were served from the left,(by right-hand crossovers). The crossover at the very right of your layout also was a right-hand crossover in reality.
When you want to switch the warehouses at the bottom from the right, the 8 inch long tail is all the length you have; just one car and an engine, way to short. And the second crossover faces the wrong way.
But when you serve the warehouses from the left you will need a passing-siding; There actually was one a few yards further to the left, just off the modelled part of your layout. As can be seen on the older pics, the track that ends now just before the engine-house tracks, was connected to the left as well; so all warehouses could be served from the leftside.
The extra space on the pier made me misinterpret the situation. Maybe a part of pier 12 can be added into the design, perhaps at the prize of the second ferry apron. In one of the older pics the engine house tracks were diverting from the last yard track (not from the ferry lead). And though not prototypical, a track running into the pier warehouse would be nice.
If I understood your original posting well you have space at the left side to add a cassette or staging. This is IMHO the place for the so much needed passing siding.
How big is your layout?
Have fun
steinjr You may already have looked at this, but if not - did you ever see the Bush Terminal layout plan Berhard Kempinski did in Model Railroad Planning 2003? It has a car float and a rail served pier warehouse on a removable peninsula at the far right of the layout, but the other installations (including a yard, warehouses and an engine house) are along the main part of the L. Might be easier to fit in if most of the installation is along the wall rather than on the peninsula.
Ponti It is based loosely on a offline terminal in New York (Fulton Terminal), so freight cars can arrive and depart via car floats, also I can have a hidden staging area off to the left or right so that cars can be dispatched to warehouse further down the dock. Thinking era wise 60's early 70's. What are peoples thoughts? I'm hoping that I've left enough room between tracks ect, but I think there is enough room for adjusting anyway.
What are peoples thoughts? I'm hoping that I've left enough room between tracks ect, but I think there is enough room for adjusting anyway.
Well, it seems reasonably prototypical for the Fulton terminal. Here is a link to more prototype pictures of the Fulton terminal (I am sure the OP has seen them, but for others who have not seen them yet): http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/nyd.html#Fulton
But the question is whether it will be interesting to switch. Basically, you have two identical car floats, and five storage tracks (four on the central pier and one on the right hand pier). So most of your operations will be the repeated unloading and loading of car floats.
The switchback to the three track engine house off the leftmost car float track is interesting, but will you have room to model the actual engine house?
I guess it depends on what your main design goal is - to give the flavor of New York car float operations, or to model a specific location.
You may already have looked at this, but if not - did you ever see the Bush Terminal layout plan Berhard Kempinski did in Model Railroad Planning 2003? It has a car float and a rail served pier warehouse on a removable peninsula at the far right of the layout, but the other installations (including a yard, warehouses and an engine house) are along the main part of the L. Might be easier to fit in if most of the installation is along the wall rather than on the peninsula.
How big is your layout area, btw ?
Smile, Stein
markpierceWell whatdoyouknow? Using a pier for a yard is something unusual. Must have been special circumstances. Mark
Well whatdoyouknow? Using a pier for a yard is something unusual. Must have been special circumstances.
Finger pier storage was done by both the New York Dock and the Brooklyn Eastern Terminal District in Brooklyn (BEDT). Cuts of cars are taken off the float and put on the pier. Or cuts of cars are made up for loading onto the float and stored on the pier. Land was expensive and could used for warehouses and/or businesses - piers on the other hand would be using space already leased from New York City.
I'm going to be modeling a Brooklyn waterfront terminal - a freelance one - it will have a 5-track finger pier like the BEDT used and it will be next to the carfloat - just like the BEDT.
Gil
Where ever you go, there you are !
Thanks for your replies chaps. Here is a picture of the terminal that I based my idea on, as you can see the centre pier was basically a storage yard for the cars after unloading from the float car.
The left float bridge only acts as a switch lead to the engine shed.
The plan would allow me when I move home to extend the layout along the dock front and put in a small yard and leads to other piers and warehouses.
Hi,
Mark was ahead of me. We had the same idea's.
Drawn with RTS, Yard turnouts are #7, the tracks leading to the pier have #5's.
The cassette is needed to have a long enough tail.
Ponti, the four-tracked pier serves no legitimate purpose. The pier is inaccessible to ships because both sides need to be clear for access to the float bridges. Also, a float bridge should not be used for a switchback tail. I would eliminate the left-hand float and reduce the tracks to the pier down to one or two at most, leaving room for a warehouse atop the pier. Also, you need a small yard at the bottom right to serve the wharf and industries.
Hi All,
Hope you have all been well and done loads of modelling. I have been looking over all these good ideas and looking at various website and have come up with a slightly differnet idea now. I realised that the framing on my baseboards was overly deep and cut them in half therefore doubling the amount of board area I could use. And after playing with different designs and different scales I have come up with this in N.
It is based loosely on a offline terminal in New York (Fulton Terminal), so freight cars can arrive and depart via car floats, also I can have a hidden staging area off to the left or right so that cars can be dispatched to warehouse further down the dock. Thinking era wise 60's early 70's.
fredswain A switching puzzle is fine as long as it is enjoyed for what it is, a puzzle. It may be novel at first. Maybe for a couple of days or weeks but it will get old fast. I prefer switching that is spaced out over a larger area that operates more realistically. Off scene staging really helps to add long term interest as well. This doesn't have to be anything long or even permanent. Look into the idea of a removal casette. Perhaps a dockside switching layout where a rail barge can be a visual staging casette could also be another good option. Add interest by keeping things flowing logically but also keep the ability to add interest and variety rather than moving the same few cars back and forth all day.
A switching puzzle is fine as long as it is enjoyed for what it is, a puzzle. It may be novel at first. Maybe for a couple of days or weeks but it will get old fast. I prefer switching that is spaced out over a larger area that operates more realistically. Off scene staging really helps to add long term interest as well. This doesn't have to be anything long or even permanent. Look into the idea of a removal casette. Perhaps a dockside switching layout where a rail barge can be a visual staging casette could also be another good option. Add interest by keeping things flowing logically but also keep the ability to add interest and variety rather than moving the same few cars back and forth all day.
Lance Mindheim did an example layout in his book (the one I mentioned earlier in the thread). It is a plain little plan, but with a lot of potensial operations. Looks roughly like this (from memory - I feel to lazy to go find the book):
In that plan you have plenty of space, and yet you have:
1) a connection to the rest of the world - inbound new cars will appear in the yard or on the interchange track, "having just been dropped off during the night shift".
2) It has yard sorting. And routing if you want to - at the end of your switching job, you will sort the outbound cars - and put some on the interchange track (for the other RR to pick up) and some in your own industry yard, for another train from your railroad to "pick up during the night shift".
3) It has a varied mix of industries - three backdrop industries, two aisle side industries. These industries can be anything - and what they are can change from day to day.
4) Industry can have several car spots - say an industry is a soft drink bottling plant - inbound cars loaded with orange juice must be spotted at door 1, a boxcar of cardboard (for boxes) must be spotted at door 2, tank cars of chlorine for cleaning bottling equipment must be spotted by the unloading pipe on the wall beyond door 2.
5) There can be complications in the switching which isn't due to switchbacks that can hold just one car - say cars containing cardboard boxes may be moved and respotted even if not completely unloaded, but once unloading starts, the cars of OJ concentrate must not be moved until completely unloaded.
Or cars may be spotted on the double siding for materials unloading (ie a modern form of team track). Cars being unloaded here may not be moved until completely unloaded. Plan your other moves so you want need the runaround after you have spotted a car on the double ended siding for unloading.
Before roads are crossed, the train must come to a complete halt, the conductor will get down to flag the crossing, the whistle will be sounded, and then the train can proceed _slowly_ across the road, stopping to let the conductor re-board the engine.
Lots of stuff like that :-)
steinjrScot Osterweil's Highland Terminal plan (which is a 6 foot by 1 foot variant on the Switchman's Nightmare): http://users.rcn.com/weyand/tractronics/switching_layout/switching_layout.htm
Scot Osterweil's Highland Terminal plan (which is a 6 foot by 1 foot variant on the Switchman's Nightmare): http://users.rcn.com/weyand/tractronics/switching_layout/switching_layout.htm
steinjr Btw, since we were discussing ideas for a small switching layout. Today I got Lance Mindheim's newish book "How to Design a Small Switching Layout" ...
I have got Lance's books some month ago. They did highly influence me. I was not brave enough to set aside one third for scenery but I do highly recommend reading of the books for small layout design.
ps. Escaping tomorrow for a week to the sunny canary islands
Reinhard