Hello All
I know some of you will notice that i have made a few threads on the boards lately. Well i wanted to create a thread that will go through the building of my layout. Some may also remember that I may be moving in the near future due to work. So as of now nothing is glued down permantly. Just looking for advice and tips from people that have been doing this far longer than I have.
A little background on the layout and myself. I will be modeling present day alaska railroad. Its my version of alaska so it will have a connection to canadian national that will get oil/coal to the states. I have already built the table so please no Duckunders are a bad idea. I am 26 and fairly flexible so at this point i kind of enjoy my duckunders.
Without further talking here is my current version of the trackplan i am designing and some pictures of the one loop and small yard i put on my layout to test the spacing. (And to have fun testing my new locos and rolling stock)
I put a bunch of notes in the center to remind myself and to get your opinion on them.
Looks good! Thanks for sharing.
Having never worked with foam risers, how do you landscape between the rerailer and the lower track and is there enough room to do that? Speaking of rerailers, I tried to camoflage mine on my previous layout as a crossing. I'm not a fan of where you located yours because there is not much else you can do with it there.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Hi big daddy
thanks for the reply, this is my first time working with foam risers too. I have never built a layout that wasn't on the ground in sectional track before this. My current plan is to put in a stone looking retaining wall on both sides of the foam riser in the middle of the yard area.
the placement of the re railer is horrible I agree, it was just an easy place to add cars as I tested the switches and functionality of the yard. I have not moved on to laying track at all yet. Right now it is all sectional track to test my locos and what I was given in free #4 switches (which I have determined will only go in the yard)
in the future I think that area's re railer will go on the main where the yard joins directly after the switch. I will concel It as a road crossing for trucks headed to the port area
Hi Spartan:
I like your layout plan, but I think you could get a bit more space in the yard below the foam riser by doing something like this:
All tracks would run parallel to the riser. You may not be able to fit six tracks in, but even if you can only get four in the space I think you would gain usable yard space. Also, my suggested design gives you a run around track. You might be able to install a drill track parallel to the main as well. You would have to do a double track bridge. If you are interested I can do up a track plan showing the right side of the yard tracks with a drill track and a connection to the main line.
Regards
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Spartan:
Hi again. I did a little more with my suggested yard plan to show you the drill track and the connection to the main line. There is a potential problem with this plan in that there is an 'S' curve where the track runs from the yard ladder to the drill track. I added some track to reduce the potential problems with the 'S' but that moved the yard further from the riser. You will have to test things to make sure you can run cuts of cars backwards through the 'S'. Maybe somebody can suggest a better track arrangement.
By the way, each single line is a separate track. The picture can be a bit confusing.
BigDaddy, there is also a product called foam putty by Woodland Scenics (I think). which is applied to fill in the gaps in the risers and then landscape over it.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
hon30critter
Thanks for the excellent suggestion on the yard, when I get some time I am going to build a mock up of this settup to test things out. Thanks for the help
Everyone else
I have one question and one photo to show off of a new addition.
First the question. I plan to upgrade to DCC next winter for my christmas gift to myself. I wanted to know if the switches i have below are ok to use on DCC. I dont understand completely the world of DCC but i plan to learn by decemeber. Just want to know if these old switches i plan to use in the freight yard are worth to lay down once I get it set up how i like.
And here is my new addition to the layout. A Lighted Walthers Proto ACF dome car that was on sale for half off plus another 10% off that. Got it for an early first fathers day present!
SpartanCook:
Glad you liked my yard design.
It looks like the switch you want to use for your yard has brass track. If so, I would think twice about using it. Brass requires constant cleaning, and DCC requires clean track. Its not the best combination.
Nice dome car!
The Bachman switch is the same as an Atlas Snap switch. You can get a better gemoetry using a #4 or #6 switch. (Still the LION uses up old snap switches ) You can cut the offending twin coil motor with a motor tool, and then use a tortoise machine from under the table.
LION arranges the turnouts and controls of him so that only one lever is pulled to run a train into any given track.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
I realize money can be a major consideration while building a layout. But I would avoid the bachmann and snap switches like the plague.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Any particular reasons? I am going to avoid them on the mainline but is there any reason i shouldnt use them in my yard until i can replace them?
So today i found out that I recieved a promotion at work and will be staying in the same location for a few years. So i finally have the go ahead in my mind to start laying track on my benchwork!!!
I really need to get my plan finalized quickly and start putting this extra cash into new #6 turnouts!
Here is a thread on Snap vs Custom turnouts
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/p/216204/2381306.aspx
So from reading that thread they should be avoided due to the turnout being curved and diverging too much creating larger gaps in the yards?
They also seem to cause more derailments if i am reading this correctly
Just trying to get a good handle on the cons
Snap-Switches have a very sharp frog. This can be more problematic in shoving cars (as is typical in a yard). The sharply curved diverging legs also create at least one fairly tight s-curve in a typical yard laddder, again potentially more of a problem when shoving cars.
Personally, the use of the Snap-Switches in a yard seems to me like a false economy.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Helllo Everyone
Thanks for the info on snap switches, I will be looking at getting some normal switches in for my yard when time allows to go to the hobby store.
I have been working on my track plan now for a little while. And i have also recently worked on dropping the bench height where the river crosses the layout. I have filled this in with foam flush with the benchwork. Now I can lay track over the area and cut the foam out when i am ready to install my bridges.
Tell me what you think about this track plan
Looks like you have quite the plan coming together there mate...looking forward to seeing how it all turns out. Cheers
Cheers...
Chris from down under...
We're all here because we're not all there...
Anyone see any problems with the layout plan above? Any s curves or problems that I didnt catch?
Hi SpartanCook:
I'm guessing that my previous suggestion for the yard below the incline didn't work out. Too bad.
Here are my current thoughts on your plan to date as it concerns the yards above and below the incline.
You need to ask yourself what do you want the yards to do, and are you going to use the yard above the incline in conjunction with the yard below the incline? In other words, is it all one big yard?
Here are your options as I see them:
If you are using the yard below the incline as a separate entity and you want to break up incoming trains into different outgoing trains then I don't think the lower yard will work. If you want to bring in a long train and then take one or two cars off it at a time and deliver them directly to their destinations instead of forming new trains then the lower yard will work to an extent. By that I mean that the lower yard consists of one longer yard track and two much shorter ones. The shorter tracks (at the top) are fed by a section of track which has to be kept clear if you want access to the shorter tracks. That is a waste of yard track.
On the other hand, if you see it all as one big yard then you can break up incoming trains and form new trains 'no problem'. I say 'no problem' but you will have to constantly foul the main line to work the yard. That can make for some interesting operating sessions, or it could be a complete pain. In fact you will have to foul the main line in order to do any hostling (re-arranging of cars) in the upper yard at all.
I hope that made sense. If you want I can have another stab at the lower yard. Just say so.
Please understand that I am not trying to be overly critical. I'm just sharing my thoughts. It's your railroad. You can do as you please. Ultimately what you want is a workable railroad. My first attempts at drawing a track plan were a disaster but I didn't know it until I read 'Track Planning for Realistic Operation" by John Armstrong. Had I not read the book, I would have built a railroad that could actually do very little of what I had envisaged, particularly with regard to the yard.
Regards,
SpartanCookAny s curves or problems that I didnt catch?
The double-crossover creates potentially troublesome s-curves with the adjacent curves. With a double-crossover you need at least a car-length of straight track to avoid sharp s-curves through one of the crossover paths. Similar to this:
As others have noted, in the same space different choices for the location and arrangement of layout elements might give more pleasing long-term results. It's a little hard to tell with the hand-drawn segments.
Good luck with your layout.
Dave thanks for the reply
I found my copy of track planning for realistic operations and am trying to decifer this as best I can. I have figured i will redo my plan starting with my yard and a rough outline on to where my mainline will run.
So here is what i want to get out of the yard. Bring full cars from the 4-5 industries on the layout into the yard. Assemble a train to be sent to another railroad. Recieve back a train full of empty cars into the yard then distribute the cars out to the industries.
I am planning a coal mine, Oil pipeline, Beer distribution, and a food manufacturer.
Still trying to wrap my head around operating a yard like this, but this is what I basically copied from http://www.housatonicrr.com/yard_des.html
Would this design work? Or did i mess it up somewhere?
Thanks for all your guys help in helping me to avoid errors before I start laying track
I wish my friend Craig Bisgeier would take that yard diagram off his site (or revise it). Schematically it's not incorrect, but that diagram is not the best physical track arrangement for a yard.
You'd probably be better off starting with one of the yard examples in the Armstrong book.
But even a step back from that, where are the cars coming from? Where does the other railroad connect? Sorting out that logical flow (as described in Track Planning for Realistic Operation) will help you create a track plan that supports it.
Good luck.
SpartonCook:
Here are a few thoughts on your revised plan:
The yard is improved but as Cuyama says, it is not the best.
The overall layout design will work quite well but it is very simple. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but I noticed that you are currently only showing one spur for industries and one for the mine (plus the engine service area). The mine spur is a bit short so you won't be able to park 'long' coal trains on it. Perhaps wrap it around to the left to make the spur longer and/or start it further up the right side of the mainline. If you are modelling coal country there is nothing wrong with having a coal train running through town.
You have lost a lot of 'running track'. In other words, the size of the basic loop is much smaller and the double track is gone. Also, you aren't showing any grade changes. I think you can resolve both issues by adding an outer track going most of the way around the layout. It could achieve about a 5" rise at 2.5% grade behind the yard if it started at the bottom of the layout. There would be a reach in distance problem on the left side, but that could be addressed by cutting a semi circle out of the inside of the green benchwork. You would have to curve the yard lead and move the engine service area a bit. Maybe run the mine spur off of the outer track.
I hope you don't think I'm trying to take over your layout!
Hi Dave
Dont worry i dont think you are trying to take over my layout. As this is going to be my first larger layout i value the advice.
I am still going to implement running track and have another loop with an incline on the outside of the layout. This will lead up to the mine track. It will be the same as the previous layout above this one with a 2% grade.
I really just wanted to simplify everything down and just focus on the yard and see what i need there first. Then i can curve my yard lead and engine service tracks after i know the yard will be functional.
The spurs are just there to show inputs and out puts of cars for my own sake trying to wrap my head on how to get this yard to function.
Does anyone know of any simple yards like I am trying to make that have an animation online? That way i can visualize how the trains will run and switch cars within a yard like this? I have between 8-10 ft and a two foot wide section to build my yard
Thanks for everyones advice and help
Kyle
Hi Kyle:
Sorry, I didn't give you enough credit. I should have realized that your plan was concentrating on the yard.
I just spent some time looking through John Armstrong's yard plans, specifically at the top plan in Fig. 2-9, page 26, 3rd edition. I think that is one of the plans that cuyama is suggesting. Unfortunately Mr. Armstrong didn't provide scale measurements with his plans. Based on 2.25" track centers the plan as drawn would be somewhere around 16 ft long. The only way you could do that would be to curve the ends of the yard down the sides of the benchwork, and that would mean devoting almost half of the layout to the yard only.
I'm not saying that cuyama's suggestion is wrong. He knows far more about layout design then I do. If I were you, I would ask him to provide a few more details.
As far as finding a program that can animate the yard, 3rdPlanIt can do that for you. Unfortunately it is not free, but I have been using it for several years and I am very happy with it. You can even do the animation in 3D, although it isn't very fast.
http://www.eldoradosoft.com/
hon30critterI just spent some time looking through John Armstrong's yard plans, specifically at the top plan in Fig. 2-9, page 26, 3rd edition. I think that is one of the plans that cuyama is suggesting. Unfortunately Mr. Armstrong didn't provide scale measurements with his plans. Based on 2.25" track centers the plan as drawn would be somewhere around 16 ft long. The only way you could do that would be to curve the ends of the yard down the sides of the benchwork, and that would mean devoting almost half of the layout to the yard only.
The overall yard need not be that long given Spartan's train lengths, I was only referring to Armstrong's track arrangement, which would be fine in a shorter yard.
I'll look through my custom plans to see if I have a good example for his space. Because yard ladders take up quite a bit of length, the yard will probably need to be longer than 8 feet in HO to meet Spartan's needs.
This HO yard example is only 8 feet, but was designed for shorter trains, a single operator, and with no need to keep the mainline clear via a yard lead (which would probably be a good idea for Spartan's layout). His would need to be a bit longer, I think, but as HOn30 suggests, parts of the yard could curve.
I think that one key shown here (unlike the schematic on Craig Bisgeier's page) is to have the double-ended track(s) that can serve as arrival/departure tracks accessible in the same way as any stub-ended classification/storage tracks. I'd definitely recommend a little more length for Spartan's yard, as the double-ended track here is only 4'8" long.
hon30critterAs far as finding a program that can animate the yard, 3rdPlanIt can do that for you.
I don't think that is what Spartan is asking. I think that he is asking to see an animated example of trains arriving, cars being switched, trains departing, etc. This would need to be created by someone with a bit of experience. I've thought about doing exactly that, but it would take a lot of time.
There was a great article by David Popp in an MR Special Issue called How to Build Realistic Layouts: Freight Yards. It looks like that might still be available and is a helpful collection of ideas.
Popp's article is a good example of how a model yard actually works with arrivals, departures, block-swapping, etc.
Byron
http://www.housatonicrr.com/yard_des.html
good read!
Steve
Hi Byron:
Thanks for the reference to David Popp's yard operations article. I just ordered a copy.
I have spent a fair amount of time trying to get my yard right. Before I read John Armstrong's book it was a disaster, but of course, being a naive newbie at the time, I though it was perfect in all respects! I'll be interested to see how it stacks up against David Popp's advice.
Thanks for the advice Byron
That design that you showed would be perfect for my layout! It will only be me operating and my train lengths will be small at least on this my first layout.
One question on how you would go about operating this yard in the scenario of returing from industries scattered along the layout with a train of 7-8 cars.This is how i think it would work but please correct me if i am wrong it may be the reason why i cant design a good yard.
1. The train would cross the turnout on the bottom left of the diagram onto the double ended track.
2. It would pull the train fully into this siding. Then the Loco would detach from the cars.
3. That loco would do a run around on the mainline and grab the cars from the opposite side. Then push them into their respective storage tracks?
Or the train could come from the other direction and just pull past yard entirely then spot the cars on the needed tracks by backing into them as well?
Thanks again everyone