Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Layout Plan

5227 views
50 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Layout Plan
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 1:22 AM

I can  use  some help here as I'm terrible at planning. I have two versions of the same plan  here one is a simple Plan A (loop to loop) and the other is something I was working  on to  get some operations out of the plan , Plan B. 

Here's how the story goes,  a friend  told me that Plan B if I removed the  second mainline I would have more room to play with for rails for operations and give  more  room for structures and scenery, my reply to him was ok I'll remove the second Mainline and make it a Loop to  Loop and made a comment  that even if I made the  plan into a Loop the Loop I  would basicly have to add the additional line off the Loop to  Loop  to gain access to the industries  but he disagreed , so I bring the question to  you those of the  Forum, can Plan A be better made for Operations, scenery and stuctures or would it be the same idea of what I've  chicken scratched into Plan B. I would  like to do mountains all around, rivers , bridges ,  a wharf and  other structures to switch in and out  of. 

Ideas, thoughts help?

Thanks

Lynn

 

 

 

Plan A

 

Plan B

 

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 15,797 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 7:51 AM

Hi Lynn:

Plan B has only got one return loop. That means you will only be able to change the direction of the locomotive once before it is trapped into running in one direction only, i.e. counter-clockwise. If you want to be able to run in both directions on both mainlines you will need a second, opposite running return loop. Note that the return loop cross over doesn't have to be on the left side of the layout. You can put in a cross over anywhere to the east of the right side return loop. It has to run from the upper track on the right to the lower track on the left to function as the opposite return loop.

Ultimately however, having return loops really may not matter since you have two main lines so you can run east to west on one line and west to east on the other.

My suggestion would be to set up whatever sidings you want and then see if you have proper access to them without the return loops. If you do need the return loops, you will need two running in opposite directions.

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 8:44 AM

Dave I agree with everything you are saying although it doesn't address the main question of whether Plan A or Plan B would be have similar results with adding sidings. 

Moderator
  • Member since
    May 2009
  • From: Waukesha, WI
  • 1,764 posts
Posted by Steven Otte on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 8:57 AM

Plan B, having a longer mainline run, will offer more realistic operations. You can pick up a car at one industrial siding, rack up mileage with any number of turns around the loop, and drop it off again at another siding. With plan A, all you can do is shuttle back and forth.

There are those who think that your plan A is more realistic, since no prototype railroad would build a loop of track passing through the same area twice, but with a space as small as yours, operational realism is more important than visual realism. Separate the two sides of plan B's mainline loop with scenery, elevation, and tunnels to make the unrealistic loop appear more realistic.

But regardless of whether A or B is more realistic, both are lacking something very important: staging. Staging tracks, whether hidden behind a backdrop, on another deck below the main layout, under scenery, or behind the wall in your furnace room, connects your modeled railroad to the rest of the unmodeled world. Without it, your trains are stuck shuttling cars from one modeled industry to the other. With it, any kind of train can come in from and depart to staging, exponentially increasing your layout's operating possibilities.

--
Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editor
sotte@kalmbach.com

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 1,500 posts
Posted by ROBERT PETRICK on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 9:19 AM

Hey Lynn-

You realize, of course, that only you can answer these questions. You have to decide which is more important: operations or scenery. Personally, I'm in the 'less is more' camp. Less trackage means more room for buildings and structures. For me, the trains are just an excuse and a reason to play with the little doll houses. And for you, I should think that mountains and ports and rivers and industries and whatnot take up a lot of room. Tough choice.

Plan A needs a little more. Plan B gives you room to run and allow trains to stretch their legs without hogging all the real estate, leaving some open areas for scenery and buildings. You might want to add a fairly long parallel passing siding to allow two trains traveling in both directions  (and eliminate the need for two reversing sections). The siding can also function as a single visible (and admittedly limited) staging area.

Robert 

LINK to SNSR Blog


  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 9:20 AM

Steven Otte

Plan B, having a longer mainline run, will offer more realistic operations. You can pick up a car at one industrial siding, rack up mileage with any number of turns around the loop, and drop it off again at another siding. With plan A, all you can do is shuttle back and forth.

There are those who think that your plan A is more realistic, since no prototype railroad would build a loop of track passing through the same area twice, but with a space as small as yours, operational realism is more important than visual realism. Separate the two sides of plan B's mainline loop with scenery, elevation, and tunnels to make the unrealistic loop appear more realistic.

But regardless of whether A or B is more realistic, both are lacking something very important: staging. Staging tracks, whether hidden behind a backdrop, on another deck below the main layout, under scenery, or behind the wall in your furnace room, connects your modeled railroad to the rest of the unmodeled world. Without it, your trains are stuck shuttling cars from one modeled industry to the other. With it, any kind of train can come in from and depart to staging, exponentially increasing your layout's operating possibilities.

 

Thanks Steven for the input, first and foremost the reason Plan A Is displayed  simply as  a Loop to Loop  format  is just to express my main point which was can  Plan A be completed ( added to ) to have a better opportunity for some  operations and at the same time continuous run without cluttering the design with unnecessary sidings. Plan B has  what I think is the additional Line  to have some industry's have sidings off it but my friend tends  to think Plan A has better Bones for a start to  a good plan. 

I do know what you mean with staging as I have had below level staging in the past  , but in the past  I was not interested  in operations but simply running trains and  working on scenery. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: North Dakota
  • 9,592 posts
Posted by BroadwayLion on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 9:22 AM

Plan A needs a passing siding in the middle, it is there that you would add a small freight yard and industrial tracks. You would then put several staging tracks in the loops. That way you can stage a meet in the middle.

On plan B you would want the high line either elevated or hidden behind a view block of some sort.

A two track railroad to my way of thinking would be a two track mane lion.

Route of LION: (click image to enlarge)

 

 

ROAR

The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.

Here there be cats.                                LIONS with CAMERAS

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:05 AM

ROBERT PETRICK

Hey Lynn-

You realize, of course, that only you can answer these questions. You have to decide which is more important: operations or scenery. Personally, I'm in the 'less is more' camp. Less trackage means more room for buildings and structures. For me, the trains are just an excuse and a reason to play with the little doll houses. And for you, I should think that mountains and ports and rivers and industries and whatnot take up a lot of room. Tough choice.

Plan A needs a little more. Plan B gives you room to run and allow trains to stretch their legs without hogging all the real estate, leaving some open areas for scenery and buildings. You might want to add a fairly long parallel passing siding to allow two trains traveling in both directions  (and eliminate the need for two reversing sections). The siding can also function as a single visible (and admittedly limited) staging area.

Robert 

 

Robert most excellent points you have made. Apparently my friend is of the same notion of Less is More. Obviously Operations is not  on the Top of my list but I only want to  allow a small  bit off switching if I do choose. 

 

I don't quite understand what you mean by eliminating the need for two reversing sections.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 1,500 posts
Posted by ROBERT PETRICK on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:24 AM

wickman

 

I don't quite understand what you mean by eliminating the need for two reversing sections.

 

As things stand right now you have only one reverse loop for Plan B, so it becomes a one-and-done situation. Once you reverse a train, you cannot re-reverse it back to its original direction. To do that you'll need two matching loops, right-hand and left hand.

Like Dave mentioned above, if you want traffic in both directions you can simply run two individual trains. To avoid the Gomez Adams cornfield meet, you'll need a passing siding long enough to accommodate your longer train.

Robert 

LINK to SNSR Blog


  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:37 AM

ROBERT PETRICK

 

 
wickman

 

I don't quite understand what you mean by eliminating the need for two reversing sections.

 

 

 

As things stand right now you have only one reverse loop for Plan B, so it becomes a one-and-done situation. Once you reverse a train, you cannot re-reverse it back to its original direction. To do that you'll need two matching loops, right-hand and left hand.

Like Dave mentioned above, if you want traffic in both directions you can simply run two individual trains. To avoid the Gomez Adams cornfield meet, you'll need a passing siding long enough to accommodate your longer train.

Robert 

 

Thanks for the chuckle with the reference to Gomez Adams cornfield meet.

Lion and  Robert is this what your referring to for the passing siding?

PS I'm not real keen on a staging yard, although if it comes to needing an area  to hold say 15 cars I may be able to do something in the lower right  loop.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,890 posts
Posted by carl425 on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:46 AM

ROBERT PETRICK
you'll need a passing siding long enough to accommodate your longer train.

The passing siding only needs to accomodate the shorter train.  Just remember that for a meet, one of the two trains needs to be short enough to fit in the passing siding.

You can pass two trains that are both too long for the siding with a "double saw by" movement which might be fun now and then, but not as a steady diet.

It's illustrated here:

http://www.sdmrra.org/Odds-n-Ends/saw_bye.htm

I have the right to remain silent.  By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: North Dakota
  • 9,592 posts
Posted by BroadwayLion on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 10:53 AM

This is a fancy peice of track work.

Power enters the layout on Loop 1 and Loop 2

Switches 1 and 2; and 3 and 4 are all on one switch.

Lever 34 in the normal position allows a train to leave RightVille and proceed to the stop signal at Centerville. (SW2)

Move Lever 12 to the reverse position and a train can contiume leftbound and enter loop two, and stop at the red signal at SW1 at Leftville.

Normal Lever 12 train gets clear light to Centerville and a red light at SW3.

Reverse lever 34 train is clear to enter Loop one to the stop signal at SW4.

 

Now you can run two trains and they meet at Centerville.

You can have industries etc between Rightville and Centerville and is under the control of CAB 1.

You can have industries etc between Leftville and Centerville and is under the control of CAB 2.

You can add sidings at Centerville, and staging tracks in the loops.

SIMPLE.

 

LIONS like Simple.

 

ROAR

The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.

Here there be cats.                                LIONS with CAMERAS

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 1,500 posts
Posted by ROBERT PETRICK on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 11:08 AM

carl425

 

 
ROBERT PETRICK
you'll need a passing siding long enough to accommodate your longer train.

 

The passing siding only needs to accomodate the shorter train.  Just remember that for a meet, one of the two trains needs to be short enough to fit in the passing siding.

You can pass two trains that are both too long for the siding with a "double saw by" movement which might be fun now and then, but not as a steady diet.

It's illustrated here:

http://www.sdmrra.org/Odds-n-Ends/saw_bye.htm

 

Hey Carl-

Yes, the shorter. Good catch. As long as both engineers agree who goes where. I need a little elbow room to make up for less than quick thinking.

As for the double saw-by . . . didn't Casey Jones try that?

Robert 

LINK to SNSR Blog


  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 12:13 PM

BroadwayLion

This is a fancy peice of track work.

Power enters the layout on Loop 1 and Loop 2

Switches 1 and 2; and 3 and 4 are all on one switch.

Lever 34 in the normal position allows a train to leave RightVille and proceed to the stop signal at Centerville. (SW2)

Move Lever 12 to the reverse position and a train can contiume leftbound and enter loop two, and stop at the red signal at SW1 at Leftville.

Normal Lever 12 train gets clear light to Centerville and a red light at SW3.

Reverse lever 34 train is clear to enter Loop one to the stop signal at SW4.

 

Now you can run two trains and they meet at Centerville.

You can have industries etc between Rightville and Centerville and is under the control of CAB 1.

You can have industries etc between Leftville and Centerville and is under the control of CAB 2.

You can add sidings at Centerville, and staging tracks in the loops.

SIMPLE.

 

LIONS like Simple.

 

ROAR

 

Roar simple  for you obviously but yes I see what you mean. Now in my case would I enter the industries off the main siding ,  your sw2 too sw3 and carry on to other industries off that siding?

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 223 posts
Posted by Choops on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 12:28 PM

I would build plan B accept the outer track would go behind a backdrop from the right loop to the middle of the top wall.  There I would add a three track thru yard.  This would allow 2 staging tracks and 1 continuous run.  I did some cad and the staging track could be at least 12" long each.  Add a passing siding on the still visible tracks for meets.

Have fun.  Steve

Modeling Union Pacific between Cheyenne and Laramie in 1957 (roughly)
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 12:33 PM

Choops

I would build plan B accept the outer track would go behind a backdrop from the right loop to the middle of the top wall.  There I would add a three track thru yard.  This would allow 2 staging tracks and 1 continuous run.  I did some cad and the staging track could be at least 12" long each.  Add a passing siding on the still visible tracks for meets.

Have fun.  Steve

 

Thanks Steve for the input, only problem is if I did as you said I would not be able to access the 2 staging tracks or  the mainline ( 3rd track ).

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 12:58 PM

You could do both by having a double track mainline most of the way and if you set it back from the front edge some, you can have industries near the isle simulated with just a siding. I undulated my mainline some for industries here and there with most of the mainline track near the front on mine.

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 1:14 PM

rrebell

You could do both by having a double track mainline most of the way and if you set it back from the front edge some, you can have industries near the isle simulated with just a siding. I undulated my mainline some for industries here and there with most of the mainline track near the front on mine.

 

Yes but wouldn't my Plan B  be sort of like that?

Moderator
  • Member since
    May 2009
  • From: Waukesha, WI
  • 1,764 posts
Posted by Steven Otte on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 3:34 PM

I've moved this thread to the appropriate forum.

--
Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editor
sotte@kalmbach.com

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 223 posts
Posted by Choops on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 4:12 PM

wickman
Thanks Steve for the input, only problem is if I did as you said I would not be able to access the 2 staging tracks or the mainline ( 3rd track ).

Removeable back drop panels.  Or hide it behind a hill or building flats.

Steve

Modeling Union Pacific between Cheyenne and Laramie in 1957 (roughly)
  • Member since
    January 2015
  • From: Southern California
  • 1,682 posts
Posted by Lone Wolf and Santa Fe on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 7:06 PM

Plan B is going to be more fun to operate. I would get rid of the reverse loop turnout and move the passing siding and spur to that area so you can have more switching. Make the spur come off of the track closest to the aisle instead of the rear track. Make the passing siding on the opposite of the main than the spur so that a train can be parked on the siding and cars can be pulled off of it without blocking the main so another train can pass as it orbits the layout. Notice how the switches are all near the front of the layout instead of the rear.

Also I would raise the elevation on the rear track so that it is a little higher than the other track to help seperate it visually. Also trees, bushes, fences, hills and cliffs will help. Think of it as the track the leaves town and every time the train does a lap it is either a new train, or a new town depending on how you want to play it.

Another idea is to add a rip track or team track near the turn table.

And if you cut back the shelf at the top to 18-24 inches instead of 36 inches you might be able to turn the blob which contains the turntable so that it sticks up into the space more and gives you a longer mainline.

Well that is what I would do anyway. I hope this helps or at least gives you some ideas.

http://www.trainweb.org/lonewolfsantafe/postplan.gif

Modeling a fictional version of California set in the 1990s Lone Wolf and Santa Fe Railroad
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 7:50 PM

Lone Wolf and Santa Fe

Plan B is going to be more fun to operate. I would get rid of the reverse loop turnout and move the passing siding and spur to that area so you can have more switching. Make the spur come off of the track closest to the aisle instead of the rear track. Make the passing siding on the opposite of the main than the spur so that a train can be parked on the siding and cars can be pulled off of it without blocking the main so another train can pass as it orbits the layout. Notice how the switches are all near the front of the layout instead of the rear.

Also I would raise the elevation on the rear track so that it is a little higher than the other track to help seperate it visually. Also trees, bushes, fences, hills and cliffs will help. Think of it as the track the leaves town and every time the train does a lap it is either a new train, or a new town depending on how you want to play it.

Another idea is to add a rip track or team track near the turn table.

And if you cut back the shelf at the top to 18-24 inches instead of 36 inches you might be able to turn the blob which contains the turntable so that it sticks up into the space more and gives you a longer mainline.

Well that is what I would do anyway. I hope this helps or at least gives you some ideas.

http://www.trainweb.org/lonewolfsantafe/postplan.gif

 

Had something like that before. Curious though whats the difference ( that you see ) with the right reverse loop  connecting  to the left in the loop compared to connecting up the right side?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Wednesday, December 14, 2016 9:41 PM

wickman

 

 
rrebell

You could do both by having a double track mainline most of the way and if you set it back from the front edge some, you can have industries near the isle simulated with just a siding. I undulated my mainline some for industries here and there with most of the mainline track near the front on mine.

 

 

 

Yes but wouldn't my Plan B  be sort of like that?

 

Kinda but a double track mainline would have the tracks about 2" apart running paralel.

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 223 posts
Posted by Choops on Thursday, December 15, 2016 8:48 AM
Modeling Union Pacific between Cheyenne and Laramie in 1957 (roughly)
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 329 posts
Posted by Annonymous on Thursday, December 15, 2016 9:22 AM

wickman

 

 
Lone Wolf and Santa Fe

Plan B is going to be more fun to operate. I would get rid of the reverse loop turnout and move the passing siding and spur to that area so you can have more switching. Make the spur come off of the track closest to the aisle instead of the rear track. Make the passing siding on the opposite of the main than the spur so that a train can be parked on the siding and cars can be pulled off of it without blocking the main so another train can pass as it orbits the layout. Notice how the switches are all near the front of the layout instead of the rear.

Also I would raise the elevation on the rear track so that it is a little higher than the other track to help seperate it visually. Also trees, bushes, fences, hills and cliffs will help. Think of it as the track the leaves town and every time the train does a lap it is either a new train, or a new town depending on how you want to play it.

Another idea is to add a rip track or team track near the turn table.

And if you cut back the shelf at the top to 18-24 inches instead of 36 inches you might be able to turn the blob which contains the turntable so that it sticks up into the space more and gives you a longer mainline.

Well that is what I would do anyway. I hope this helps or at least gives you some ideas.

http://www.trainweb.org/lonewolfsantafe/postplan.gif

 

 

 

Had something like that before. Curious though whats the difference ( that you see ) with the right reverse loop  connecting  to the left in the loop compared to connecting up the right side?

 

The difference is that there is no reverse loop.

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Thursday, December 15, 2016 10:49 AM

Svein

 

 
wickman

 

 
Lone Wolf and Santa Fe

Plan B is going to be more fun to operate. I would get rid of the reverse loop turnout and move the passing siding and spur to that area so you can have more switching. Make the spur come off of the track closest to the aisle instead of the rear track. Make the passing siding on the opposite of the main than the spur so that a train can be parked on the siding and cars can be pulled off of it without blocking the main so another train can pass as it orbits the layout. Notice how the switches are all near the front of the layout instead of the rear.

Also I would raise the elevation on the rear track so that it is a little higher than the other track to help seperate it visually. Also trees, bushes, fences, hills and cliffs will help. Think of it as the track the leaves town and every time the train does a lap it is either a new train, or a new town depending on how you want to play it.

Another idea is to add a rip track or team track near the turn table.

And if you cut back the shelf at the top to 18-24 inches instead of 36 inches you might be able to turn the blob which contains the turntable so that it sticks up into the space more and gives you a longer mainline.

Well that is what I would do anyway. I hope this helps or at least gives you some ideas.

http://www.trainweb.org/lonewolfsantafe/postplan.gif

 

 

 

Had something like that before. Curious though whats the difference ( that you see ) with the right reverse loop  connecting  to the left in the loop compared to connecting up the right side?

 

 

 

The difference is that there is no reverse loop.

 

Duh, my bad.

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Thursday, December 15, 2016 10:56 AM

Choops

Wow Steve you sure went  Above and Beyond what I expected to see. As  much as I appreciate your efforts that plan kinda robs  me of my scenery although there  is actually quite a  bit in it that helps out  a great deal.

ps I'm thinking you do this as a hobby, whats the trackplan software your using?

Thanks

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 223 posts
Posted by Choops on Thursday, December 15, 2016 12:04 PM

I use autocad for designing.  I have it at work.  It gives me a lot of control to edit benchwork and move track around quickly.  The design I did there took about an hour. 

Designing layouts is the part of the hobby I enjoy a lot.

Solid works offers thier 2d software called draftsite for free.  It is worth looking into.

Steve

Modeling Union Pacific between Cheyenne and Laramie in 1957 (roughly)
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Canada
  • 1,284 posts
Posted by wickman on Thursday, December 15, 2016 4:19 PM

Steve I use Xtrackcad. Steve  at first glance  of your plan , first impression is Busy but  but then I think well take away the yard next to the Turntable and take away the Staging yard and really its not all that Too  Busy.  How would you access a train in the Staging yard? I kinda like  the idea of what you did with the left loop breaking it up into a tunnel ( smart ) . I've actually asked myself if I could make this work  in the  present benchwork I have built,  only major change you made was extending  the lower left loop  but...

This is my present contruction 

And yours 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,890 posts
Posted by carl425 on Thursday, December 15, 2016 4:33 PM

wickman
take away the yard next to the Turntable and take away the Staging yard and really its not all that Too  Busy

I've gone back through this thread and I don't see anywhere where you have expressed your operational goals for this layout.  What type of operations are you trying to support?  Do you want to operate the layout as a simulation of a real railroad or do you just want to run trains?  Do you just want an outlet for your artistic energy?

You reject the yard so I guess you don't want to originate/terminate trains.  You reject staging so there is no source/destination for run through trains.  What is it you want to do with this layout?

There are no wrong answers.  It's your railroad, your choices, but an understanding of what you want out of the layout would be most useful to those trying to help you.

wickman
How would you access a train in the Staging yard?

Are you perhaps confusing the staging yard with the fiddle yard?  You park assembled trains in a staging yard.  Think of it as the actors waiting in the wings for their turn on stage.  A fiddle yard is where you move cars on and off the layout by hand to make up/put away trains.

btw, I like Steve's plan a lot (but then I'm not building it)

I have the right to remain silent.  By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!