Freight Yard Ladder Turnouts

[railandsail]

hon30critter

Brian, what will the radius of the fascia be on the end of that aisle? Have you decided yet? If you are willing to post your shed and benchwork dinensions again I'd be willing to have another shot at it.

Dave

 

I can post a few photos/drawing here, but they have been downsized to fit the forums, and this forum in particular squeezes them up even further. If you want them in a bigger size, and hopefully to scale I would have to send them to you directly I suppose.

 

I think if you click on these posted photos they will expand to 750 pizels wide. Also the squares shown on portions of the drawings are 1" inch to the 1' foot scale.

 

In general the benchwork was going to look some like this

**************************

Then it became this...

Bottom Deck Track Plan

 

My latest 2 sketches for the bottom and top decks of my dbl deck layout plans has been an attempt to both;
1) Decide on what structures I will utilize on my layout ? ...(select from a LARGE selection of ones I have in storage)
2) Give them an area on the layout plan, so I can decide how they might fit, and how the deck/shelf plan needs to be configured to handle them.
 

I have been moving things around quite a bit....understatement :)...ha...ha

a) Steel Mill.
Most recently I moved my steel mill scene out of the upper right corner down to the lower left corner. It needed a little more room for some trackage, and access trackage. I think it has it now. That rolling mill as shown sits awfully close to the tracks, and that was done such that it could be cut down in length (shortened) if need be. The blast furnace might also be moved over just a bit to the left if another run around track for the hot metal cars was to be provided.

 

b) Waterfront.
I'll have several 'waterfront areas', but I had really been interested in finding a location for the scene I had purchased from an estate sale. I believe that latest placement in the right corner next to the entrance does it justice. I'll likely have to do a little trimming around the edges, but I can use those small structures in another spot, or attached to a different corner of this scene.

 

c) Brick Factory, Kilns
As shown on this dwg I first thought of putting it up in the right hand corner sitting on a mound that would cover one of the center peninsula tracks. I am seriously reconsidering that, and now placing it down behind my waterfront scene. I think it will fit in with the 'older architecture' of the waterfront scene now located there, and can be provided with access trackage in a better manner.

 

d) Refinery and Tank Farms
I now moved that from the lower left corner up to that upper right corner. The refinery(s) themselves will likely be located in the corners next to the backdrops themselves, and the multiple storage tanks will be distributed throughout the area, including to either side to mainlines feeding the helix (perhaps a multiple series of steel trust bridges for these mainlines?) the peninsula access track in that refinery area will not be covered by an earthen mound, but rather will pass thru the tank farm area.

 

e) Peninsula Access
I had been seeking several access tracks to the central peninsula, and that one on the right hand side can present an acceptable alternative. Plus it is long enough that a whole train can set in that 'passing track' waiting for its turn to enter the fray. Or it can operate in there while breaking down or reassembly to drop off cars for businesses in the central peninsula.

f) Stone Arch Bridge, Continuous Loop Trackage
There is a track feeding off the mainline on the upper right side over to a track on the left hand side. This track provides for a 'continuous loop' on the lower level such that the trains do not always have to climb the helix. It sits behind the turntable and in front of Balt city. I'm imagining it is a stone arch bridge sinilar to one I have already posted a photo of, and that was located just outside of Balt.
I have yet to find an acceptable way to join it into the mainlines on the left with a 'gentle grade'. So I am willing to put up with it have a big grade in a short distance, and thinking that in many cases the trains will be descending this grade.

g) Turntable
This structure has been moved back and forth across the layout plan on numerous occassions. I believe it has a good home now.
 

h) Coaling Tower and Steam Engine Servicing
I need to work on these details some more. The dwg is just a general placement, and thetracks are wrong.

i) Freight Yard
I had thought that the one side (left) of the freight yard would have several tracks for diesel engine fueling and sand, then several for engines in 'waiting' (display), and a two track maintenance building, with some short track storage out back??

j) Scrap Yard?
Perhaps a RR scrap yard in the lower left corner (old locos, frieght cars, etc)

k) Peninsula 'industries'
Several industries primarily centered around shipping ,....(stacked containers, lumber warehouse. coal, ) ???

****************************
Then I began to work on the freight yard situation,..

Freight Yard Ladder

I am struggling with a similar situation with my desire to but a small freight yard scene on the bottom deck of my new plan. Here is a quick sketch I did, and it has already been pointed out that I will likely NOT be able to fit that many spurs in there.

 

That wider deck/shelf under the freight yard was originally thought to be 30" inches deep (as shown on the dwg), but now I find that 29" or even 28.5" would be fine. Likewise I found I could make that aisle width a bit wider...from 30" to 32". 

The end fascia you speak of could be of any general shape that would fit the chosen track configuration. In my mock-up there on the floor the square face of the aisle there is about 37" frome the back wall of the shed.

BTW, my shed's outer dimensions are 12'x16'. the interior dimensions are basically 11'x15'

 

[hon30critter]

railandsail

Not too exciting possibility for me at the moment.

Hmmmm..... back to the drawing board

Brian, what will the radius of the fascia be on the end of that aisle? Have you decided yet? If you are willing to post your shed and benchwork dinensions again I'd be willing to have another shot at it.

Dave

[railandsail]

I did this quick little experiment. I accurately joined 4 Peco small radius turnouts (templates) in a pinwheel fashion, then laid them over my previous mocked-up yard ladder.

Yes I ended up with a slightly better 24" curve from the peninsula area over into the freight yard. But look how it screwed up my end points on that curve,...all in pursuit of a 24" radius verses a 22" radius.
 

Then I'm left with four tracks rather them five originating from the outer tracks of that pinwheel.
And I have potentially  3 less tracks on the inside curve of that pinwheel.
 

 

Plus it screws up my other 24" radius curve for steamers to access my coaling tower.

Not too exciting possibility for me at the moment.

[railandsail]

kasskaboose

Great photos!  Given that you're compressing quite a bit of space, how to handle longer freight cars?  I see them in a picture showing them on 24" curves, but can you get any broader? 

 

Wish I could go broader, but at the moment I don't see it. perhaps when I figure out the plan for the central peninsula, then maybe,...but big maybe.

[railandsail]

Don't forget, Tim Warris of Fast Tracks built a model of CNJ Bronx Terminal. It wasn't exactly easy.

http://www.bronx-terminal.com/

 Everything presented in this thread so far are very special cases, for very specific situations. One should not use any of this as the basis for the main line or even main yard planning on a model railroad. ANd most of that very tight waterfront trackage was constructed when 40 foot box cars were the bigger cars. There might be an odd 50 foot gon in some of those pics, but I highly doubt they ever positioned those around the loop of the freight house on the Bronx Terminal - there were other tracks for loading and unloading such cars.

 Modern 80+ foot cars like autoracks? Fuggetaboutit.

                            --Randy

I do understand that Randy, et al.

I tried a brief experiment with the ladder configuration for my freight yard, and there were a number of problems for my situation. Basically if I try to add a 24" radius curve from my yard tracks into the peninsula area it just screws thing up. I did get a 22" radius curve to do it. That requires the outer radius of my dbl-curves to be very nearly 22", which they are.

So I can get most 22" capable equipment into my yard, and out to the mainline. I will have one or two tracks in that yard that will require 18" capability. 

Recall that I also have a 24" curve into the peninsula,...the one under the coaling tower. Long cars might be run over this curve, out onto the mainline, then backed up the ladder, then inserted into a yard track,....all 24" curves.

I know that might not be prototypical, but on my model train layout it might be a fun exercise. So I could have some long diesels and long cars sitting on the freight yard tracks...as long as they can negotiate 24" curves.

Have NOT given up on the pinwheel concept yet, but I'm less excited about it then I was at first.

[kasskaboose]

Great photos!  Given that you're compressing quite a bit of space, how to handle longer freight cars?  I see them in a picture showing them on 24" curves, but can you get any broader? 

[railandsail]

 

I believe the Bronx Terminal tracks are the same as the Harlem Transfer.  The inner track radius is 90 ft and the outer track radius is 104 ft.  Thats 12.4 inch and 14.3 inch, respectively.

Ray

The GE-Alco-Ingersoll Boxcab #2 on the Harlem Transfer has extra long coupler shanks.  The early publications mentioned that "extra long links" were used to couple cars.  Since HT was built after the days of link and pin coolers, this must have referred to the system NHTX mentions.  I've collected a number of HT photos and can find none that show cars coupled on the inner track.  However the 1954 aerial on Historic Aerials shows two cars coupled on the southwest side of the freight house.  

The early articles also noted that there were no problems with up to 11 coupled cars on the outer track.

Ray

[railandsail]

I had trouble with opening that link (in the traditional method) myself this morning. But then I hi-lited it, right clicked on it, and chose "open the link". It worked.

[NeO6874]

rrinker

 It's extremely inconsistent - and I suspect it has to do with forum links ending in .aspx

 

 

I did a little digging in my previous post, and it tries to be smart -- converting "http://cs.trains.com/blahblah..." into "../../../threadhere.aspx" -- which, while it's (likely) a valid relative link, causes things to unfortunately not work.

[railandsail]

 

 

Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:31 PM

This here's the famous Bronx Terminal:

 The track surrounding the building is 15" radius, in HO.  In the foreground, you can see a classic B&O boxcar.  Over in the float yard, it looks like there might be a 50' box.

 

In this photo, you can see what maybe is a 50' gon:

 

I seem to recall seeing an article, maybe in MR, about the B&O Dockside switchers that mentioned a coupler that had extra swing for the tight curves at the Baltimore docks

[riogrande5761]

railandsail

 

 riogrande5761

It seems also inconsistant to bring in Metro trains into the discussion as they operate with a different set of standards, hence the ability of the Metro or L trains to negotiate curves standard railroad cars can never manage.

 

 Its not just metro trains. Go to the discussion and have a look.

Is this where I join Cayuma, throw up my hands and give up?  . 

[railandsail]

Steam Switcher,...Proto 2K 0-8-0

There was one steam switcher that I was concerned about being on tighter curves, as I have at least 2 of them with sound.

I found these,..

Before I had a permanent layout, my P2K 0-8-0s would negotiate #4 snap switches and 18" radius curves, with cars, just fine.

I have three 2-8-2 Mikes for three different manufacturers and they all negotiate 18" radius curves and Atlas Snap turnouts without any problems.  The Proto 2000 0-8-0 shouldn't have any problems with 18" radius either.

Have 3 of them they have no problem handling a 18 in ra.

My P2K Mikes and 0-8-0 switchers will do 18" radius no problem. Visually the Mike will look better on larger radii. There isn't enough difference in all actuality in the driver diameter between the model Mikados and 0-8-0 switchers to make 18" radius a problem. The earlier poster that mentioned a 30" minimum for the switcher hasn't a clue as regards Proto 2000 steam locos; if we had to have that large of a curve (in HO) for a switcher than we'd all need a gym to have our layouts in.

 

 

[railandsail]

riogrande5761

It seems also inconsistant to bring in Metro trains into the discussion as they operate with a different set of standards, hence the ability of the Metro or L trains to negotiate curves standard railroad cars can never manage.

 

Its not just metro trains. Go to the discussion and have a look. Too bad the link is being so problematic.

 

Strange, I'm not having a problem with that link??

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx

[cuyama]

rrinker

it has to do with forum links ending in .aspx

Yes

[riogrande5761]

It seems also inconsistant to bring in Metro trains into the discussion as they operate with a different set of standards, hence the ability of the Metro or L trains to negotiate curves standard railroad cars can never manage.

[rrinker]

 It's extremely inconsistent - and I suspect it has to do with forum links ending in .aspx

 I just pasted a link to Tim Warris' Bronx Terminal in that thread, and I didn;t have to manually add the tags OR even use the link icon in the editor - just had to put it on a blank line, because when I did the same thing in a PM, but pasted a URL after some other text, it did not make it a link.

                         --Randy

 

[cuyama]

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx

Like this. You type the parts in red, and then paste the forum top-level thread link in-between and hit "Return". (Or, obviously, type the first part, paste the link, type the last part, return)

[BigDaddy]

railandsail

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx

here you go

edit, well now I can't do it either.  Converting it to tinyurl ought to work

https://tinyurl.com/y74dr93s

[NeO6874]

riogrande5761

 

 

railandsail

Tight Radius Curves

Speaking of tight radius curves on real railroads, this link could be an eye-opener
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx 

 

 

 

I couldn't get that link to work but if it is the topic I think it is, the "real RR curves" are on the L, a Chicago based metro transit system and not applicable to standard mainline RR conditions.  In other words, those are not the droids we are looking for.

 

 

Indeed it is.

Ugh, I give up. Apparently the forum doesn't like linking to other parts of the forum...  

 

[riogrande5761]

railandsail

Tight Radius Curves

Speaking of tight radius curves on real railroads, this link could be an eye-opener
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx 

I couldn't get that link to work but if it is the topic I think it is, the "real RR curves" are on the L, a Chicago based metro transit system and not applicable to standard mainline RR conditions.  In other words, those are not the droids we are looking for.

[Doughless]

railandsail

As one person pointed out we don't all have hanger size basements in which to build our layouts.

We understand that.  Which is why so many with limited space choose to not run every kind of equipment they want.  

You've got to consider the overhang of long cars when on a tight radius, both the inside center overhang and the outside corner clipping thereof by other cars.  Ultimately that means fewer yard tracks and possibly an inability to hold and run as many trains than if you kept car length shorter. 

Assuming the long cars have to run on the curves with the tight radii.

My old layout had a minimum radius of 24 inches.  But those were in the turnback loops and the 72 foot centerbeam flat never went near them.  It ran from staging to the lumber yard and back again over the generous 48 inch mainline radius curve in between.

[railandsail]

Tight Radius Curves

Speaking of tight radius curves on real railroads, this link could be an eye-opener
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/13/t/272940.aspx

[railandsail]

Doughless

I haven't followed Brian's various threads closely enough to clearly understand what equipment he is trying to run on the layout.  I'm a bit surprised to see that auto racks and long passenger cars are being considered for this layout with all of its tight curves.  

I thought the layout was based on the Tupper Lake and Whatever plan that was set in an era where 50 foot or possibly 60 foot cars would be the maximum length.  In which case, 24 inch radius curves for mainline speeds and 18 inch radius curves for yard speeds wouldn't be an issue. 

 

That 'original track plan, the Tupper Lake....' was the basis of what I started out thinking about,...the inspiration. But that changed very quickly when I went double deck, and when a number of postings convinced me that I needed bigger radius turns in the helix structure and around the walls of the shed. So the curves at the corners, and on the mainlines in general, are on the order of 30" inches.

In the staging areas, in the yard areas, in the peninsula areas, I am trying to maintain a minimum of 24" inches. But there are a few locations that I may have to go tighter to get things to fit on this relatively small layout.

As one person pointed out we don't all have hanger size basements in which to build our layouts.

 

[riogrande5761]

hon30critter

Brian,

Byron just sent me a note suggesting that the 2" track centers won't work in the yard because there won't be enough clearance on the curves. You will have to space them a bit further apart.

Dave

Yes, 2-inch track centers only work on straight track; for 24" radius, I would suggest a minimum of 2 1/2 - inch centers but with long equipment like auto-racks, I would test that to be sure it is sufficient.  The clearance issue of close track centers together with sharp curves is going to limit capacity and what will clear as you get near the turnouts.

[hon30critter]

Brian,

Byron just sent me a note suggesting that the 2" track centers won't work in the yard because there won't be enough clearance on the curves. You will have to space them a bit further apart.

Dave

[Doughless]

I haven't followed Brian's various threads closely enough to clearly understand what equipment he is trying to run on the layout.  I'm a bit surprised to see that auto racks and long passenger cars are being considered for this layout with all of its tight curves.  

I thought the layout was based on the Tupper Lake and Whatever plan that was set in an era where 50 foot or possibly 60 foot cars would be the maximum length.  In which case, 24 inch radius curves for mainline speeds and 18 inch radius curves for yard speeds wouldn't be an issue. 

[riogrande5761]

railandsail

Further Justification, Peco Sm Radius (24") in Ladder

I'll just say this about 24" radius and the auto racks, like the Atlas articulated auto rack.  A 24" radius is probably the smallest you can run them on and stay on the rails.  But consider this, when you are operating at the mechanical limits of anything, then you are likely to be on the edge of havin problems at some point.

My own opinion about minimums is they are just that, the bare minimum able to operate.  But best practice is to not operate on the edge, but to be above the minimum by some comfortable margin. 

Back when many layouts were 30" minimum radius, I decided to add a couple inches to that because every inch you increase the radius in the low range (18 to 30 inches) will make a substantial difference in what you can operate reliably and without issue.

So ask yourself, yes, you can get away with tricking that articulated autorack around a 24 inch curve, but is it a good idea to build a layout and expect long term smooth and reliable running?  Questionable.  Operating on the edge of bare minimums seems like it's pushing your luck. 

It's your layout and you really only need to convince yourself and then build it.  Me, I'd prefer to bump up the radius as much as I could manage.  I realize space is limited.  As John Armstrong says, it's a list of givens and druthers and you have to decide what you have and what you want and find a middle ground.

[cuyama]

railandsail

It was said that all Peco turnouts have a #6 frog

That's still false for PECO HO Streamline Code 100 and Code 75 (though true for PECO N). It's about a #4.5 frog for HO on all the turnouts.

Edit: That said, that frog is a good match for 22" radius minimum curves. So I'm only pointing it out to avoid confusion for others in the future.

SetTrack even tighter, as noted many times.

[railandsail]

.....from another forum,...

Further Justification, Peco Sm Radius (24") in Ladder

There is another factor here I didn't see in the discussion above. It was said that all Peco turnouts have a #6 frog, what wasn't said explicitly is that the Peco code 100 track is not a North American style turnout, it is more European. This means that it doesn't "kink" as much at the points as a USA turnout would. This is a good thing when trying to get trains around the tighter corners. I love the Peco code 100 small radius turnouts for this reason. I think they will serve you well in this application.

Brian

My Layout Plan

Interesting new Plan Consideration

• Reply

[railandsail]

I will likely try to use Peco 'mediums' rather than 'smalls' in those crossover locations,....30" diverging tracks,.....and slow speeds in yards.

I will not be running big steam 'in' the that yard. Those engines will be joined up to their consist out on the mainline,...and some minor ones in that 24" radius circle.

The 'long cars' will be limited to the 24" radius tracks, and done as singles rather than coupled to others. I think that will take care of most of them. Those cars that this yard will not handle,... will just NOT be able to utilize that freight yard.

I keep remember seeing some images such as this

Those autoracks are on the 26" curve, and it appears barely enough for them, although that flatbed has the same footprint as autoracks and it seems it could make the 24".

These 'joined' Auto Racks just made the 24" radius

...more here...
Minimum Curves for Long Freight Cars & Steam Locos https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/32599?page=2