Dave-the-Train wrote: Hey! I wondered where you'd gone! Glad you haven't been abducted by aliens How's the plan coming along?
Hey! I wondered where you'd gone!
Glad you haven't been abducted by aliens
How's the plan coming along?
Hi Dave --
Still working on it. I think I am starting to get satisfied with the mainline, staging and yard setup. What I have now is:
I am now working on where to put industries, struggling with the temptation to cram in a lot of industries and make the whole thing too overloaded again. This is what the layout look like now.
Smile, Stein
steinjr wrote: Hi Tom -- How did you set up your waybill system to ensure that you get a reasonable mix of cars to the industries ?
Hi Tom --
How did you set up your waybill system to ensure that you get a reasonable mix of cars to the industries ?
Stein, I only recently started working on that.
I have to give credit to Jerry Hopkins (http://users.bigpond.net.au/gerrymmr/index.html) and Wolgang Dudler (http://www.westportterminal.de/).
If you look at the Operations link on Jerry's page, it will lead you to getting the card cards and waybills setup.
I started on the car cards a couple of weeks ago. I'll next do some waybills and try this out on one staging train.
Regards,
Tom
BRJN wrote: With small children, you will definitely want a continuous loop. My son (age 11) enjoys playing on my switching layout; my daughter (age 5) thinks trains going back and forth is boring.I will use a cassette to get cuts of cars on/off my layout, as soon as I build a few. If you are a reasonably good carpenter (I need a lot more practice), you can use the cassettes and a home-made rack as under-layout storage. Maybe one side of each cassette could be clear plastic? This will help you find individual cars.
With small children, you will definitely want a continuous loop. My son (age 11) enjoys playing on my switching layout; my daughter (age 5) thinks trains going back and forth is boring.
I will use a cassette to get cuts of cars on/off my layout, as soon as I build a few. If you are a reasonably good carpenter (I need a lot more practice), you can use the cassettes and a home-made rack as under-layout storage. Maybe one side of each cassette could be clear plastic? This will help you find individual cars.
Hi there --
I also saw these nifty (but kinda pricey) acrylic "tubes" (square cross-section, see-through), with tracks built into the bottom and a connector that could be hooked up to the track so trains could drive into and out of the acrylic cassette under its own power.
German thingy - called train-safe (http://www.trains-safe.de). Haven't tried them, but looks like a neat concept.
Thanks for the advice on how much staging would be needed. Seems like I have been thinking along roughly similar lines to what you have been doing - having a transfer run from the outside, with maybe two locals to set out and pick up before you have enough cars to send a transfer out again.
So each train in staging from the start can generate 4 runs - a transfer from staging to the yard, two locals and a transfer from yard to staging. With three tracks in staging - a train can start on the runthrough track in staging and enter play immediately, I should be good for quite few trains before things start repeating.
I am also planning for trains about the length you have in staging - a little less than 150 cm. Btw - I really like your layout! And recognize some buildings that will also be on my layout (but of course fewer of them on my layout).
Smile, Stein, in Sorumsand, Norway http://home.online.no/~steinjr/
steinjr wrote: My design goal is to end up with a layout that allows me to have a taste of two different types of railroading in a small urban interchange/terminal railroad in the American midwest ca 1962-63: taking apart and building trains - ie yard workpicking up and setting out cars at industries - ie a local freight train
My design goal is to end up with a layout that allows me to have a taste of two different types of railroading in a small urban interchange/terminal railroad in the American midwest ca 1962-63:
Hello Stein, I have been following this with some interest as I pondered how to obtain the same design goals as you've indicated.
I believe you indicated you used Joe Fugate's formula's. There is definitely a balance to achieve across a lot of variables. Changing one, e.g. staging length or # of staging tracks, can affect other operational aspects.
I looked at your subject question and goals. Generally, advice will be more and longer staging is better - but again back to the formulas. I started with that advice and designed a double ended staging yard some 13 feet (390 cm) in length with 9 tracks - talk about a lot of long trains! I realized later that my passing sidings would not accomodate this, so I re-designed.
This is a picture of my staging - four tracks at approximately 5 feet (150 cm) along one wall. The width those four tracks take up is about 10.5 inches (26 cm). The # of cars approaches what you indicated - I have some 50 footers in there
I began really thinking about how I was going to operate that staging area. What I realized was that a train from staging could give me two trains to operate once it reached the yard.
Consider the following.
Assume you have 3 cars in the yard and 11 cars staged at industries.
You bring out the first staging train of 7 cars to the yard to be broken down, sorted etc. The yard now has 10 cars.
You build your first local taking 3 cars from the yard and 3 new ones that just arrived from the 1st train from staging. Assume this local #1 will set out all 6 cars at the various industries and will also pick up 6. Local #1 leaves. That leaves 4 cars in the yard.
You, or someone, now could build up local #2 while local #1 is on it's mission. Local #2 takes the remaining 4 in the yard for set out at industries and will bring back 5. That leaves 0 cars in the yard.
Sometime later, local #1 returns to the yard with it's 6 pickups. Local #2 is busy with it's chores. The yard now has 6 cars that must be broken down and sorted.
Local #2 returns to the yard with it's 5 pickups. The cars in the yard now number 11.
There is one empty staging track. So, assume we now build the outging, back to staging train.
A train is consisted with 7 cars from the yard out of the 11 available. This train then leaves back for the empty staging track. That leaves 4 cars in the yard and 10 cars staged at the industries around the layout.
So, for that one staging train, one could get the action of two locals delivering and picking up from the industries. In my case I could get as many as 8 locals from the 4 staging tracks. It will depend on my operations plan. But again, 2 for 1. That's not bad.
Point is, depending on how many operators you have or wish to have running trains affects how much staging one needs to get that level of activity.
Hope this helps.
Mmm - how about this one ? I think it should be functionally equivalent to Eric's suggestion, while preserving most of the yard. Haven't added sidings for industries yet.
I've given this layout proposal id code "double01a", if anyone wants to refer to it:
<Yawn> - time to head for bed - it it 04:00 hrs over here :-)
SmileStein
Hello Stein, I've just been updating myself on your plans and ideas...
I really like Eric's suggestion about a twice-around plan, and if I remember correctly the Minnesota Transfer has a crossing exactly like that. It would be great to include it in your layout, and have the possibility of both continous run AND staging accessible from both north and south..!
How about putting the staging tracks along the left wall behind the backdrop (you don't need such long staging tracks as suggested in Eric's sketch), and make room for a small Midway Yard at the upper or lower wall? The visible part of the layout may have several sidings for industries of your choice, and the layout would still have plenty of space in the center...
Svein
Hi Eric --
Okay, now I understand. Was no problem to just duplicate your sketch in my layout program. Will experiment with this idea and see where it leads.
Thank you !
steinjr wrote: ericboone wrote:One way I've seen to handle staging tracks in a small room sized layout is to put the staging tracks along the walls behind a short backdrop that you can reach over to access the track. In your case, I would have anything more than two tracks. Make the staging track part of your mainline run. Your mainline will have to cross it self to get in and out of staging, but a simple crossing / junction will do the job nicely. Given that your modeling a terminal railroad, this single junction as the entrance to staging and the staging itself could simulate interchanges with the class 1 railroads.Hi Eric -- I'm sorry, but I don't quite get what you are recommending. I do understand the point about a low backdrop so you can reach over. But even though I read and speak English reasonably well (I think :-), English is not my native language, and I didn't quite understand the "I would have anything more than two tracks" part or the part about the mainline crossing itself. Could you rephrase it or explain a little more about what you meant ? Smile, Stein
ericboone wrote:One way I've seen to handle staging tracks in a small room sized layout is to put the staging tracks along the walls behind a short backdrop that you can reach over to access the track. In your case, I would have anything more than two tracks. Make the staging track part of your mainline run. Your mainline will have to cross it self to get in and out of staging, but a simple crossing / junction will do the job nicely. Given that your modeling a terminal railroad, this single junction as the entrance to staging and the staging itself could simulate interchanges with the class 1 railroads.
I'm sorry, but I don't quite get what you are recommending. I do understand the point about a low backdrop so you can reach over.
But even though I read and speak English reasonably well (I think :-), English is not my native language, and I didn't quite understand the "I would have anything more than two tracks" part or the part about the mainline crossing itself.
Could you rephrase it or explain a little more about what you meant ?
I drew a quick sketch showing the mainline and staging tracks. You'll have to fill in the industrial sidings and yards you desire. This concept gives you the possibility of longer trains and if you count the staging tracks, a much longer mainline. The cross-over simulates a junction to go into and out of staging. There is an "interchange track" to allow completely visible continuous running. The dotted line represents the short backdrop hiding the staging tracks.
Eric
Safety Valve wrote: What good is more staging if you cannot move the trains on your availible trackage?What good is too much industry when you can barely dig a car out of a sea of cars?You have a continious run, that is good.How about selecting three industries YOU KNOW that will take alot of different cars. Build a yard that will allow you to build one train worth of industry switching and maybe keep that cassette thing as a way to feed the railroad.Im not ready to move further with this around the walls plan unless we explore that middle space, Im thinking a folded figure 8 with a stacked loop might do it for several industries around the place.
What good is more staging if you cannot move the trains on your availible trackage?
What good is too much industry when you can barely dig a car out of a sea of cars?
You have a continious run, that is good.
How about selecting three industries YOU KNOW that will take alot of different cars. Build a yard that will allow you to build one train worth of industry switching and maybe keep that cassette thing as a way to feed the railroad.
Im not ready to move further with this around the walls plan unless we explore that middle space, Im thinking a folded figure 8 with a stacked loop might do it for several industries around the place.
Yes, obviously there must be a reasonable balance between staging, track capacity and number of industrial car spots.
I haven't calculated the track statistics using Joe Fugate's track statistics measure yet. Probably should have. Seen them before ? Can be found at his Siskiyou web site:
http://siskiyou.railfan.net/model/layoutDesign/layout.html
Not quite sure what you mean by "folded figure 8 with a stacked loop", but the room has to do double service as storage as well - I need to be able to get my tools and various stored objects from shelves under the layout. So I cannot fill in too much of the center of the room.
No prob, Kimble. Just piggyback as much as you like
Smile,Stein
Wow, steinjr!
It's like we're living in parallel universes ?. I have 7 x 11 feet of space to work with so I can run trains with my five year old. Ops is not as important as having fun. I plan on hand thrown turnouts and slowly over time add in DCC controlled Tortoises.
One of my many past plans was a loop, just like yours, but then I settled on a folded dog bone / "G" shaped layout.
http://web.mac.com/rcarignan/iWeb/Layout/
I've laid ½ of my mainline (the left hand return loop) and am presently am enjoying my time staing at the plywood sheet with a cup of coffee and working out the details of my "yard".
Not only am I also working with limited space, but I want to have a transfer track with my narrow gauge line.
It would be so easy to just have a stub end yard ?
Last year, my brother gave me some track to help me start my layout...30 year old track! It was "leftovers" from when we were kids. I don't know why I took it or kept it at the time, but it has proved useful. I'm using it to lay out my yard (sans turnouts) with push pins to hold it in place.
If you don't mind, I'd like t piggy back on your topic and post some of my own layout pictures and issues.
steinjr wrote: What would you move inwards towards the center of the room to make room for extra staging ?Stein
What would you move inwards towards the center of the room to make room for extra staging ?
Stein
For sake of ease in describing what I am thinking of, think of your plans as 1,2,3,&4 based upon the order they appear in the post.
With plan #2 as a basis, look at both the left and right and you see a foot of straight track on the sides. That is what I would remove. Then add the three track staging like appears in #4. Instead of hiding it with a backdrop, hide it with a hillside that angles above staging. You then access staging from underneath. You might want a slight grade to add clearance, but you shouldn't need much.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Safety Valve wrote: What good is more staging if you cannot move the trains on your availible trackage?What good is too much industry when you can barely dig a car out of a sea of cars?You have a continious run, that is good.How about selecting three industries YOU KNOW that will take alot of different cars. Build a yard that will allow you to build one train worth of industry switching and maybe keep that cassette thing as a way to feed the railroad.
I agree. There is a train of thought (no pun intended) that many model RRs have too many industries that are too compressed, e.g. a bunch of warehouses but there's only room for one car per warehouse.
On my shelf switcher, I have a transloading facility - takes tanks, covered hoppers and the occasional boxcar, just as a prototype near Lagrange, Illinois does. Another possibility is a paper mill - takes tanks, hi-cube boxcars, coal hoppers for the power plant, pulpwood flats and chip gondolas and the occasional gen purpose flat for machinery in or out.
selector wrote: I would like to pop in without really taking the time to fully learn and think about all the conversation so far, but I am averse to the cassette idea relying on the door module being in place. That is, to me, a second order flexibility impediment since you must rely on another "implant" to take advantage of the cassette, already an implant...of sorts.
I would like to pop in without really taking the time to fully learn and think about all the conversation so far, but I am averse to the cassette idea relying on the door module being in place. That is, to me, a second order flexibility impediment since you must rely on another "implant" to take advantage of the cassette, already an implant...of sorts.
I see your point. No, the piece in front of the door it doesn't have to be a gate and it doesn't have to be there all the time.
But it is not the cassette feeding off down to the right (ie counter-clockwise on the mainline) that is the primary factor in making that gate crossing be there in front of the door.
That is just incidental - a cassette (if I use that idea) can fairly easily be reoriented in any which way you like. The easiest way would be just slanting it slightly differently and laying the track off the layout into the cassette on the opposite (left) end of a cassette instead of the right end.
The main factors in me leaving that thing in front of the door is
But it is an important reminder. I have started taking that thing in front of the door for granted, and I would like to not have the door blocked any more than necessary.
Not because I expect to be in and out a lot while running trains - and I do not plan on parking anything on the gate in front of the door - that is an accident waiting to happen, but to make it easier to use the under layout part of the room for storage when I am _not_ running trains.
I will certainly look into a better place to attach a cassette (if I go with the cassette idea).
selector wrote: Edit - Okay, I have read-in. Staging is really very important, but more-so in cramped quarters because you want to preserve as much free running and operating space on the layout without resorting to using any switching facilities, engine service tracks, or the odd siding/set-out as real storage. Keep the vistas, the structures, your operating stuff in the clear and appreciable. Reaching into a yard to manipulate items when you have to be careful of the rest of your 40 pieces of rolling stock and five locomotives will quickly get old. Also, as Chip describes in his nifty guide, to which I hope he will provide a link, staging allows you to simulate "everywhere else that you can't model" that your railroad is serving in one way or another.
Edit - Okay, I have read-in. Staging is really very important, but more-so in cramped quarters because you want to preserve as much free running and operating space on the layout without resorting to using any switching facilities, engine service tracks, or the odd siding/set-out as real storage. Keep the vistas, the structures, your operating stuff in the clear and appreciable. Reaching into a yard to manipulate items when you have to be careful of the rest of your 40 pieces of rolling stock and five locomotives will quickly get old. Also, as Chip describes in his nifty guide, to which I hope he will provide a link, staging allows you to simulate "everywhere else that you can't model" that your railroad is serving in one way or another.
No need. I do understand what staging is used for. Have known that since probably a long time before Chip made his web page. I won't snap at Chip if he provides the link again, but it won't exactly be news to me
What will be in the yard is only trains in the process of being broken down or assembled - and only very rarely more than the consist of two trains (say 12-16 cars, a caboose or two, a yard switcher and the arriving or departing road power) at any given time. As little as I can get away with while trying to deal with breaking up a transfer in from somewhere and distributing the arriving cars into "transfer out to different railroad" or "deliver locally".
I am not considering storing engines and rolling stocks on the visible layout. The real estate is far too valuable for that in such a small layout.
What I am considering is to keep extra engines and cars either just stored in boxes or in off-layout staging, using a cassette to transfer whole trains from the layout to off-layout staging or from staging to the layout.
Say a shelf above layout on upper wall , with maybe 6 tracks on the shelf, organized like a movie theatre - ie back row or rows higher than the rows in front, so it is easy to see what is there and easy to reach any given car or engine or whatever.
Attach a cassette at the end of the shelf and drive (or back) the train on the cassette off the cassette and onto one of the staging tracks. Then drive (or back) another train from the staging shelf onto the cassette, and bring it back to the layout. Need to turn a train ? Turn the cassette before connecting it to the layout or before connecting it to the staging tracks.
That's the idea anyways. Not sure if it would work as well in practice as the theory says. See any obvious problems with it ?
selector wrote: Happen to like your first second-version. Unless you already have a scenery or topographical plan for it, that lower right corner, outside the curved mains, could also afford you a small industry if you would like even more work.
Happen to like your first second-version. Unless you already have a scenery or topographical plan for it, that lower right corner, outside the curved mains, could also afford you a small industry if you would like even more work.
The version with a lot of tracks in the yard area, a runaround parallell to the yard ladder and staging along both the upper wall and right wall ?
I initially really liked that design too - it conveys the sense "busy" pretty well [:-)]. But it tries to pack in far too much in too little space. Access to staging along the upper wall is sheer hell, the yard demands trains to be backed in, and it is fairly dependent on the module in front of the door to get trains in and out from either staging area.
Well, gotta run to catch my train (1:1 scale :-) - will continue later.
Thanks for the comments this far - keep em coming. I do appreciate your suggestions and questions
Smile,
Rather than reference your plan directly, I will describe a part of my operating scheme which relies on having LOTS of staging:
Short peddler freight arrives at its terminus, a town with only minimal local freight switching (sawmill-log yard, freight house, lightly-used interchange and minimal steam servicing facility.)
As you can see, only 10-20% of the cars from that local will actually be switched to spots. The rest are, "Just passing through." Through freights are even more so - dropping only 25-30% of their cars for reclassification, of which 20% MIGHT end up at a local spot other than the interchange.
It only takes a few spots to keep a switching crew busy (trust me, I know!) Since you don't have space to model the industrial sprawl of a prototype terminal district, but do want the classification/train building action of a yard, this is one way to get it. Exactly how much staging you want to use will be determined by your willingness to watch the same consist reappear shortly after it departs.
Another point, which Andy Sperandeo likes to make. Cars standing in a yard aren't making money. The object is to get them rolling toward their destinations as quickly as possible.
Just my . Your opinion may vary.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I promise to now learn what you are trying to do and come back with something more helpful.
I happen to like your first second-version. Unless you already have a scenery or topographical plan for it, that lower right corner, outside the curved mains, could also afford you a small industry if you would like even more work.
I would not have concrete silos needing trains running through my yard in order to service it, as you have shown at upper right. Not saying there isn't a protype...I'm saying I would not model it because you don't have the space for a big yard anyway. Maybe the silos can go in that lower right corner I was mentioning?
Finally, and this is just me, I would not want to have to have the door span down in order to be able to use the tracks that lead off on the divergant at its left. Instead, even if the door span needs to be up for some lengthy moments, you would still be able to run that trackage if you moved it to the thin section on the other wall, to the left. You can always curve it, since it is not longer a cassette (Yay!), and it will only encroach on your pit area by maybe three more inches, and can join the main much earlier than you are at present, thus obviating the door span any time you want to use it.
SpaceMouse wrote:Now to answer your question, I would do both. I would collapse some of the space in the center of the layout and put the staging in behind the layout with the most switching.
I made a couple of layout proposals a while back tried to combine quite a bit of staging with a lot of switching.
Here is an early attempt, where I went somewhat wildhog with having fairly easy routes between all points on the layout :
Here is a cleaner, less busy variant - fewer tracks.
Main problem of using more of the center of the room is mainly one of access. If you want to put a couple of tracks of hidden staging behind a 4" high (or higher) scenic divider behind 40 centimeters (15") of shelf depth, access can get somewhat tricky.
Sorry - I should have specified that. Yes, it is H0, and N is not in the cards for me. I do know I could have run quite a bit longer trains in N and fit more track in N, but it just seems too small for me somehow.
Plus I already have enough (well - or at least as many as I can somewhat sensibly use on a layout this size ...) engines and cars in H0 - six short wheelbase switchers/road switchers from the right era (a couple of RS3s, an S1, an FM15-44, a GP9, and a GP30) and about 80 or so 40' cars of various usable types for this kind of era - boxcars, tank cars, covered hoppers, a couple of flatcars etc.
Hi --
I am struggling with a layout I am trying to plan for a small room (6 1/2 x 11 1/2 feet).
Obviously there has to be a _lot_ of selective compression when you are dealing with a layout room that size :-)
I have tentatively named my layout Minnesota Transfer Railway, which is the name of the prototype railroad that has inspired me, even though what I am building is not based on the prototype track plan.
I expect to run this layout alone or maybe together with one or both of my young kids (ages 5 and 8) - who just like to see trains move, they don't want to switch or anything (yet). I plan to do one operation at a time, and not use a clock. No automation - just throw switches by hand. Magnetic couplers on the cars, using a handheld magnet tool to uncouple cars.
Obviously my trains will have to be fairly short in a small room like this - I am planning for a maximum train length of 146 centimeters (one diesel switcher, 8 40 foot cars and a caboose). If you want to, you can imagine that each car in my train really represents 4-5 cars - ie 30-40 car trains :-)
I've gone through quite a few different layout plans - all of them basically shelf based around-the-room, but apart from that rather different (if you would like to see some of my old plans you can see them at the LDSIG wiki web page at http://tinyurl.com/2uaf7o).
Here is the two latest layout proposals I've made
The top layout leaves in quite a bit of mostly hidden staging connected to the layout - three tracks along the left wall - and two tracks along the bottom wall, and focuses more on yard work and less on switching industries (only a couple of industries - switched from the yard). It even squeezes in an engine shed and RIP track in the upper left corner.
The bottom layout has ruthlessly eliminated most of the staging - the only staging left is a 150 centimeter (59") cassette (enough to hold one entire train), and the possibility of having more staging tracks on a shelf above or below the layout, with trains transfered in or out of staging and in and out of the visible layout by way of the cassette. And has added quite a bit of industries - cutting e.g. the enginehouse/RIP track in favor of even more industries, having quite a few tracks and car spots per industry.
Any comments on the two layout proposals ? What do you think I ought to prioritize on this fairly small layout to get a sensible mix of yard work and local set out/pick - more staging or more industries ?
Anything else you would recommend that I try to make this layout better ?
Smile, Stein R