FORUM CLINIC: Designing for satisfying operations

[jfugate]

Then to get back on topic- hows my trackplan look?

I model Chicago Great Western in 1968, in Iowa.

ding:

How large is your space, and where around your track plan are the room walls?

A few things I noticed right away:

1. Everything's very symetrically aligned parallel to the edge of the tabletop and goes around corners at perfect 90 degree angles. That's considered poor practice and makes the layout look less real. Real railroads twist and turn to follow terrain, and rarely make perfect 90 degree turns or run perfectly parallel to the terrain around them.

Take note how my track plan and table-top edges more flow around the room at various angles, very few of them at perfect 90-degree angles. If you use flex track instead of train-set track sections, you can lay your track to flow more realistically.


(click to enlarge)
For more details on my HO Siskiyou Line track plan, you can go here.

2. There's no passing sidings on the main once you get outside the yard, so you won't be able to have more than one train on the main at a time, which is not very realistic. Your industrial switching area at the bottom has no runaround track so you won't be able to switch it very easily. You could use the wye for that purpose, I suppose -- but it will be very awkward.

3. Generally, I don't recommend switching puzzle-style industrial areas. More prototypically based single-large industries with several tracks going different places to that one industry are more realistic and actually more interesting to switch. It's certainly more prototypical than one-of-everything industrial areas with tiny industries that each take one or two cars.

I'd like to see how your plan fits into your space, because there may be better ways to use your space than what you show here.

[rghammill]

Wow, I've read all three of your clinics (unless there's more) and they've all been great!

Being my first post here, I figured planning was a good place to start.

In my current house I don't have the room for a full layout, but since it's been years since I've had my railroad up I'm starting with modeling small sections that I can use later when we get around to moving (and a couple of years, hopefully). I'm also working on the trains themselves.

In the meantime, I'm setting up an 8x8 layout to serve two purposes as best as it can. The first criteria is that it had to be a loop, because my 3-year old daughter isn't particularly interested in point-to-point operation, and I'm not interested in rebuilding crashed trains at each end of the layout.

The other aspect is that it's a practice layout to work on the many ideas I'm finding online. So I'll be using a lot of the scenicking ideas, and I'm wiring it similarly to what you've done Joe.

There's no real operation-based section yet, just an outer loop with an inner loop that passes over itself. Since I'm using it to test out my models as I make them, I needed wide radii and turnouts. I have 2 #6 turnouts (not that wide, I know, but the best I could do), but all of the curves are 36". I'll be adding a spur to go along a shelf once I decide what section to start modeling.

I'm planning on modeling the New Haven line from Springfield, MA to Hartford, CT in 1948. I was originally going to do the entire Springfield line New Haven to Springfield) until I started some plan ideas. Since I don't have a specific room to plan for I'm just making things up. But I hadn't realized how much space a 10-12 car passenger train with two DL-109s would take up.

The New Haven was double-tracked for the entire run, and there are freights as well, but the bulk of the traffic is passenger trains. I know that in '47 there were around 25 passenger trains running each day in each direction.

Would your planning formulas need to be modified in any way for passenger trains?

Having never operated trains in a realistic manner, if I had an operating session do you think somebody would like to run a hidden staging yard to assemble different passenger trains from the ones that just arrived to be sent in the other direction? I'm not sure I'll ever have enough locomotives (or cars for that matter) to model that many trains, but I would think that 'recycling' the staged trains would work OK.

I've been told that in Springfield the general procedure was to turn the entire train instead of running the locomotive around. There was a junction between three railroads (Boston & Main, Boston & Albany (NYC), and the New Haven. After detraining they simply backed the train past the wye, went up the other track, then backed it into Union station again for the outgoing train. I think this would be a really cool operational model, but how difficult would it be to back up a 10+ heavyweight/Streamliner HO train (twice)? Or would I be better off with an offstage loop?

Since passenger trains run at higher speeds than freights, would you plan on more space between towns? If so, how much?

I like the narrow shelves, especially for the longer sections of the mainline between towns, so I'm going to work on ideas with that in mind.

How long would a 'nolix' layout need to be to avoid it looking like it's on a constant incline? Connecticut's not exactly flat, but it's not the Rockies either.

With a two-level layout, how would you handle two major yards, one at either end (Hartford and Springfield), even if some of the tracks are hidden staging?

No real rush to answer these since I'm still researching and planning. But I'd love to hear everybody's ideas.

Randy

[jfugate]

Randy:

Two train lengths between towns at least would be ideal, but to get that you often have to selectively compress out some towns. This can be painful because each town has its own character and industries. I've sometimes removed a town and then pulled some of it's character and industries into a nearby town I kept, creating kind of a hybrid.

For a nolix in flatland country, consider using a grade of about 1.5%, which is just gentle enough that it won't look like a helper grade, yet steep enough you can get some distance as you go around the room.

Remember a 1.5% grade will climb 1.5" in 100". 100" close to 96", which is 8 feet. If you use 8 feet, the error will be 0.0006% which isn't bad. So you can say you'll gain roughly 3" in 16 feet. I consider the minimum separation between two narrow decks to be about 12", so you will need about 50 feet of run to climb a foot. A square room of 12.5 feet has a circumferance of 50 feet, so if you have a room larger than that, you have what it take to do a good flatland layout nolix.

For those who may not know, a nolix is an around the room "no helix" replacement, where the layout constantly climbs to get a second deck over the first. So you can have a double deck layout with no helix, hence the term "nolix".

[rghammill]

Thanks, Joe.

Right now I've decided to go a simpler route with one level. The room I have is 10x20, but I need to leave space in the middle for other activities, and I can't go all the way around the room so it'll be a basic dogbone.

Here are two pictures of it. The first is an early version that has the full extent of the benchwork, although the loop on the left side has been reduced. The second has a reworked plan, but is still not perfect. My mockups have been better than my plans I'm afraid...

http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=3718&d=1154670017


http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=3732&d=1154746541

Anyway, as you can see I settled on two towns for now, and when I have more space I'll reincorporate those with the other towns up and down the line.

Oh, it's the New Haven in 1948, eventually I'll model from Hartford, CT to Springfield, MA.

In real life the two towns are essentially across the CT river from each other, Thompsonville just a little north of Windsor Locks. Thompsonville is dominated by a large carpet company, Windsor Locks consists of several smaller industries grouped around several spurs. Even the geography generally works out, with some compression of length and curves of course.

As it turns out, though, because of the size of the layout, the focus will be on freight for now. Passenger trains stop at both, but it doesn't take long to stop at both stations. I'm also compressing the trains, each car representing 2 cars so I'll have 5-car passenger and 10-car freights so they aren't too long. I'm not quite sure I'll get the two train lengths between the towns, but it will be at least that between the stations I think.

One thing I was considering, and can always add in the future, was a long double-track from the larger loop, around the side and back walls, just to get to a second level that would. It would be a modified nolix, since the track would provide any protypical purpose, it would exist only to get to the second level. But I think operationally it would be better than a helix (besides, I don't think I have the space for a helix anyway).

Incidentally, I'm planning on using your masonite spline technique on the layout. What I'm trying to figure out is how to make sure the spline is in the right place and with the correct radius curves. In both towns the there are areas needed for below grade scenery, so I'll be using spline around the entire layout. To make it fit I have to use 24" radius curves in the loops, but otherwise my minimum for the double-tracked mainline is 26" and 28".

Randy

[Anonymous]

First off, the layout is 17'x9' and is an island walk in. The only side that's up against a wall is Kampton. I do have some pics ot show this. (BTW, Kampton will be 2' longer, and have an IC interchange, and more industries- the plan would shows this, but Atlas RTS is sometimes IMPOSSIBLE) I do use flextrack, tho.

Since I'm sorta pressed for space, track kinda has to be paraell to the table.

There's no way trains of the length that I run could pass each other- over half the main line would have to be a passing siding. Plus, I only run with 1 operator (me) 99.9% of the time. But, the yard is wired seperate from everything else and can be run seperately.

That one large industry isn't a bad idea, but- there were CGW towns that had clusters of small industries. And there were just as many industries that picked up / delivered their shipments via the team track (which I'm going to try to have somewhere) as there were that had their own sidings (spurs). Remember, it was the 1960s (I model '68)

[Anonymous]

Here's the latest plan

The yard is at least 1' longer than shown. (I can't work well with RTS)

[jfugate]

Hey ding:

What's your room look like? It's hard to tell where you expect to access the layout ... is it sitting in the middle of a room or is it up against a wall somewhere? Can you attach anything to the walls?

The current layout design looks an awful lot like an island layout design -- which means it sits in the middle of the room. This sort of layout design uses a very inefficient expanded 4x8 design philosophy, which does not make very good use of space. You end up with most of your space devoted to aisles around your layout, which is quite inefficent. It's known that an along-the-walls design makes better use of space ... so what's your room look like?

[Anonymous]

joe,

i gotta say you're a real saint helping these guys out. i noticed there was not one thanks from mitchell for a "rough" plan that beats anything i can do hands down. between here and your site, i'm really learning a ton.

your layout would still be my favorite even if you weren't so helpful!!!

 

mac

[jfugate]

Thanks, mac, for your kind words.

Yes, I don't mind helping people out, or even doing a quick sample design once in a while, but I will not design your layout for you. I'd rather teach you to fish rather than hand you a fish.

[Anonymous]

It's pretty much in the middle of a room. Basically, there will be acess on the left, top, and right (as shown on the plan) I know around the walls would be better, but its not practical for this situation.

[jfugate]

It's pretty much in the middle of a room. Basically, there will be acess on the left, top, and right (as shown on the plan) I know around the walls would be better, but its not practical for this situation.

Well, it's your room so you ought to know. But just before we give up on the along the walls idea, have you considered free-standing benchwork that does not attach to the walls, kind of like this:





So with a little forethought, it's possible to build free-standing along the walls benchwork. There's nothing that says the along the walls benchwork has to be *fastened* to the walls. The above examples are multi-deck free-standing benchwork. Single deck free-standing benchwork ought to be a breeze to do by comparison.

Here's a contrast between your design and what along-the-walls will give you in the same room (assuming 2 foot aisles around the left, top, and right of your other plan):


(click to enlarge)

The above design is simply a rough idea, but it includes a turntable with roundhouse, reasonable diamond style (instead of pyramid-style) yard with roughly equal track lengths, fairly long run to the next town on the other side of the middle penninsula, and a staging yard with a turnback loop. Lots of cool stuff in your space, and a lot more interesting layout by my way of thinking -- all in the same space and using the same minimum radius you seem to be using. Also I just guessed where your door is, I could be wrong, and you  may have windows or closets you can't block ... but maybe this will give you some idea.

The minimum radius of 24" in HO is pretty tight, but workable if you are using short locos and rolling stock from the fifties or earlier. The aisles are also pretty tight, with some 24" or so pinch points. But this should give you an idea of the contrast between an island layout design and an along the walls design. The difference is huge -- I dare say you can get twice the layout into the same space that way.

[caldreamer]

What is the differance between storge and staging tracks?

[jfugate]

What is the differance between storge and staging tracks?

Staging represents the rest of the "offstage" world where trains come and go. Since you don't have enough space to represent the entire rest of the world, then you create "staging" tracks. If you model southern California, for example, the staging tracks will represent, say, all points east, like Phoenix, Chicago and so on.

This gives your trains a place to go, or to come from. You might ship California lettuce in refers to Chicago, for instance. On your layout, your local picks up the refers from the product warehouse, and take them to your on-layout yard to be made into trains to go east. Once you have enough cars for a train east, then you run your refer train around your layout and into staging -- which represents points east like Chicago. The train then dead-ends in staging, representing rolling through the miles off-layout.

Later, you  might have a passenger train come from Phoenix. The train already made up and stored in staging, waiting for the time to appear. When the time is right, the "Phoenix passenger train" rolls out of staging onto your visible layout, runs around your layout and then ends at the passenger station near your main yard.

Without a staging yard, your layout becomes a point to point shortline that doesn't connect to the outside world at all. Or a roundy-roundy toy train line like you put under the christmas tree. If your goal is realistic operation, then 99% of the time, you need staging to represent your connections to the outside world. A staging yard is generally only used to originate or receive whole trains, and cars are not classified during an op session in a staging yard.

"Onstage yards" are used to receive trains and to reclassify cars into other trains. Ideally, an onstage yard is not used to store trains, but to keep cars moving toward their destination. When a company pays the railroad to ship something, it is paying the railroad to keep the load moving toward its destination, not to "store" the load. Industries on your layout are generally not used to "store" cars either, since the cars are supposed to be either in the process of being loaded or unloaded.

Make sense?

[caldreamer]

My new  layout is in the design stage.  It is in N scale and will be 36 feet long and 12 feet wide.  I was planning for it to go around 3 walls and have a center pod.  It will be 2 levels with the large classification yard (An operating hump yard) on one side.  Since I am only 5'3" tall.  I am wondering if I want staging to be below the layout at say 26" from the floor, with the first level at 34". or do I want to put 6 staging tracks visable near the main yard.  The upper level will be 50" (arm pit high) from the floor with a 6 track classification yard and 6 staging tracks.. 

[WSOR 3801]

Without a staging yard, your layout becomes a point to point shortline that doesn't connect to the outside world at all. Or a roundy-roundy toy train line like you put under the christmas tree. If your goal is realistic operation, then 99% of the time, you need staging to represent your connections to the outside world. A staging yard is generally only used to originate or receive whole trains, and cars are not classified during an op session in a staging yard.

"Onstage yards" are used to receive trains and to reclassify cars into other trains. Ideally, an onstage yard is not used to store trains, but to keep cars moving toward their destination. When a company pays the railroad to ship something, it is paying the railroad to keep the load moving toward its destination, not to "store" the load. Industries on your layout are generally not used to "store" cars either, since the cars are supposed to be either in the process of being loaded or unloaded.

Make sense?

Many plastics places use the railcars as mobile warehouses.  Also helps companies dodge the warehouse tax, as the product is "in transit", altough it could sit for 6 months without turning a wheel.  The manufacturer makes batches of certain product at certain times, like Athearn used to do.  Down by the chemcal plants, they have large SIT (Storage In Transit) yards, look a lot like staging yards.  Up in the Horicon, WI yard we have 50-60 cars of plastic for one customer.  As they want certain cars, we go dig them out and send them to the customer.

We also provide empties for some customers, such as RBLs for canning plants.  When it is off-season, we have to store the cars somewhere.  Upper manglement thinks the yard is a good place to do this.  They're not the ones doing the actual work.  Some times it gets like a Rubik's cube switching out the yard.  Pull out 20-30 cars out of one track to get the car you need, then shove it all back in.  Repeat for 12 hours.

The AAR test track in Pueblo is a roundy-round deal.  They want to see what will break under heavy loaded (286k or 315k) cars.  Safer to experiment on the test track than out on the main.  If they turn some over, they take the time to find out why, instead of pushing everything aside and running more trains.

[jfugate]

The Layout Design Special Interest Group Wiki has some very helpful layout design tips posted recently.

See: http://ldsig.org/wiki/index.php/Category:Hints-Tips

Also, here's an especially useful tip about what curve radius is appropriate to use in your layout design.

Good stuff!

[ericboone]

Excellent tips on that page.  My mainline track minimum radius will be 40 inches and  my siding and yard minimum will be 28 inches.

That gives me just under 7X and almost 5X respectively for my 40 foot cars and just over 5X and just under 4X for my 50 foot cars.  Those will be my most common freight cars lengths since I'll be modeling the 40's.

My 85 foot passenger cars will be limited to the mainline, so they're at just over 3X worst case.   This is not as nice, but is the best I can do.