I just realized I never seen a switch back on a layout. Why is that? Could it be an alternative to the ubiquitous helix? I guess it really comes down to space, I imagine it would take a lot space to fit in a switch back in any scale except N. Thoughts?
John
I have one half built, based on the Western Maryland's Chaffee Branch, which included a switchback as it worked its way up from the Potomac River valley to Vindex, location of the switchback, and on up to Manor Mine. The grade in some parts was 5%, with some stretches approaching 9%. It's where the Big 6, the largest and last Shay built, lived.
Mine is somewhat shorter, and not yet installed on the layout, though.
Lee
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
I have one in the pre-benchwork stage.
This plan is not how the the trackwork ended up in the towns, but shows the climb in elevation. The switchback runs along the two longest walls at a 4% incline.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
Set the WABAC machine for December 1965.....
Model Railroader had a project railroad called the Sierra Pintada that was all switchback. It was an L shape except both sides of the L were about the same length (maybe half an X?). A mainline ran along the front edge but didn't run anywhere. A branch line launched up from a wye in the middle and did a double switchback up to a ore mine, crossing over itself.
Here's a link to the magazine index on the TRAINS mag site. The cover shows the layout.
http://index.mrmag.com/tm.exe?opt=I&MAG=MR&MO=12&YR=1965&output=6&sort=D
I was a teenager at the time and for some reason the track plan just impressed me - probably because it was somewhat unique. I built the mine tipple that was in a later article and added it to my layout of the day. I still have it after all these years- a bit battered though from many moves.
George V.
I have two, but don't have photos that encompass their lengths and show how they fit in. That is one of the problems with them, or that can be a problem...they take up linear length their own way, much like a turning wye does.
But, I wouldn't be without one.
-Crandell
I have one on my logging branch.
I only run 2 car trains on the branch so the lead on the switchback is only 2 cars and a loco long.
It runs automatically using a PICAXE chip I programmed myself.
I think a switchback on a mainline would drive you as crazy as it did the real railroad operators.
cheers
Alan Jones in Sunny Queensland (Oz)
Wow! Most layouts have switchbacks, particularly in areas serving industries. Overdone, in my opinion.
OK, OK, I bet you're thinking of this method of gaining altitude to reach a higher point in a short distance or to avoid building a tunnel. That's not commonly modeled. It takes a lot of space because the train lengths are limited by the "tail" of each switchback. It was avoided by railroads unless it was the "last solution."
Mark
markpierce wrote: Wow! Most layouts have switchbacks, particularly in areas serving industries. Overdone, in my opinion.OK, OK, I bet you're thinking of this method of gaining altitude to reach a higher point in a short distance or to avoid building a tunnel. That's not commonly modeled. It takes a lot of space because the train lengths are limited by the "tail" of each switchback. It was avoided by railroads unless it was the "last solution."Mark
It turns out that both the Ferrocarril Central Del Peru (FCCP) and the Cerro de Pasco Railroad used switchbacks extensively on their lines. They also ran oxbows up one side of a valley, crossed the valley, and then looped back on the far side to rejoin the grade when it was necessary. All things considered, these things do take up room as I mentioned in my earlier post. But their utility is well established, and they were not uncommon.
Switchbacks would look quite good on a rising and long bank at the back of a shallow bench.
Back in the 60's Chuck Yungkurth had a article in MR in the 60's about his Gump Stump and Snowshoe which was If I remember correctly a 2'x 6' layout with the switchback to an upper level. He did include this into a larger layout ala John Allen with his original Gorre & Daphetid.
Rick
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
On my Chaffee Branch, I'm following the prototype in that only five loaded cars can be brought down the hill at a time, and the locomotive always had to be on the downhill end of the train. That requires not only a switchback, but a run-around track as well.
The mine at the top can hold 15 cars, so it'll keep an operator busy for a little while...
wm3798 wrote: I have one half built, based on the Western Maryland's Chaffee Branch, which included a switchback as it worked its way up from the Potomac River valley to Vindex, location of the switchback, and on up to Manor Mine. The grade in some parts was 5%, with some stretches approaching 9%. It's where the Big 6, the largest and last Shay built, lived. Mine is somewhat shorter, and not yet installed on the layout, though.Lee
Great photo. Intentional or not, I love how the gray wall makes the sky feel ominous. An imminent storm is a neat idea that could make any layout more dramatic.
Craig
DMW
jep1267 wrote:I just realized I never seen a switch back on a layout. Why is that?
Here's an amater video of my automatic switchback or zigzag as I call it.
Check it out here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhjftEXLy8A