FORUM CLINIC: Designing for satisfying operations

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jfugate

Andre:

Interesting ... this gets back to a key question to answer for yourself in the hobby -- are you an engineer or a railfan?

If you are a railfan, then standing at one location and watching trains roll by is a delight for you. A railfan doesn't have a problem with so-called spagetti bowl layouts, since you can run more trains through a scene, and there's more to railfan!

The engineer, however, likes to stick with one train, and follow it along it's entire journey. For an engineer, the trend toward linear walkaround layout design is just what the doctor ordered.

Now none of us is 100% one or the other, we're all a mixture.

Me, I'm 80% engineer and about 20% railfan. While I would be interested for a while with the one-location layout design mentioned, I would start getting ancie after a while and want to do a single train from start to end and wish I could model more of the line.

If you figure out which of these is dominant in you, it will go a long way to getting a layout design that satisfies you more long-term.

Joe,

On the railfan/engineer continuum, I guess I tend toward the railfan. However, the last thing I want to do is to create a spaghetti bowl layout. As a matter of fact, the only way I would build a layout where the line goes through the same scene more than once is in a situation where it would appear in real life (e.g. SP's Horseshoe Curve on Cuesta grade, the town of Wassen on the Swiss Federal's Gotthard line, etc).

There's basically 2 types of railfanning. There's the parade watcher, who stays in one place and lets the trains come to him/her and the train chaser/motorcader who focuses on a single train. Virtually all railfans are parade watchers, becoming chasers only in the case where some unusual train (usually steam powered or other special movement) makes it worthwhile to concentrate on a single train.

No, wait a minute. There is a 3rd type of railfanning, the "moveable feast" type. The "moveable feast" type of railfanning is where railfanning is secondary to getting somewhere. I do moveable feast type railfanning whenever the opportunity presents itself (i.e. driving CA 58 between Bakersfield and Barstow, I-40 Barstow to Ludlow, Needles, CA to Kingman, AZ, Santa Rosa, NM to Tucumcari, etc.). We take I-40 when we go to Maine.

But I digress. I like the concept of the layout as a stage where the actors enter, do their thing and exit. In a sense, a stage play (or even a movie for that matter) "selectively compresses" its subject and only concentrates on the interesting parts of human existence, editing out the vast portion of life that is devoid of drama. One of my in-laws is a retired American Airlines captain. He described his job as years of boredom punctuated by seconds of sheer terror. The seconds of sheer terror is what constitutes the drama, the part we are interested in watching. By the same token, the steam powered "San Joaquin Daylight" arriving at Bakersfield from the north, having its GS-4 cut off and replaced by an ABBA set of F-7's and then departing is the drama. It's the drama we want to catch.

The kind of layout I'm considering building, if looked upon in theatrical terms would have a stage (i.e. that part defined by the proscenium arch) 34 feet wide by no more than 2 1/2 feet deep (for practical reasons) and would represent a single town. The rest would be the wings through which the actors enter and exit the stage.

Andre

[jfugate]

Next point: Relationship between staging and passing sidings

Passing siding length constrains your train length, and so does staging track length. In fact, the two need to be similar length or you can have issues.

Consider: if your staging track lengths are longer than your passing sidings, then opposing trains out of staging will clog the main because they won't be able to pass each other easily.

If your passing siding lengths are longer than your staging tracks, then any train that originates from a yard on the layout will be able to pass opposing trains no problem (so you will be tempted to make trains that long), but it won't fit into staging!

Finally here's a dispatching trick: use staging as a passing siding. You can hold a train onstage at the end of the line until almost time for the next train to come out of staging. Then schedule a meet just offstage between the train onstage and the one about to come onstage ... presumably at a passing siding along the line that's offstage.

So you run the onstage train into staging (essentially "taking the main") and then shortly after that train has pulled into staging, you bring the offstage train onto the layout. Supposedly, this train was "in the hole" on a nearby passing siding, waiting for the train that just "went down the main" into staging.

This is a little trick that sometimes can come in handy for the dispatcher.

Next topic: yard design tips

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jfugate

Next point: Passing Sidings

Passing sidings are the points where opposing trains meet on a single track line. If you have double track, then most of this does not apply.

The key is to realize that with opposing trains meeting, the siding only needs to be as long as the *shorter* of the two opposing trains. The other train can be as long as you like and the two trains can still pass.

You need to determine your average and your maximum train length while you are designing. Again, I like to use 40 foot cars in HO since the 6 inch length makes the math easy.

A 20 car HO train would be 10 feet long if it was all 40 foot cars. Consider that at least one of the cars on the front needs to be the loco, and at least one of the cars on the end is the caboose (depending on your era), leaving you 18 cars to generate revenue for the railroad.

Not every passing siding needs to be 10 feet long unless you expect to have meets at every town. You can shorten a few of the sidings in certain towns and that will mean the dispatcher will have to plan things more when two full sized opposing trains encounter each other. If one of the opposing trains is shorter, but will fit in the shorter siding, you can use the shorter siding to do a meet in that town.

Given that trying to fit everything in can be a challenge, the fact you can shorten some passing sidings (and in effect create more single track main between towns) can be a big help when designing your track plan.

Next topic: Relationship between staging and passing sidings

Wouldn't it be more practical to consider the maximum train length (at least for steam/diesel transition era modeling) in terms of a 50/50 mix of 40 and 50 foot cars and then add your typical locomotive consist plus caboose to get siding length? Using a 3 unit set of F's (about 22 inches in HO - round up to 2 feet ) as a "typical" locomotive would then give you more than enough length even if you substituted a Big Boy for the "F" units. And 6 inches will accomodate virtually any caboose (well, except maybe Bangor & Aroostook cabooses made from old troop sleepers).

A 50 ft. car is about 7 inches in HO, so a 50/50 mix of 40 and 50 ft cars would have a length of 132 inches ( 11 ft). Adding in 30 inches (24 for the "F" units + 6 for the caboose) gives you a siding length length of 162 inches ( 13 feet 6 inches) between clearance points. As well, it gives you some flexibility on the car count if a given train (say a reefer block of 40 footers) has no (or at most 3-5) 50 footers in the consist.

It also gives some latitude with passenger consists. Three "F" units are about the same length as 2 "E" units. A 3 unit consist of Alco PA's is roughly the same length as 3 unit set of "F's" plus a caboose. 85' passenger cars are about a foot long. A 13 1/2 foot passing siding will comfortably accommodate a 10 car streamliner with either 3 "E" units or 3 PA's.

Andre

[dehusman]

The stage analogy has been used alot but it breaks down along the same lines as the railfan/engineer analogy. If the layout is a stage, are you the audience or an actor? One of the arguements for the walk along multiple station designs is that the primary reason for a railroad is to provide transportation, moving things from A to B (for a profit<g>). Some feel that without the sense of movement, starting at A and ending at B, they lose the "feel" of the railroad.

Unfortunately this is all highly personal in nature so there is no "right" answer, you have to do what you like to do. The problem is that what you think you like and what you end up liking may be two different things. The only surefire way I have seen to determine what you actually want is to A) build something, recognizing that it may not be satisfying and accept that it will be replaced, B) operate on many different layouts and experience the various operations before you build. The down side is A is expensive in cash and B can take many years to build up the network to allow you to visit a variety of layouts.

One suggestion I have always made is to sit back, relax and think of the word "train" and see what the image is that you come up with. Then that.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

One caveat on using real time while ing one station. Pick your station and your time well.

A real train takes about 2 minutes to pass a point. A "busy" mainline can have 25 trains through it a day. That means excluding meets and station work, there is a train "in town' only 50" out of an entire 24 hour period. There could be hours where no train passes the station. Yeah that 2 on one meet was cool (one train in the siding and two go by back to back on the main) but that means that in some point in the "day" there will be 2 1/2 or 3 hrs of time with no trains.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

Regarding staging as a "passing" track. I reccommend that for another reason. If you use a prototypical movement authority system (timetable and train order, track warrants, DTC, etc) if you consider the staging area a 'station' it lets you actually run a train there enhancing the feeling of distance, indicating the train actually goes beyond the visible layout and keeps the staging yard from queueing up a train on the main right at the first visible siding, ly creating a 2 on 2 meet (a bad thing).

Dave H.

[Big_Boy_4005]

I have an interesting and slightly different version of staging on my railroad. The yard consists of 5 very long, double ended, tracks. Each track is at least 6 times as long as the longest siding. The yard is not intended to be used for breaking up and making new trains, but rather queueing trains that are coming off stage, and holding them for later use.

Because I will be using computer control, and the yard is under the layout, trains will be run in and out automaticly. When an operator's train reaches the edge of the world, he will signal the computer to run it into the yard and park it. The computer will then bring out a replacement train for that operator.

The computer will also be capable of running mainline trains all by itself. This will allow a small crew to to have a full level of traffic to work around, while they do the switching and yard work. It will also allow for a display mode, for open houses, or times when simple railfanning is desired.

When it comes to my taste between railfan and engineer, I would have to say 60 - 40 engineer. I want my layout to be pleasing to all, regardless of where they fall on the spectrum. Something for everyone, regardless of their preference. [8D]

[jrbernier]

Passing sidings: I agree the length should be a train length long and hopefully the same as the staging tracks. On my present layout, the first town east of staging is a small yard. The yard can hold a complete train. The next town does not have a passing siding, and the 3rd town does have a passing siding - then the mainline goes into east staging. It all looked good on paper. The problem is that I could not have 'meets' in the middle. A train leaving the Sinsinawa yard had to make a meet at the last station out or hold in the yard if there was no 'slot' available in staging. The future layout is on paper and will have at least two passing sidings in the 'middle' and lot's of staging......

Jim Bernier

[wpsteve]

On the WP, I designed all 9 passing sidings to handle the normal train length.
To add interest when needed, I just issue special orders for additional cars.
Sacramento is the shortest siding and the waybill system appears to have it in for that siding. Trains are hanging out on a fairly regular basis ( without special orders ) I just let it happen.

The WP was designed for both local switching and through trains as we are CTC and the traffic is needed to keep the Dispatcher on his toes...I have found that when he is busy , the crews appear to be just as busy.

All my staging track are long enough to hold any train I throw at them. Just happened that way..

Andre , where are you located?

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wpsteve

On the WP, I designed all 9 passing sidings to handle the normal train length.
To add interest when needed, I just issue special orders for additional cars.
Sacramento is the shortest siding and the waybill system appears to have it in for that siding. Trains are hanging out on a fairly regular basis ( without special orders ) I just let it happen.

The WP was designed for both local switching and through trains as we are CTC and the traffic is needed to keep the Dispatcher on his toes...I have found that when he is busy , the crews appear to be just as busy.

All my staging track are long enough to hold any train I throw at them. Just happened that way..

Andre , where are you located?

From November thru April, I'm in Monterey, CA. The other 6 months, I'm in a house in the country about 20 miles east southeast of Waterville, Maine. Closest town is Freedom in Waldo County (about 900 or so inhabitants).

Where are you located?

Andre

[jfugate]

Andre:

Regarding the 50 foot versus 40 foot question, yes, especially for a more modern era layout, 50 foot cars make more sense. They're actually about 7.5 inches in HO, which makes for an odd number of inches. So I start with 50 footers when designing track plans for modern stuff, then convert to equivalent 40 footers since the 2 cars per foot factor is very convenient during design.

For example, the Siskiyou Line is designed for 29 car trains using 50 footers. That's right at 18 feet HO, so I just converted that to 36 car trains of 40 footers and designed from there.

And as you say, that's not 36 or 29 actual cars because once I factor in 3 units head end, two units mid-train helper, and a caboose, I'm down to about 23 actual revenue generating cars for 50 footers, or 29 forty footers.

[orsonroy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon

I live on the edge of the metro area, but I am getting offers for construction help from people over 100 miles away. One person is 250 miles away!!! That's just to help build it. Have a good plan, and make it a reality, and THEY WILL COME.[/i]

Perhaps you're right. OTOH, we're talking about Maine which ain't exactly a hotbed of the hobby. The nearest hobby shop with any kind of model RR inventory is more than an hour's drive away. The nearest hobby shop with a DECENT model RR inventory is nearly 2 hours away.

Even so, you may still be right. Still, I think I'll err on the conservative side and make sure that the thing can be operated solo if necessary. That's not necessarily a bad thing since it means I will be worshipping at the shrine of Our Lady of K.I.S.S.

Andre

Remember too that having a "large" layout means complex, not big. With over 300 square feet to play with, you can build a pretty large, but simple, layout. Model an entire branch, where you have the line breaking off from the mainline (staging or partially modeled), run through a number of sleepy towns to the end of the line, where the engine is turned and the train heads out again. You'll get lots of mainline length, but nothing on the layout demands more than one train move at once. If you have friends over to operate, throw in a second or third local for fun.

On the other end of the spectrum, if you prefer heavy mainline action, try modeling a road with a two or more track mainline. If the mains are loops, you can have one to three trains running around in circles while you control a local. You get lots of action and one man operations.

[jrbernier]

I was looking through some old Milw employee TT's from the late 40's/50's. I note that they are figuring on a 4 unit diesel(ABBA something), a caboose, and 40' cars. Late TT's from the 70's appear to use 50' car lengths, and a current BNSF TT uses actual feet to list the capacity of a siding.
On my late 50's era layout, I use a pair of GP9's, a rib-side caboose, and 40' box cars to calculate siding lengths. I have 50' cars(gons/auto boxes/flat cars), but they are offset by all of the 34'-36' (cement hoppers/ coal hoppers /tank cars). Now, on the yard tracks, I do NOT count engines or caboose - Just the raw 40' car capacity. Of course the industry tracks are based on the raw car capacity as well. That length will vary, as the Swift meat dock is sized for 4 36' meat reefers for example.

Jim Bernier

[jfugate]

New topic: Yard design tips

Take a look at these simple yard schematics:



If you pay attention to how you lay out your yard ladder, you can get just the effect you are after with your yard design.

The standard yard ladder is simple to lay out and to switch, but it gives you yard tracks that are all different lengths.

The second example shows how you can design your yard so all the yard tracks are similar length, which can be handy if most trains you need to switch are of similar length.

The third example is especially a useful design for staging yards because it puts all the turnouts right up front so you can maintain them easily. However, it has the same disadvantage as the first example in that the yard tracks are not a consistent length.

Next topic: Yard design tips, part 2

[jfugate]

Time for the next post: Yard design tips, part 2

First, not all yard tracks need to be double-ended, although stub-end yards are less frequent on the prototype than the model. At least some of your yard tracks should be double-ended to allow making up and breaking down trains easier. These tracks are your "arrival and departure tracks".

However, adding stub end tracks makes it easier for you to create yard tracks that are a consistent length.

Given the foreshortened length of our model mainline, the mainline run of a train goes faster, which puts more pressure on the yardmaster on a model to "produce" trains at a faster pace than the prototype. Thus anything you can do to improve the efficiency of a model yard, the better off you will be operationally.

Here's a schematic diagram to illustrate.



Notice that you add a switching lead on the end of the yard you will switch cars from, and you also add a runaround track for those times when you need to rearrange cars quickly and need to get at the opposite end of the block of cars. The runaround track also helps make up for the lack of double-ended tracks in the yard.

Next topic: designing a yard on a curve

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman

Remember that railroads don't run the same number of trains every day and it can vary between times of the year. Don't just limit yourself to one town. if you want build the whole branch. When you operate it yourself , run a "Sunday" schedule or an off season schedule. A daily mixed train and a local freight. Then when you get a full crew on (I have been on excursions where carloads of people drive hundreds of miles to operate) then you can do lettuce harvest with reefer trains galore weaving in between the mixed and the local.

Dave H.

Dave, the single location idea is for a mainline operation only and I'm not absolutely wedded to the idea to the exclusion of all others. A single location has to be a spot that not only has sufficient traffic to be interesting, but is also sufficiently important that most trains have to stop for one reason or another, even if it's only (in the case of a passenger train) to simulate entraining and detraining passengers.

For mainline operation (I'm a steam/diesel transition type of guy, not to mention SP), I've come up with 3 possible concepts that could work as single town operations, Salinas, CA during the lettuce rush, San Jose, CA, with the empasis on passenger train switching and commuter operation, and Santa Barbara, CA, which did have at one time a yard and engine facility (not to mention a beautiful Mission style station with an enormously broad tree about 50 yards to the north).

I have sufficient room to do a reasonably good job of representing the grade from San Luis Obispo to Santa Margarita. That's really appealing to me even if it does raise the degree of "difficulty". Some years ago I designed a layout based on the area to fit in a space of 20 x 15 and including both towns. Unfortunately, it was for a 2 car garage and other things took priority. I currently have available a much larger space. While I was mulling over a design for the new space, it occurred to me that I could get a much better design by switching the point of view from looking east to looking west. This had several advantages in that I could eliminate the roundhouse and engine service area and just have a turntable in south end staging for turning helpers as south end staging would be stub. Engine terminal operations aren't on my list of "Druthers". In a sense, San Luis Obispo then becomes an extension of south end staging. It also puts the station on the wall side which means it could be a flat if necessary. The real bonus, however is that it takes a necessary evil (a turnback curve) and makes an asset out of it in that it is now Horseshoe Curve and you get to stand in the middle of it while surrounded by your train. It also gets you up close and personal at Chorro siding, which is where the north and southbound Daylights usually met. The one disadvantage I can think of is that the wye at Santa Margarita has to be flipped 180 degrees to avoid the aisle.

Even though I want mainline operations, I'm not ruling out a branch operation. The Monterey branch was served by a named passenger train (the "Del Monte") powered by a 4-6-2 in the latter days of steam and it was served in the time period I'm interested in by 3 local freights originating out of Watsonville which, IIRC, operated as turns. Switching the canneries at Cannery Row could get pretty intense. I also believe, although I need to research it, that troop trains would occasionally be run into and out of Fort Ord. Fort Ord also had considerable trackage in it and one of the local freights was called the "Ord Local".

Here's a guy who's modeling an SP branch in the 30's: http://home.earthlink.net/~bowdidge/modelrr.html It looks like its going to be a neat layout.

Andre

[BRAKIE]

Speaking as a former brakeman allow me to make the following points.
In the real world of railroading there is no such thing as switching puzzle.Why should we even THINK about using one?
Now a double ended yard is the best type of yard to have the reason being you can work either end of the yard to build outbound or switch out inbound trains...Now about yard capacity .There are times when yards get jammed up due to a influx of trains Vs. the number of outbound trains..This can be cause by a lack of "rested"crews to track maintenance or even the weather..
So,there is NO cut and dry solution to railroading as it changes from day to day.
So with that thought we should incorporate that into our operation plans.
As far as branch line..We need to know what type of branch lines we are dealing with.You have the following types.
1.Urban industrial branch that serves the City's industries or perhaps a industrial park.
2.A coal branch going up some hollow to a mine or load out.
3.A branch that serves several small towns or cities.This type of branch usually has its own yard and assigned crew.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another word about yards.There are several types of yards.
1. A division point yard
2.A outlaying yard in some small town or city that a local or locals is base out of.Now not all outlaying yards have locals based out of them but is used to hold overflow cars for industries.
3.Interchange yards.Those yards are of course use for large amounts of interchange traffic between to or more railroads.
4.Coal Marshalling yards where loaded hoppers are built into trains.
5.Intermodule yard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again there is a lot more to railroading then meets the eye..Each type of yard fills the division with trains.

[Isambard]

I've just spent an hour reading this thread from top to bottom and have to say thanks to Joe for kicking it off, and to the others who have contributed to date!

I'm currently evaluating whether to build a smallish layout or not (To be, or not to be: --), rather than to depend on club running, and if it is to be, what are the limits "smallish" means- given limited resources eg time, money, skills, space etc (Had we but world enough, and time, --). So I'm looking forward to more ideas and opinions on the thread to help me in my onerous task, apart from reading the usual pubs.
Keep it going guys!

[Paul Milenkovic]

Anyone out there have experience with British-style staging -- the so called "fiddle yard?" Can anyone relate any experience with cassettes (sections of track that you use to pick up entire trains and put them on the shelf), sector plates (sort of a giant turntable selector to access a yard rather than a space-consuming ladder).

I am looking to doing staging in very tight space and wonder what people's experience is.

[jfugate]

Paul:

My friend and fellow modeler Charlie Comstock is using a sector plate on the far end of a lower staging yard on his new layout. It is about 15" long an allows selecting any of the 7 tracks in his staging yard. It looks simple to build and very effective. In lass than 18" or so of space he now has a way he can swap locos or otherwise on the end of his staging yard.

Far less space than a full on 7-track yard ladder would take, yet about the same functionality, so it's very effective.

[Anonymous]

i LOVE the idea of online clinics! my railroad is on a 4ft by 8ft sheet of plywood, so that doesn't really give me much space for double-ended yards. does anbody have any sugestions on how to put the longest double-ended yards (on a 4ft X 8ft sheet) possible. also my layout doesn't have long train cars or locomotives, and i use 18 inch radius track. thanks

bnsf6733

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bnsf6733

i LOVE the idea of online clinics! my railroad is on a 4ft by 8ft sheet of plywood, so that doesn't really give me much space for double-ended yards. does anbody have any sugestions on how to put the longest double-ended yards (on a 4ft X 8ft sheet) possible. also my layout doesn't have long train cars or locomotives, and i use 18 inch radius track. thanks

bnsf6733

The question is, do you really need a yard? Have you considered using one side of your 4x8 for staging (hidden by a view block down the center)and the other side to represent a "town"?

To get best use of space on a 4x8, you would need curved turnouts (18" inside radius, 22" outside) to maximize the length of the tangent component (i.e. the straight track). Atlas at one time made a turnout like that, but I think they dropped them from the line a few years ago. Roco makes some small radius curved turnouts in code 83, but I'm not sure they're 18/22. You also might check with Walthers.

Oh yeah. If you can get hold of a copy of the 1995 issue of Model Railroad Planning, there's an article by Tony Koester on using staging on a 4x8 oval.

Andre

[johncolley]

Joe, Neat basic yard, Now if you add one more diagonal on the left of the ladder track you have a caboose track next to the runaround. Add one or two straight tracks parallel to the bottom long edge going to the left off of track 5 and you have engine service. I love these forums that get the ideas flowing!

[jfugate]

Next: Designing a yard on a curve

The critical issue with putting a yard on a curve is solving the coupler alignment issue since you don't want to always be manually aligning couplers so you can switch cars in the yard.

The rule of thumb I use that seems to work well is to make sure your yard track curve radius is at least 5 times the length of your typical car. For example, in a 1950s era layout, a typical car length is 40 feet, which in HO is about 6 inches. Doing the math then:

6 x 5 = 30"

This means the minimum radius for a yard on a curve should be 30", if you want to avoid coupler alignment issues. No curve should be less than this radius.

This means when you do curves, the inside curve radius (which will be the tightest radius) will need to be 30", which, if you use 2" yard track spacing, will mean all the other tracks will have a curve that is a larger radius. If you have 5 yard tracks, that means the radius of the other curves will be 32", 34", 36", and 38".

The one thing that can solve coupler alignment on tight curves is to use talgo trucks, with the coupler draft gear box attached directly to the truck so the coupler follows the curve around. However, it is well known that talgo trucks cause the pulling stresses of the train to be transferred directly to the trucks, causing more frequent derailments. For this reason, most serious operations minded model railroaders stay away from talgo trucks.

Next topic: Mainline run

[wpsteve]

Andre, I am located in Sonora California......about 3 hours from you..
Think I'm going to Maine in a few years to the NG convention..
WP Steve
Andre , where are you located?

[johncolley]

Joe, et al, re. curved yards. See Keddie, CA; Dunsmuir, CA; and others. If you have easements and a short say 6" to 12" tangent out of the ladder switches you don't have any coupler alignment problems. Keddie actually did a 180 around a ridge with 5 yard tracks. Dunsmuir yard's curve was from following the river bank. I am sure there are a lot of other examples in the Appalachian coal yards.

[cwclark]

I like to design my layouts where everyone operating can do so in a safe zone...in other words, I build sidings off the main line track and then the siding would have turnouts that connect to spurs and industrial yards...this way, everyone can participate in switching movements without ever fouling the mainline...if rolling stock need to be pulled off or put on the mainline train, then the section of the mainline could be taken over at any particular siding to make such moves and then the mainline train could continue on it's journey without one group fouling another by switching on and off the mainline with another mainline train ready to arrive before the switching is completed...Chuck

[jfugate]

John:

Yes there are lots of examples of prototype yards on a curve, but the prototype has the luxury of being able to use far larger curve radii than we use on the model.

Using the tangent out of the yard ladder as you specify is an excellent recommendation and will help a lot since most coupling occurs near the yard ladder, but coupling deeper in the yard will still be a problem if you don't follow the 5 times car length rule.

However, using the tangent as you suggest will make the geometry of a curved yard a lot harder to design. If you stick with the 5 times rule, it will simplify your curved yard geometry and you will still be able to switch smoothly anywhere in the yard.

My HO Siskiyou Line Roseburg Yard is on an S curve and it's design follows the 5 times rule. Coupler alignment issues anywhere in the yard are seldom an issue, so I know this design rule works well from actual model experience. As you know, I cover this design rule (and others) in volume 2 of the Siskiyou Line video series.

[jrbernier]

The hadder of my yard starts on a curve, the only problem is that the engineer of a switcher would be 'blind' looking at a left handed yard lead. I guess that is what a fireman is for!
The other end of the yard has a slight curve to the right before the ladder collapes to the main track. I have never really had coupler alignment issues on the lead into the ladder, but the curve is about 28" radius on the inner track. I have clipped all of the glad hands from my couplers and manually switch anyway - I just do not like magnets. Coupling seems to not be a problem with that curve, and I would have no problem building it that way again. All of my tracks are on 2" centers, but with 40' and 50' 50's era cars I have problems with side-swipes. I like the way the yard 'flows' though the area, and even though the shortest track is 10 cars, it is not real apparent when looking at the yard.

Jim Bernier

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wpsteve


Andre, I am located in Sonora California......about 3 hours from you..
Think I'm going to Maine in a few years to the NG convention..
WP Steve
Andre , where are you located?

From November thru April, I'm in Monterey, CA. The other 6 months, I'm in a house in the country about 20 miles east southeast of Waterville, Maine. Closest town is Freedom in Waldo County (about 900 or so inhabitants).

Where are you located?

Andre

Be sure and stop by the Wiscasset, Waterville and Farmington Railway Museum http://www.wwfry.org/ and ride the train.

In Maine, I live about 6 miles from what used to be the WW&F's Albion station {url}http://www.wwfry.org/locations/albion.html[/url], which is slowly undergoing restoration. I'm not a member of either group, but my wife and I are considering joining the WW&F museum.

The Albion station is actually farther along than the pictures would indicate.

Andre