kasskaboose There is no correct answer. Each of us has their own valid opinion.
There is no correct answer. Each of us has their own valid opinion.
I agree. Too many variables to come up with a formulatic answer. There's more to it than yard space. Frequency of train movements also enters the equation. A modeler will know he's reached his limit when operations start getting clogged up. That's how I figured it out.
Maxman, I did not find your source. I did find this:
https://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/210536.aspx
Where the range is 50 to 80 percent, excluding staging tracks.
Simon
Browser search for "Model Railroad Car Capacity Charts".
Scroll down the results and hopefully you'll see something called "Car Capacity-name of another forum". Click there and there is a little discussion, with another link to some of Joe Fugates thoughts.
wjstix It's always interesting to me how quickly these threads wander off away from the original question / topic. In this case the original poster asked: cefinkjr I seem to recall an article in MR (or maybe some other magazine) many years ago that suggested operations on our layouts could be improved by limiting the number of cars we have in service. I've searched the MR archive unsuccessfully for that article. Can anyone point me to it or does anyone have a better memory of it than I have? The request to help find a particular magazine article became a long discussion on how many freight cars was too many.
It's always interesting to me how quickly these threads wander off away from the original question / topic.
In this case the original poster asked:
cefinkjr I seem to recall an article in MR (or maybe some other magazine) many years ago that suggested operations on our layouts could be improved by limiting the number of cars we have in service. I've searched the MR archive unsuccessfully for that article. Can anyone point me to it or does anyone have a better memory of it than I have?
I've searched the MR archive unsuccessfully for that article. Can anyone point me to it or does anyone have a better memory of it than I have?
The request to help find a particular magazine article became a long discussion on how many freight cars was too many.
cefinkjrI seem to recall an article in MR (or maybe some other magazine) many years ago that suggested operations on our layouts could be improved by limiting the number of cars we have in service. I've searched the MR archive unsuccessfully for that article. Can anyone point me to it or does anyone have a better memory of it than I have?
Scroll back to page 1 and read David Husman's answer again.
There are two questions here: how many cars are too many? and how many cars can there be on a layout before it stops being fun?
I can't answer the first question, but I'm happy I didn't have funds for freight cars before InterMountain and Tangent and the others got rolling.
For the second question, I've endured op sessions where every spur track and every yard was full, and the sessions weren't fun and did not feel real. On top of that, some were set up so that were three cars picked up for every three cars spotted etc. They were like one of those little square puzzles that have eight sliding tiles for nine spots.
A yard more than half full is difficult to work efficiently. A railroad with all the staging tracks packed requires more schedule discipline than either real or model railroaders possess.
We keep our rotating set of cars on shelves, grouped by car type. We keep the "deep surplus" cars in slding drawers or banker boxes with appropriate dividers and separaters. Most years, we haul our "deep deep surplus" cars off to a swap meet and sell them.
My layout isn't large (4x8 with an L-shaped extension).
I have the maximum number of cars I can keep on it, on it now. I couldn't put one more car on it without disrupting my normal switching/road/industrial jobs.
The yard (only 3 tracks) is 100% full between jobs. And the industries are 100% full as well. For each job, so many cars go out and that many come back in.
I've bought few cars lately. A few cabooses, yes. Actually, there's only one more car I really want, and I can't buy it because it seems nowhere to be found: an Intermountain covered hopper, lettered for "Percival Grain, Inc." If anyone's got a copy they'd like to get rid of...
Oh, I don’t think it would get closed down for any of this polite banter.
Now, if one of us made a comment about people keeping their spare cars in their drawers, then maybe.
maxmanHaving fun? Yes. Feeling lucky? Nope.
Russell
csxns maxman No thanks. You're beginning to sound like Dirty Harry. Are you having fun sounds like it so go ahead and make my day.
maxman No thanks. You're beginning to sound like Dirty Harry.
Are you having fun sounds like it so go ahead and make my day.
Having fun? Yes.
Feeling lucky? Nope.
maxmanNo thanks. You're beginning to sound like Dirty Harry.
cefinkjr I seem to recall an article in MR (or maybe some other magazine) many years ago that suggested operations on our layouts could be improved by limiting the number of cars we have in service. IIRC, the article suggested that we should limit the number of cars on our railroads by type according to the capacity of the places each type could logically be stopped. I think it suggested some ratio of cars to total capacity but I'm not sure what that ratio was.
I seem to recall an article in MR (or maybe some other magazine) many years ago that suggested operations on our layouts could be improved by limiting the number of cars we have in service. IIRC, the article suggested that we should limit the number of cars on our railroads by type according to the capacity of the places each type could logically be stopped. I think it suggested some ratio of cars to total capacity but I'm not sure what that ratio was.
- Between operations, I like to keep the mainline clear. I try so anyway. So the cars all need to fit in the yards and sidings. Locos are stored in the roundhouse.
- Most cars should be associated with an industry on the layout. A generic yard could allow you to "cheat" and have foreign cars that would come and go to an unseen destination. But the foreign cars should be limited in numbers if you want to do exchanges between the industries on your layout and the generic yard.
- Jam-packed yards are difficult to switch. I like to keep some free space on my sidings to facilitate remote uncoupling. If there is not enough space, unwanted couplings will occur when picking up selected cars. So I usually keep an empty space (of about one car in length) in my sidings.
- Personally, I don't like switching too much, so I limit the scenarios where empties are replaced by full cars. So industry sidings will be empty from time to time while the cars are out serving the customers. My logging operation will get the empty-full swap because my 5 finger crane actually allows me to swap the logs from the flatcars near the sawmill back to the empty flatcars sitting near the woods via the "ski crane". Once emptied, I get the loco to bring back the empties at the source, and pick up the full ones. I like seeing empty skelton cars returning to the source...
-I have one passing siding that usually remains clear, unless I am in operation mode.
Otherwise, I have a few drawers full of spare cars. I like to change "eras" and "railroads" on my generic layout, so I will replace locomotives and passenger cars entirely on the layout from time to time. The freght cars don't get changed as frequently.
csxns maxman I’d say but I’m not interested in dying just yet. Go ahead and say you might be lucky.
maxman I’d say but I’m not interested in dying just yet.
Go ahead and say you might be lucky.
No thanks. You're beginning to sound like Dirty Harry.
Well, I don't know?
I think both a Railroad or a modeler saying I have too many cars, would be like saying I'm getting to much air or I'm making too much money.
Maybe the cars that don't match up to the business's or Industries in the area they're at, stop by at the next town where they do. Or on a layout just passing through, to do that same thing too
Just saying
TF
maxmanI’d say but I’m not interested in dying just yet.
MisterBeasleyAt some point, I read that some high percentage of rolling stock should be "home road."
Somewhat era and location dependent.
The older the era, the truer it is The more limited the variety of cars the more it swings one way or the other.
If I am modeling a Michigan Upper Peninsula ore line then about 90% of the cars will be home road. If I am modeling Freeport, TX then 95% of the cars will be private owner.
If you are modeling a general railroad in the midwest to west in the 2000 or later era, then about 50% of the cars (or more) will be private owner.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
csxns maxman “He who dies with the most trains wins”
maxman “He who dies with the most trains wins”
I’d say but I’m not interested in dying just yet.
Years ago (advent of Ebay) I got into a serious loco and railcar buying spree. At the height, I had just over 600 railcars - almost all kits, with 32 passenger cars and the remaining all pre-1960 freight cars. During all this time I had two similar medium size layouts (1995-2008 and 2008-2020), both 11 x 15 with lower level staging.
Obviously, I soon realized I couldn't possibly have all these cars on the layout and most ended up back in the boxes. Finally, over a two year period I sold off about 400 of the cars on Ebay, leaving only about 220 on hand. These were selected because they made sense for my '50s midwest ATSF & IC layout.
At first I tried to have as many cars as possible on the layout (about 100-125), but I eventually figured out that it was just too much. So I cut down the layout cars to 75 or so, and it surprised me that I actually enjoyed running the trains more than I did when the layout was loaded. This was a quite a revelation to me, as it hit me that "less really was more".
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
riogrande5761 MisterBeasley At some point, I read that some high percentage of rolling stock should be "home road." It depends. D&RGW being a bridge route probably breaks that convention, except coal trains.
MisterBeasley At some point, I read that some high percentage of rolling stock should be "home road."
At some point, I read that some high percentage of rolling stock should be "home road."
It depends. D&RGW being a bridge route probably breaks that convention, except coal trains.
It's a pretty good "general" rule of thumb overall (if you're modeling a "general" layout and not necessarily a specific location to rigourous accuracy), but if you're modeling a specific line/route/location then the specific geography plays a role.
e.g. if you model a busy main line with lots of connections and industry, you'll see a wide variety. If you model a "bridge" connecting line, you'll see a wide variety of "overhead" traffic beyond what's even modeled on the layout. If you model a stub-end branchline, you'll ONLY see what originates or terminates on that line, so your % of home-road cars will sky-rocket if the line originates more traffic than it terminates.
My railroad is mostly a backwoods resource hauler that runs at right angles to other main railroads. The majority of traffic is originated on line, and even a good portion of that is entirely on-line. It does interchange some of its traffic, and has a limited amount of bridge traffic (although it's not a major route) and receives very little inbound terminating traffic from other roads. So home-road cars make up a very good percentage of cars.
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
maxman“He who dies with the most trains wins”
kasskaboose Defining "too many" cars is near-impossible. I don't keep my 100 freight cars on the layout. Instead, I keep all on a shelf until I need to stage operations. Operations are fun, depending on the siding, I put 6-12 cars in each. This might appear low, but they are longer since I model the 1980s. When I combine cars from 2+ industries, I can get a suitable number of cars without looking unwieldy. I defer to my engineer friends who can discuss force, acceleration, etc. Bottom line: there really isn't an easy answer.
Defining "too many" cars is near-impossible. I don't keep my 100 freight cars on the layout. Instead, I keep all on a shelf until I need to stage operations. Operations are fun, depending on the siding, I put 6-12 cars in each. This might appear low, but they are longer since I model the 1980s. When I combine cars from 2+ industries, I can get a suitable number of cars without looking unwieldy. I defer to my engineer friends who can discuss force, acceleration, etc.
Bottom line: there really isn't an easy answer.
In a way this just shifts the perspective of the question.
If you control [via whatever method] how many cars are on the layout at one time, you can own as many as you want and swap them out between sessions.
But the question of "How many cars is too many [to have on the layout at once]?" is still the same.
I remember years ago when I had too many trains on my layout, so I added some hidden storing tracks. I then expanded my layout with 4 sidings for my western-themed town; all passenger tracks. I added some freight cars into a couple of the trains, to bring supplies into town.
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR
csxns "Too many cars?".Yes I do have too many same with locomotives no way I can run them all on my layout but I like it that way.
"Too many cars?".Yes I do have too many same with locomotives no way I can run them all on my layout but I like it that way.
“He who dies with the most trains wins”
I have about 280 freight cars plus 15 or so cabooses and a few passenger cars and I'm still buying. In other words, I have far more freight cars then will ever fit on my layout.
You might ask why I am regularly buying new freight cars if I already have so many? The answer is that I am trying to upgrade the quality of the cars. When I first started into the hobby, I thought Athearn BB cars were a great buy so I bought a bunch of them. That left me with multiple mediocre cars, many with the same numbers. Those so-so cars will either be sold or donated to my old club (the latter is more likely). I am replacing the Athearns with somewhat upgraded cars from the likes of Bev-Bell primarily because they tend to not have duplicate numbers, and the lettering isn't faded (I'll do that myself). Most of the Athearns that I own have very faint printing which makes re-numbering difficult. I don't like cars with faded logos and fresh numbers.
My home road is Canadian Pacific with a few Toronto Hamilton and Buffalo cars thrown in. I would say that the two roads account for about 60% of my inventory, maybe more.
If I can offer some advice to newcomers, I would say to keep your boxes where the cars will still fit into them with the couplers installed. I threw out most of the boxes simply because I didn't have space to store them. Now that I have some storage space (once the cabinets are assembled) I will have all sorts of room for them. I just ordered 50 new 7"x3 1/2"x2" boxes from Uline. Fortunately they are not too expensive ($2.00 ea. incl. shipping and taxes), but in hindsight it is still money spent that I could have avoided.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
My freelanced railroad is primarily a bridge route and a majority of my rolling stock are foreign roads, mostly roads that interchange with my fictional road. I've only recently gotten good enough at making my own decals to letter a good amount of home road rolling stock. There's more to be done in that regard but for every home road car I add, something else will have to come off the layout, at least temporarily.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Since the original question deals with a large club layout, I was going off that info, most clubs run through trains, and have staging.
Taking 50% of cars from spots out would leave such a layout very sparse looking.
IIRC, through trains, and staging, had cars from said available spots in them, hence removing only the 10-15%.
If industry and yard spots do not receive through freights, which being a "through freight" they simply travel through the scenery, through freights are "free" cars.
Most club layouts are a type of "hybrid" cross between switching operations and railfanning style ops. (Railfanning style ops are mainline freights, little to no switching moves for them.)
This affected the percentage removed. Railfanning style ops need much less car spots freed up for smooth operations.
Purely switching layouts did have a higher percentage of "free spots" needed for smooth operations. But I don't recall it being as high as 50%.
But, I could be flat out wrong on what I remember reading.
As far as that size layout with ~400 cars on it, I have zero idea on if that would be a reasonable number or not. I have zero idea how many feet of track are purely mainline, no any idea how many of those ~400 cars are in mainline "railfanning" style operations.
One other caveat here - How do the other club members like to operate? Do they feel that it is too many cars? Or do they feel it's about right? It's even possible that they feel that more cars are needed on the layout... So us "non-members" can suggest anything with zero real consequence - We can't change what the club is doing as we are not part of said club.
While I do remember an article, I have zero idea where or when. But there was indeed an article that gave a formula to remove "x" percent of cars versus number of available car spots, depending on size and operating style.
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.