Trains and cars stand still in yards. They often do so side by side so most of what you see id their tops. You often need to do a fair bit of coupling/uncoupling... which can be a pain.
We need storage yards to represent the rest of the world that our rolling trains go to/come from.
I like to see all of my trains and to see them rolling (in H0) ... so I like to model junctions and similar places ... places where the trains aren't jammed together sideways and where there is reason for them to slow down and/or speed up. I like the "Hotspot" pages in Trains mag for inspiration.
Another good thing about hotspots... they often involve more than one company... which someone else has just pointed out in another thread brings in a whole bunch of different considerations as well as more liveries.
If you haven't already done so, part of my response is in my reply to Dave's thread of this morning about how layouts get old.
Your realization is a natural evolution for those whose current layout is not comprehensive in capability. Long scenic runs get boring, and we find a way to build a yard. Then, the pendulum swings when the yard gets old, and so on.
My first layout had no yard, this one does. I will never, ever, build another without a yard. Yet, this is the second layout of two with long runs in nice scenery. Ditto about them.
You are learning something about railroading and your desire to experience it. I would be a happy fellow if I were you. You have a new set of marching orders. You have work to do.
This sure is a give and take situation and it comes down to whether you want to do a lot of "making trains" in a space consuming yard.
A yard can show off all your rolling stock, but not really very well as "Dave the Train" has pointed out. They are just too close together. On the other hand they represent the real world which have some major classification yards...Hey, they have to make and break trains somewhere!
I have about a 16' x 16' pike and don't feel I have the space nor the need for a large yard. But...I do have a number of junctions (three on just my upper level)that provide plenty of interchange. I guess what I'm trying to say, is that even if I had your space I would rather model the junctions and run trains as opposed to having a large yard taking up space with rolling stock at rest.
And, for what ever it's worth....Here is my largest yard (just below Sawbill Junction) with great ability to make and break those trains. And it doesn't take up ANY pike space!
To add to my previous post, and to HHPATH56's, a poorly designed yard will be as much fun as a poorly designed general track plan. I believe that the whole point to a yard is that it provides realistic operation of realistically compiled consists. In that sense, it is a highly desirable service to your entire layout and modeling experience. It is at least as important as a servicing facility, or a turntable and roundhouse if you are modeling steam era...it adds variety and modeled utility to merely keeping locomotives and cabooses separated by all the trackage between sidings.
If you don't want to go to the trouble of designing a good yard that will fit in the space you have available for other than mainline and spurs, you might as well just fill it in with a village, or another industry or two. But I agree that most layouts can have a good yard, and that such an addition will add immensely to the enjoyment of the operator(s).
Below is my own layout in a high panoramic view. The yard comprises about 25% of the total track length on the layout, including sidings. I was able to fit a single double-slip turnout, although I had to modify my plan for two as limitations mounted due to cumulative changes and errors since the yard was the last place where I laid track.
Being a former railroader and into operations I would not even think of designing a layout without a yard..Even my industrial switching layouts has a one or 2 track yard
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Even a moderate sized roundhouse, coal tower, and yard can take up allot of real-estate. Any new ventures for me will find the yard on a layout of it's own.....The main line could, for the most part, be a shelf unit and connect to several large layouts...This would make expansion or renovation far easier...BDT
I could not imagine my layout without a yard or two.
My buddy Ed and I spent a pleasant couple of hours last night breaking down two mainline trains (30 cars plus 3 locos each), assembling a local for the harbor branch (12 cars for the barge & 7 for local industries), and then putting another two mainline trains together and sending them out on the mains. I then worked the branch while he did a run out to the coal tipple to drop off some empties and pick up whatever was ready to go.
north end of the 8 track/95 car stub ended yard
throat of the yard. left to right: yard lead, secondary yard lead/branch, main1, main2.
south end approach. left to right: control siding, main2, main1, branch, future branch expansion, yard lead.
please excuse the grainyness of the photos.
Jay
C-415 Build: https://imageshack.com/a/tShC/1
Other builds: https://imageshack.com/my/albums
Well I would keep the yard, maybe redesign it some but KEEP the yard. You will regret not having it! You could always design a yard above or below the layout on a different level.
Like Brakie, i'm a former railroader and I love having a yard to switch and cut up / build trains in. I also enjoy switching and working locals (with some mainline operation).
My model railroad doesn't have 'a yard,' or 'yards.' It has named locations, each of which has facilities dictated by what goes on there. If trains originate and terminate, then some kind of classification trackwork is required. If some of those trains are passenger runs, and the consist can't be left at the platform, some kind of coach yard is required. If every through train that arrives behind a catenary motor will leave behind steam (or, possibly, diesel-hydraulic) power, a need for motor pockets and a minimal steam terminal becomes obvious.
OTOH, suppose every train passes through, perhaps stopping to work passengers or drop a car at the seldom-used freight house. At that point, anything beyond a simple passing siding and one spur is gross overkill.
Note that, in both cases, the operating scheme and the need for service at that location drove the facilities, not vice-versa. (I will admit that following a specific prototype makes this kind of planning easier!)
So, what happens to a train when it vanishes into the netherworld? It finds itself routed to one of the five (count 'em) freight staging locations, or to the seven-track passenger layover point. Like an iceberg, my layout has far more hidden track than visible track; including the only locations where complete trains can stop and hold without any changes in consist. That makes it possible to have the right train (type and consist) appear at the right place and time to meet timetable requirements.
This design technique isn't practical for the inexperienced hobbyist. I had been a railfan and model railroader for a long time before I pushed a pin into space-time and said, "Here!"
Where? See below.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
How good it is to hear from two real railroaders who each state that they would not find their layouts complete without a yard...if not in the exact words.
I love watching my Duplex do limited speeds across my trestle and along my mains. But 10 minutes of that goes a very long way, so I need something else to keep me interested. Okay, how about turning a steamer so that it can nose into the roundhouse. Three stretched out minutes later, I'm done. Now what.
How about a pick-up, a special, at the mine...they have increased tonnage and have a yard full of cars to get out. Ten long minutes later, I am done that. Now what? More mainline screaming...or how about building/tearing down a train? Darn, I wish I had kept that yard in my plans.
What I am suggesting is that, if you have only 10 minutes one day, you can stand at your yard and have an intense session for that period. Next day is a whole different approach if that is your interest.
Variety. Operations.
Ditto for me on the yard. I am glad I designed one in.
Prior to starting on my yard a week or so ago, I was just able to run a train in a loop and stop here and there to do a drop/pickup. I was amazed the other night that, with just three tracks completed how much more flexibility it provided and how long (2 hours) it took to fetch cars from around the layout and build one outgoing train.
Regards,
Tom
Hi Dave-the-train
True what you say about yards. however thats where runs start and finish.
You need a yard even if its only two or three tracks so your trains have somewhere to start and finish and be shuffled around a bit before the next run.
Also somewhere is needed to leave your other stock while you have a train running the 0-5-0 shunter from layout to shelves is best not used that often.
Trouble is most people seem to have more stock than there layout can handle.
regards John
My current layout has one stub end classification yard and one double ended staging. I need both of them for the operations that I want. However both of them are too small. I need 1 or 2 more tracks in both to make them ideal.
Depending on what type of operations that I design my next layout for I may or may not have a classification yard. However, a staging yard is absolutley necessary IMO. I would never have a layout without one.
I can never see myself designing or building a full service engine facility including a roundhouse. A roundhouse takes up an unbeleivable amount of space in O scale and consume alot of time to build (very few if any good quality kits available). Also, a roundhouse provides very little in terms of operation, aside from turning engines and pulling engines off trains and parking them. They just aren't worth the time and space IMO. However I have not ruled it out. MR had a good design for a roundhouse where it was built along a wall. It resembles a full size but there are only 2 or 3 usable stalls. So this would give the possibility of turning engines while using less space.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
Gentlemen...I stand corrected, I think.
With my first post to this thread, I was thinking "yard" being quite large as depicted by HHPATH56 and modelmaker 51. After seeing what Selector and Tom Bryant (in regard to size) have posted, I too have to chime in on the singing of the praises for a yard. I guess I have "yards" at some of my junctions!
Even though the cabinet (a yard here so to speak) below Sawbill Jct. serves as storage and trains do get put together here, this serves a different scenario. Trackage at Sawbill Jct. continues (off pike and not modeled) to two other locations. Thus trains coming through Sawbill are put together or taken apart here.
OTOH, it is now apparent to me that the five tracks and double cross-over at Cascade Jct. (the merging of a double track mainline and the center of a subdivision point to point) is not only a junction, but a yard too, even though relatively small. Guess I hadn't given enough thought.....
I have large yard, probably a little too large in relation to the layout size. My layout room is 46X26 and the longest yard track in the ladder is about 25 feet. Add a 6 and 10 foot drill tracks on either end of the ladder and you can see that the yard occupies almost the entire long wall on one side of the layout. A good chunk of the other long wall is taken up by a hidden staging yard so you can see that the yard is the dominant feature of the layout. If I had to do it over again, I might shorten it by about 5 feet, but I wanted a large classification yard because I like making up and breaking up trains, so I'm not sorry I devoted a lot of real estate for my yard.
If you aren't interested in this aspect of operation, a large visible yard is not necessary. A few small interchange yards should be enough. You can run trains from one staging yard, pass over the mainline, drop a cut of cars at one of the interchange yards, and continue on to the other staging yard.
jecorbett wrote: I have large yard, probably a little too large in relation to the layout size. My layout room is 46X26 and the longest yard track in the ladder is about 25 feet. Add a 6 and 10 foot drill tracks on either end of the ladder and you can see that the yard occupies almost the entire long wall on one side of the layout. A good chunk of the other long wall is taken up by a hidden staging yard so you can see that the yard is the dominant feature of the layout. If I had to do it over again, I might shorten it by about 5 feet, but I wanted a large classification yard because I like making up and breaking up trains, so I'm not sorry I devoted a lot of real estate for my yard.If you aren't interested in this aspect of operation, a large visible yard is not necessary. A few small interchange yards should be enough. You can run trains from one staging yard, pass over the mainline, drop a cut of cars at one of the interchange yards, and continue on to the other staging yard.
All good points. I have seen some railroads where there is no visible yard. Your train comes out of staging, switches out the various industries in the different towns and returns to staging.
On the flip side of the coin I have seen layouts that were one big yard. Trains come out of staging in some type of schedule, into the yard. The trains are built up and broken down, locos serviced and sent on their way with a new train back to staging. Some even have multiple staging yards to represent different origins/destinations.
So there are plenty of options ranging from pure mainline operation to pure yard operation. Most of us fall somewhere in between. However, IMO, staging is crucial to good operations in most cases.