another concept plan

[Wiredup]

So the scenes didn't work out how i described them in the end... but thats the whole thing about layout planning right?

I decided it would be easier to describe the scenes if I put in color to show my plan for scenery as well.

So here's the engineering stats for the layout that the work team will have to deal with:

Tight 11" radius curve at the main depot. An unfortunate nessecity to fit the layout in the space provided.

3% grade along the east wall between the northern turnout and the town.

2% grades everywhere else



Here is your scene descriptions:

S/SW: Main depot. Loosely based on Jasper/Squamish. The stub end track for the passenger station (passenger station is the gray box) is actually on the double tracked truss. (I already have the model, I might as well use it! ) I think it will look neat when the scene is completed with the river flowing where it is. I plan on putting some freight structures and what not in the grassy area by the yard. The big black section is driveway and parking stalls.

W: This is my "transition scene. The train starts climbing half way through the lower west curve and will be at a 2" incline by the roadway (2% grade according to Winrail) and will go across the river/waterfall using a single track truss. The lower track @ ground elevation will be crossing a girder bridge.

N: This is my mountain region. The lower track will follow the river, with the middle track heading down a 2% grade to drop 1" to reach the town, while the lower track will proceed upward to meet up with the northern track. The Northern track will head down a 3% grade into the town.

E: The small town has a small lumber mill shown in brown, two rows of shops in red, and the passenger/freight station in gray. The Black is once again roadway.



I want to put in a section of track for reversing trains... dunno where to put that tho.

[Triplex]

That double crossover is excessive. In fact, I'm not sure what use a spur extending over a river to nothing would be.

[Wiredup]

That double crossover is excessive. In fact, I'm not sure what use a spur extending over a river to nothing would be.

The double cross over is to manouver a locomotive from the spur onto the other track, and to allow a train to change tracks. The spur is there because without it, I wouldn't be able to fit my longest train (loco included) into the space provided.

[TrainNut]

Hmm, that's interesting. Just a few things jump out at me. The big one being your yard in the bottom left needs some fine tuning. I think you could maximize the space a little better. I'll stare at it some more later.
In the eastern section, keep in mind that engines and cars don't like to couple or uncouple easily around curves.
On the western section, as far as scenery is concerned , angle your river into the wall instead of deadending it into the wall. That will make it easier to maintain some forced perspective.

[TrainNut]

See how it works if you move the roundhouse and turntable into the corner and angle your yard 45 degrees across the SW corner. It might fit better and give you more space for a better yard.

[Wiredup]

See how it works if you move the roundhouse and turntable into the corner and angle your yard 45 degrees across the SW corner. It might fit better and give you more space for a better yard.

I see what your saying, but I can't seem to visualize how to make the yard accessible from either direction

[Wiredup]

Heres the mod with Trainnuts advice.

I like it, the yard is more useable, but is still poorly designed.




I just see operational issues with this yard....

My average train will take up 4 of those longer sectional pieces (Kato's 248mm straight) without power. That's only 4 passenger cars. And so far, this yard would not be very accommodating of this train... if you were turning the train using the wye in the yard anyways... So I've decided I just have no idea how to design a good yard. The largest loco I have (Challenger) will take up 1 of those 248mm straight sections

However, this new yard does allow me for a much larger roundhouse. which will make a few of you bang your heads... but at the same time it will allow me to display my motive power and give me some more fun. And hey... it fits!


So far this is my favorite design... I just wish I could get the yard into something I could be happy with....


I also put a reverse track in up at the north. The part of the track that's covered by the pale brown line means that it's traveling through a tunnel.

[TrainNut]

Now see there you go. While I was trying to sketch up something to illustrate my thoughts, you went and designed a whole nuther railroad! I guess I'll still post what I was thinking but I think your more on the right track now.
Somewhere out there, there's a site on how to design a proper yard with all the correct pieces. Somebody turned me onto it back at the Z place and I can't remember where it was at now.
Anyways, let me digest your latest plan and here's what I was thinking... though, I think your already past that.

[steinjr]

Now see there you go. While I was trying to sketch up something to illustrate my thoughts, you went and designed a whole nuther railroad! I guess I'll still post what I was thinking but I think your more on the right track now.
Somewhere out there, there's a site on how to design a proper yard with all the correct pieces. Somebody turned me onto it back at the Z place and I can't remember where it was at now.
Anyways, let me digest your latest plan and here's what I was thinking... though, I think your already past that.

Like it.

Hmmm - you can get more similar length yard tracks if you do a diamond shaped yard instead of a pyramid shaped yard (yard ladder on both ends slant in the same direction instead of towards each other).

Also - will there be room for the roundhouse inside the turnback loop ?



Smile,
Stein

[MountainMan]

What does the small section of river under the spur connect to on your layout. It seems to be an "orphan".

[tetters]

For what its worth. I like Stein's design.

[TrainNut]

What does the small section of river under the spur connect to on your layout. It seems to be an "orphan".

I think your asking roughly the same question as Triplex above...

That double crossover is excessive. In fact, I'm not sure what use a spur extending over a river to nothing would be.

The double cross over is to maneuver a locomotive from the spur onto the other track, and to allow a train to change tracks. The spur is there because without it, I wouldn't be able to fit my longest train (loco included) into the space provided.

[steinjr]

Hmmm - on second thoughts - we could probably minimize at least some of those pesky S-curves (running long rolling stock and long steam engines makes S-curves an even worse problem) by putting in the yard ladders in another way, and just use a little more of the left wall for the upper yard ladder. Maybe something like this instead ?



Might give you enough room to replace those medium turnouts with long turnouts.

Of course - it also depends on what the purpose of the yard is - as it is drawn now, it is essentially three visible double ended staging tracks between the main (closest to the wall) and the engine service area. It's not really intended for a lot of switching - it doesn't even have a separate yard lead for switching without fouling the main.

One certainly could be added (running around the turnback curve from the front), but I already feel that curve radii is pushing things a bit here. A decent rule of thumb (from the Layout Design Special Interest Group web page: http://www.ldsig.org/) for curve radius is:

2X - Some model equipment may be able to track reliably on 2X their length, but this is generally considered pushing it.
3X - Making your curve radius at least 3X the length of your longest cars gets reliable tracking around curves, but looks toylike.
4X - If you make your curve radius at least 4X, your longest cars will look much better on curves.
5X - If you make your curve radius at least 5X, your longest cars will couple easily with minimal manual fiddling of the couplers.

80 foot passenger cars is in N scale about 80 feet x 12 inches/foot : 160 = 6" long. A 3X curve then would have a radius of about 18".

Smile,
Stein

[Wiredup]

humm, good insights into this area for sure! I like it!

To address a few comments:

What does the small section of river under the spur connect to on your layout. It seems to be an "orphan".

And it is... However I was inspired by a video I saw on line of the Great Canadian steam excursion that invovled the double heading of the CNR 6060 and CPR 2860 through the Rocky Mountains where they were backing through a double tracked truss to join their train. I also saw a double tracked truss at the end of the yard on Mikes layout, and just loved the way it looked. And when I took the Via Rail across Canada when I was 8, Winnipeg had a similar approach if I recall... So I wanted to include something similar in my layout. This seemed to be the best place to put it for me (river with a truss by the station). However, I also wanted that stub end track in because I wanted to be able ot have a train sitting in the station and still run my mainline. In the end the a stub end was the best way.

The reason why it looks like an Orphan is because your viewing the river in relationship to the other bodys of water on the layout correct? I'm choosing to look at the railway as three separate scenes, instead of one large scene where a river in the north would affect the shape of a river in the south. This is one part of the plan I'm pretty much fixed in keeping...


As for the pair of track plans that have been posted. We are for sure dealing with my major issue with the plan... the yard.

I'll have to try those changes and see how it looks with the rest of it. I'm interested for sure to see how it would affect it. Operational interest would be different, because yes, they are essentially a set of staging tracks part of the main.

I do want to have a more "realistic" yard. I want a runaround track. I want a caboose track. I just gotta figure it out a lil better...

The wye is something I wanted because it helps turn the trains in the yard...but whats the point if the yard isn't useable with the wye correctly?

I want something more functional, something to allow me some switching. I can access this part of the layout from the north and east, so reach isn't a huge problem. I can get a good 34" reach without stressing myself as well.

This is why I put the roundhouse in the lower corner, farthest point to reach, but also hopefuly the area with the least reaching (the house anyways, not the table! )


I'll play with these ideas for the yard. I can skip the wye if I can come up with something better.

[MountainMan]

What does the small section of river under the spur connect to on your layout. It seems to be an "orphan".

I think your asking roughly the same question as Triplex above...


Nope. He was asking about the tracks - I'm asking about the little orphan piece of river itself that is under that spur. Looking at your layout overall, the eye can follow the path of the river, but does not see any connection to that small stretch because it goes the wrong way geographically. Can you re-align it so that it looks like it would naturally join the main part of the river by visual extension?