09-28-2010, 03:34 AM
After months of "analysis paralysis" and changing my mind numerous times, I finally took a different approach and have come up with two slightly different versions of a switching layout. The "different approach" was to select the industries that I wanted on the layout and ones that would support the types of equipment I have - the era I am modeling (late 70's to early 80's) - and a mid-west locale.
Since I worked for the L&N Railroad through the 1970's before going back to short line railroading, I wanted the plan to be based on an L&N industrial spur so I could operate L&N power (C-420's - NW-2's - SW-1200's - SW-1500's - MP15's, etc.) in the various paint schemes - the L&N Rebel scheme, Family Lines - even Seaboard System.
The closest thing that I found that would match what I was looking for was Lynch Road in Evansville, Indiana (an area I frequently visit), and my plan is loosely based on that industrial spur, although it's really free-lanced and includes some features from L&N industrial spurs in other areas. I did resist the temptation to fill every available spot with track to duplicate the prototype track to scenery ratio and also I like the nice flat terrain in this area.
Overall, there are just four main industries on the plan, although version 2 adds a fifth.
1) Team Track or Trans-load Track as they are called these days, that will receive lumber, building products, and other odds and ends (2 or 3 cars spot).
2) A farm co-op that will receive feed and fertilizers (3 or 4 cars spot).
3) A Coca-Cola bottling plant receiving tank cars of corn syrup - perfect foreground industry as I need only model the unloading pipes (2 cars spot, room for 1 being held).
4) Temple-Inland Containers - receiving box cars of pulpboard (4 cars spot).
Any way, at this point I'm ready to start laying the track, but am still stuck with a bit of "analysis paralysis" in so far as I'm undecided which of these two versions of the plan to call the final version! The overall plan dimensions are 18 inches X 20 feet with a narrower 6 foot staging section for a total "main line" length of 26 feet.
Version 1 - has a long run-around track as on the prototype spur which would allow the yard crew to enter and leave the spur with the loco leading and permit spotting cars on the one odd facing spur. On the prototype spur, all industrial tracks switch from the same direction except one, so that's more or less prototypical.
In version 2, I have all the industry tracks facing the same direction and have added one other foreground industry along with a highway overpass that sort of separates the main layout from the staging area. Have also included a second track in the staging area, the idea being that I could have two different trains staged to switch the spur (a first shift and third shift crew). I could do the same thing with version 1 if desired.
Since the right most area of the plan is pretty well fixed, I'll no doubt go ahead and at least lay and wire the track for Temple-Inland and Coca-Cola and just temporarily put a long switching lead down until I decide which plan will be the final version. With the switching required for just these two industries, it should give me a good feel for how the plan will work.
Oh yes, on either plan, the staging track area will have scenery too, as the idea of a bare narrow "staging cassette" doesn't appeal to me, and the staging area is permanent and need not be made removable.
Which version appeals to you folks and why?
Since I worked for the L&N Railroad through the 1970's before going back to short line railroading, I wanted the plan to be based on an L&N industrial spur so I could operate L&N power (C-420's - NW-2's - SW-1200's - SW-1500's - MP15's, etc.) in the various paint schemes - the L&N Rebel scheme, Family Lines - even Seaboard System.
The closest thing that I found that would match what I was looking for was Lynch Road in Evansville, Indiana (an area I frequently visit), and my plan is loosely based on that industrial spur, although it's really free-lanced and includes some features from L&N industrial spurs in other areas. I did resist the temptation to fill every available spot with track to duplicate the prototype track to scenery ratio and also I like the nice flat terrain in this area.
Overall, there are just four main industries on the plan, although version 2 adds a fifth.
1) Team Track or Trans-load Track as they are called these days, that will receive lumber, building products, and other odds and ends (2 or 3 cars spot).
2) A farm co-op that will receive feed and fertilizers (3 or 4 cars spot).
3) A Coca-Cola bottling plant receiving tank cars of corn syrup - perfect foreground industry as I need only model the unloading pipes (2 cars spot, room for 1 being held).
4) Temple-Inland Containers - receiving box cars of pulpboard (4 cars spot).
Any way, at this point I'm ready to start laying the track, but am still stuck with a bit of "analysis paralysis" in so far as I'm undecided which of these two versions of the plan to call the final version! The overall plan dimensions are 18 inches X 20 feet with a narrower 6 foot staging section for a total "main line" length of 26 feet.
Since the right most area of the plan is pretty well fixed, I'll no doubt go ahead and at least lay and wire the track for Temple-Inland and Coca-Cola and just temporarily put a long switching lead down until I decide which plan will be the final version. With the switching required for just these two industries, it should give me a good feel for how the plan will work.
Oh yes, on either plan, the staging track area will have scenery too, as the idea of a bare narrow "staging cassette" doesn't appeal to me, and the staging area is permanent and need not be made removable.
Which version appeals to you folks and why?
Ed
"Friends don't let friends build Timesavers"
"Friends don't let friends build Timesavers"
