Planning an N Scale E shaped ISL - 9ft 6 in X 9ft 6in

[TTRAK_andrew]

G'day Folks, below is and XtrkCad plan of an N scale industrial switching layout that I am planning to build. The site of the layout is to be a prefabricated metal garden shed of dimensions roughly 10ft by 10ft. As The shed is still to be built (i.e. waiting to be payed off over time in our local hardware store) I am at the moment using dimensions of 9ft 6in by 9ft 6in to make sure my plans will have room to grow and not the need to be pruned. This metal shed will be put up inside our large metal garage as a secure and hopefully almost dust proof home for the layout. The layout will be in domino form to allow for any future moves. The curves are Atlas 9 3/4 inch and 11 inch set-track to use up what I have on hand and to keep constant radius. Atlas switches and set track straights are used in the plan as they make a easy `units' to judge siding capacities etc. At this level of planning the Atlas switches match reasonably closely to the PECO medium radius code 80 units I will actually use. The layout is planned for 1 to 3 operators with a main aim being the ability to operate for just half an hour or so single handed or have two or three people occupied for an hour or two.
The concept of the layout is a largish industrial park with rail service provided by either an independent local operator or an existing short line such as Aberdeen & Rockfish, R J Corman, etc. The A&R operate the separate PeeDee River Rwy and once ran the Dunn Erwin Railway, so taking on a new industrial park in their region would not be out of the question.
At the top of the plan is the main yard where removable storage cassettes provide inward/outward traffic. The orange coloured rectangles represent industrial structures/boundaries.

   

Switching Area 1 would be operated directly out of the yard as if the track distance on the model accurately represented the distance on the fictional prototype. Perhaps only being switched once a day.
Switching Area 2 is meant to be significantly further away from the yard and would be worked by its own out and back train. If a pushing/shoving move was used to get to Area 2 perhaps an old caboose could be used as a shoving platform and I could do away with the run-around siding. I would envisage one to two workings of Area 2 per day with each industry only receiving one switch per day. This area is likely to be hosting mainly chemical based industries, eg. paint manufacture, pool chlorine processor, etc.
Switching Area 3 is a very busy place and a significant distance from the yard. Some of the industries here would receive cuts of 3 to 5 cars at a time, eg. Newsprint warehouse, grocery chain warehouse. A long team track with a specialized lumber transload operation at the end is a feature of Area 3. I would envisage two or three trains per day to Area 3, each with its own assigned industries to switch. Perhaps the Newsprint warehouse might be switched twice a day to have sufficient through put.
By using the Auran TRAINZ simulator I am slowly making an operating computer version of the proposed layout which helps a lot in not only planning operations, but also in achieving visual and functional balance.
   

The types of industries I am thinking about creating include: tank-car cleaning and repair facility, newsprint warehouse, lumber transload, Liquid Propane Distributor, Frito-Lay type plant, grocery chain warehouse, bulk cement distributor (eg., Blue Circle), team track, grain transload, logistics warehouse(s), pool chlorine processor, and paint manufacture.

Any critiques, suggestions etc. are gladly welcomed.
Cheers, Andrew G.

[Brakie]

The types of industries I am thinking about creating include: tank-car cleaning and repair facility, newsprint warehouse, lumber transload, Liquid Propane Distributor, Frito-Lay type plant, grocery chain warehouse, bulk cement distributor (eg., Blue Circle), team track, grain transload, logistics warehouse(s), pool chlorine processor, and paint manufacture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great choices of industries for a super nice ISL..

If your lumber transload area deals with centerbeam flatcar* unloading then the unloading area will need to be paved on both sides of the track.


* A fun fact..Some railroads call these cars "centerbeam lumber carriers/centerbeam lumber cars".

[Kev1340]

Hi Andrew,

I like your plan, and choice of industries One minor alteration you might want to consider ...

Remove the 'run-around' in switching area 2. The area is small enough that the proto railroad would probably get rid of the extra switch to save on maintenance costs, and gives you the oportunity to use a shoving platform 8-)

Out of curiosity, have you already purchased you Peco track? If not, take a look at their code 55. Same geometry, virtually the same price, and much nicer look.

Keep us posted on your progress

Cheers,

Kev

[Brakie]

Remove the 'run-around' in switching area 2. The area is small enough that the proto railroad would probably get rid of the extra switch to save on maintenance costs, and gives you the oportunity to use a shoving platform.
--------------------------------------------
Actually that run around is needed as a locomotive escape on a pull in move..

Instead of using a old caboose most railroads would use the run around or engines on both ends of the train.

There would be little maintenance cost on maintaining that switch since its not a heavily used switch..

[Rscott417]

It seems like a lot of people see run arounds on track plans and suggest to remove them, whys everyone hating on run arounds ?? The 3D rendering looks cool btw

[Brakie]

It seems like a lot of people see run arounds on track plans and suggest to remove them, whys everyone hating on run arounds ?? The 3D rendering looks cool btw

They probably read that in a book or some such..

As I mention that runaround is needed for a engine escape--unless one wishes to add a second unit on the rear of the train.

As far as a caboose as a shoving platform it appears they are slowly being replaced by a noisy caboose on some locals that requires long reverse moves and facing point setouts.

[TTRAK_andrew]

G'day Folks, Thanks for the positive responses, I appreciate the experience and insight of the contributors.
I should add that most of my rolling stock is 1970-1980 era and so I will probably run close to that era for the layout.
I also have a preference for South Eastern states of U.S. as my reference to Aberdeen & Rockfish would suggest.
I have about 200 freight cars and a limited budget so I am unlikely to move from that in a hurry. Seaboard Coast Line/Family Lines is a major road.
After I get the garage sorted out and the inside shed erected I will be reviewing my freight car balance to get closer to finalized industry choices. I have a great liking of the Incentive Per Diem box cars or that era and hence the preference for an industry that receives a lot of clean new cars (i.e. the Newsprint warehouse).
In regard to track I too would prefer PECO code 55 over the code 80 track, but I have quite a few code 80 points (switches in U.S. rail talk) already and the limited budget means I have to use what I already have. One thought that I have is to use the code 80 track on the switching areas where I can hopefully have lots of distracting details and scenery to draw the eye away from the high rail. Also I plan to paint and weather the track. The classification yard and surrounds is very much `all track' and I would probably use PECO code 55 track in that area as I ma reasonably confident I would have used up all the code 80 in the switching areas.
The Switching AREA 2 conversation regarding use of a shoving platform may be influenced by my core time frame of 1970-80 and how many code 80 switches I have .
The lumber trans-loading area is to be at the very end of the team track in Switching Area 3 and as the adjacent runaround track curves off to join the switch there should be enough room to get a forklift in on both sides of the track. plus I plant to make it a raised platform to allow car floor height forklift access. When I fire up Auran TRAINZ again I will take a screenshot of the area from that end.
Comments and feedback most welcome.
Thanks Again, Andrew G.

[Brakie]

The Switching AREA 2 conversation regarding use of a shoving platform may be influenced by my core time frame of 1970-80 and how many code 80 switches I have.
-------------------------------------------------
Ah,you will be using a caboose since you have a 4-5 man crew-on some locals with lots of switching a third brakeman was added to speed up the work.The conductor usually supervised the work and made sure safety and operating rules was followed.If the crew was going for a early quit then he would jump in and help do the work.

Normal crew size on most railroads between 70-80 was four men consisting of engineer,head brakeman,rear brakeman and conductor.

[Dottney]

I have an area on my layout that is almost identical to area #2, just with the run round on the other side of the middle track. The run around is useful but if you only do push moves into the area its unnecessary. If there's a run around out on the main or drill track before entering the area the run around is not needed either.
I'm wondering if a run around on the drill or main is more prototypical. Have to do some digging on the world wild web!
Nice plan overall. I'm probably going to use some of your ideas on an HO switching layout I'm doing.
Dave