I had a thread a while back, but decided to start a new one with this plan… Since my wife and I had a baby in November, and she is a stay-at-home Mom, my priorities don’t include a layout right now… So, I’ve had time to work on my plan a bit and came up with a new one. My G’s and D’s (mostly G’s) are:
-Display type layout with 30" radius on the mainline and 24" on a mine branch
-Pennsy steam/diesel era
-Passenger trains (2 at least)
-double track mainline with continuous running for 2 trains and some hidden staging
Here is my room sketch:
And here is my current plan:
I am not hard over on the entire plan, but I’m pretty happy with it… In the closet, I plan to have a casette type setup to switch out loaded and emply hoppers. And the lower line crossing the water will probably have a power plant to give a good place for the loads to go.
I thought about a wye from the mine with a drop down tail track (off the hill and into the operating pit), but thought it didn’t look realistic, so I will just go tender first with the empties from the mine (I have a 2-8-8-2 for the mine branch)…
I will take empties up to the mine tender first - run around them, and bring the loads down engine first. At the power plant on the lower level (in the closet), I will use a casette setup to swap the loaded and empty cars between the upper and lower tracks - but the engine will leave the power plant with empties tender first… follow me? The engine will never turn (in fact none of them will). The inner loop of the main will run clockwise, while the outter loop will run counter-clockwise as far as normal direction…
The closet is narrow, so I don’t think it would fit… thought about turning it manually with a cassette in there and using a wye up by the mine, but like I said, I don’t think a wye would look good squeezed in there… plus, it was common for engines to run tender first on mine branches…
One other note - I just realized that even when you expand my picture, it is not really readable as far as the grade goes - it is 2.75% up reaching 4" where it crosses over the main on the left side and 6" where it flattens out for the mine tracks…
Also, my height is going to be around 50" for the mainline and it will be sectional benchwork.
I have a large layout and I run 2-8-8-2 and 2-8-8-0 and 2-10-2’s and using a 24" radius curve for those engines is very tight, I would run 30" on the mine and 36" on the mains to make it easier on the engines and passenger cars. A thought you could use double headed K-4’s if you run the tighter curves to shuttle the cars in and out of the mine.
I think it looks very good. You could get fancy and use remote turnouts and magnetic uncoupling for the back section to never really have to enter the pit unless for derailments. Just run and watch everything from the outside. Two observations come to mind:
It looks like you’ll have to rely on curved turnouts for some of your mainline switches. They are expensive at about $35 each.
Also, I think you’re a bit optimistic about the switchback to the industries in the SE corner. I would just have one spur there.
I like the bridges over the river. Very scenic. Just visually here, you could probably push the portals for A and B towards the back more to maybe clear the throwbar for the turnouts that are underneath. Portal A definitely. You could enclose that curved section of the mine branch with the same mountain.
A good plan. I think you’ll want to play with the scenic choices to try to minimize the abrupt changes from flat terrain to mountain side, especially between the inner main to mine section.
Ray - I don’t have room for the curves you mention - my current layout (if you can call it that - plywood pike) has a 24" radius on it and my 2-8-8-2 is just fine on it. Also, my passenger equipment runs on my current 26" radius loop fine - but will look better on the 30" - larger radius would be great, but there just isn’t room.
Doughless - I will have to rely on a lot of curved turnouts - unfortunately, they are needed for a layout of this size with larger radius curves… no way around it as far as I can see.
I haven’t totally decided on the industries in the SE corner - I drew them it in there, but can always change the plan there if it is too cramped… I want to keep the one to the REA building next to the station for sure…
I wanted the turnouts for the staging tracks behind the portals - there are already too many visible turnouts… I’ll use remote control for those (eventually want DCC control of those turnouts so I can automate passenger train control on the main and staging).
I understand what you are saying about playing with the scenic choices - I have a bunch of different sketches with the same track plan and different scenery (hiding different portions of the track) - I like the idea about hiding part of the mine branch… I’ll try that out.
i did some drawing in RTS freeware, and had some idea’s about adding a wye. The main is drawn as single track, just for time sake, but the main difference is the branch at the outside of the operating pit.
But, one problem remains…you need to turn the engine in the lower terminal as well. The cassette can cover that as well.
Using curved turnouts isn’t really a problem. I have several on my layout and they really come in handy. Some people have experienced some derailment problems with the longer turnouts, #8’s especially, combined with large, heavy, steam locomotives. The moving point tracks are very long on those turnouts and the weight of the heavy steamers tends to splay them apart as they are ridden. It doesn’t look like you’ll have to go up to #8’s however. My diesels have no problems traversing the #7.5’s.
As far as visual appeal: You can also experiment with making the operating pit less uniformly sized. The closet and cassete will need to be accessed, making the right hand side of the layout always accessible from the outside of the pit. Therefore, you could thicken the benchwork there and move the duckunder to a different spot in the plan. You might find that it gives you the ability to make the whole plan a little less semetrical than it is now, which might improve it from a visual standpoint.
I do like Paul’s adaptation. You might try a turntable instead of a wye. However, I think your operating plan sounds fine as far as pulling the train upgrade tender first. The branch isn’t that long and I think it would look kinda cool to watch the steam locomotive pull the train up the hill backwards.
edit: after comparing Paul’s adaptation to your original,
Here is another version I came up with - same track plan, different scenery… I think I like the way this one is broken up better than my other one…
Paul - I like your idea - I’ll take that and work on the double track and scenery and see how it looks… I noticed that it would be possible to do a wye on the lower track in the same area that you did the upper one. Would take some work on the scenery to make it look right, but it is possible…
I had another version with the branch on the outside of the main loop, but thought from the main room, it would view better with the branch climbing in the back (near the pit)…
Well, that’s a good point, and its nice to see you’ve put a lot of thought into your plan. You can still experiment with different scenic elements. That adjustment you made to the mountain in the NW corner probably results in covering a little more track than I would’ve done, but that’s just preferences.
Part of the reason why the mine branch is high near the front of the layout is the need for it to cross the main line in the SW corner. If the mine branch started in the middle of the front, near the depot, and outside of the main, it could rise slowly enough to where it would not block the view of the main line much at all, since it wouldn’t cross another track until it got back to the NW corner area. Also, you could then flip the depot to the other side of the main, facing the room. The fronts of depots are usually more detailed than the rear, making it a nicer presentation maybe. You may be able to then have more room for your other industry along the bottom.
Just tossing out thoughts. You may have everything pictured in your head a certain way and now we’re messin’ with that.
Paul - I tried every which way and just don’t like all of the track involved with the wye… I can deal with not turning engines.
In fact, I’ve decided less is more… I moved the branch back to coming off the front. I kept the REA and coal/water area - those are more important to me than industries… I thinned some of the benchwork down (thinking of moving the inner loop more toward the back wall and going to 24" on it too). I would rather have less stuff crammed in so what I do have looks better.
The only operations will consist of switching out head end cars at the REA and servicing engines. And the coal branch… That is fine with me - I’m more of a railfan than operator anyway!
I’m surprised folks haven’t mentioned a couple of potential issues. One path through the double crossover creates a potentially problematic S-curve. If you never shove cars through here, you might be OK, but it’s not the most reliable arrangement.
Also, every time an engine enters or leaves the service area, cars spotted at the REA must be removed. That certainly would not be typical of a real railroad, since it would interrupt loading or unloading of the cars (which is not instantaneous).
I also wonder if the turnouts are drawn to scale in this area – this might take a little more length than you anticipate.
i am also worried about the hard to reach underground tracks; and you have a lot of them.
The wye is optional. In this plan the staging area is accessible from the room. Both stations have all the space they need, the lower one has a mine and a house track.
I fully agree with the remarks of Byron Henderson. The possibility to run around is missing too in your station.
Thank you very much for the input on my plan! I took your comments into consideration and made some changes. The main plan is on a 6" grid, so I did a detail of the turnouts on 3" grid to see if it would all fit.
I moved the mains toward the pit enough to put the coal/water on the other side of the mains. I added a double ended siding at the REA to help with switching there from both directions. I measured and a 60’ baggage, 70’ baggage, and 50’ reefer will all fit on there together. There is also a short stub with a loading dock for one or two more cars.
I used Peco #6 turnouts (they are 9" long) in my plan but I am unsure of the track spacing they give. I have some Walthers #6 (11" long) that give 2-1/2 centers - I was thinking they could be cut down to give 2-1/4 centers and they would end up around 10" - so I could probably squeeze them in if I had to. The double crossover is a Walthers that I already have and it is on 2" centers (19" long).
Paul,
I did the above plan before seeing your post with your new one. I like it, but it looks like I lost a lot of hidden staging track that way? Maybe I am just not seeing it correctly… I know what you are saying about the hidden track - but that was part of the idea - to be able to put two or three complete trains in there out of sight (one of them being a 9’6" passenger train).
I am used to working with modules, so the entire mountain will be foam and removable. Also, the fill wall between the mine tracks and lower level tracks would be removable. I know its not ideal, but with good track work and a good bit of running before covering it (to work out the bu
Frankly I think the previous plan, this one above, is your best plan yet. Cuyama pointed out some adjustments that should be made but those shouldn’t be too difficult to make.
If you are concerned about hidden trackage, you could peel back the tunnels to expose the turnouts, leaving only nonmoving track parts hidden. Is this the best look? Maybe not, but you are working with 8X15 feet and compromises are usually needed in smaller spaces, especially if you are trying to incorporate staging.
You could also try to use the closet exclusively for staging, not have the hidden trackage, or use the part in front of the mine for open staging (holding) and simply have the hidden trackage under the mine as part of the main line run through. Compromises. I think just building the above plan and exposing the moving parts of the hidden turnouts is probably the best compromise.
Frankly, I also liked the tunnel in the middle of the lower tracks in front of the mine, like your first post. My suggestions later were for you to try to make the tracks not quite so parallel and maybe the scenery not quite as symetrical as you had it.
Guess the problem is I want mainline railroading and have industrial switching space… Can’t bring myself to switch to N scale. I’m taking a break… my head hurts! [B)]
