I have an N scale so-called shortline (at some 235 scale miles…[:)]) that i’m currently in the process of trying to configure around a large basement. The thing i seem to recall is seeing at least 3 places were the spur appears at the same height as the main around here(CN–Dundas sub/sw ontario). Is this really prototypical in some cases? And if so, why?
I need an excuse here for at least one…[:-^]
It all depends on the revenue value of the spur and the conditions of its use. A spur might be used once a week, or once a day. It may be used twice a day. If what it transports is worth $1M a pop, then it might make a lot of sense to profile the spur as if it were a more heavily used one, one that requires proper drainage that only a mainline ballast and roadbed prep would enable. Remember, it’s not just the customer and client that dictate what and how…it is also insurance companies.
So, sure, if the need is met only by proper profiling, then it will be done.
Alot of spurs I recall in my local area were dropped below the main a few feet so that nothing can roll back to and block the main.
Some spurs were simply part of the street downtown as not to tear up the cars and trucks using it.
I can think of several locations along my prototype (CSX between Atlanta-Chattanooga-Nashville) where some industry spurs look just like a well maintained mainline (nice ballast pile, well shaped, same height as main track), although most of the spurs are lower (almost on the ground), have little ballast and obviously lesser maintained rail. So you are not being unrealistic if you are planning some of the well maintained type. Jamie
In downtown DeRidder Louisiana there’s a spur that cuts across a 5 lane highway (4 driving and 1 turning) and has no crossing gates, just lights and bells. The rail is the same as used on the mainline it comes from. It connects with the KCS mainline and is quite well maintained.
If varies. Side tracks can be above, below, or the same height as the main track. As long as the arrangement can accomodate drainage away from the main track, its OK.
Most spurs in my area are the same height and profile of the main they come off of. I think it has more to do with the lay of the land than anything. If the ground slopes down, why bother to fill it in and raise it? If it goes up and doesn’t cause a rolling down hill condition, why bother.
Railroads did what was cost effective. (unlike governments…)
In some cases, it could be the remnants of a portion of formerly doubled track (where there used to be double tracks but now only a single remains) so it would maintain the same profile and height as the main. If perfectly good track is already there, why lift it to put in new just because the use has changed ? As Loathar said… “Railroads did what was cost effective.”
In the town of Monnett, Ohio, near where I grew up, the siding for the grain elevator used to be below the level of the mainline. Back in the early 90’s, the siding was redone with the switch moved to the south end of the siding, and the siding was elevated to the same level as the mainline. When the small yard for the grain elevator was added, and the switch put back in at the north end of the siding, it was left at the same level as the mainline.
Kevin