First, I am certain that this is not the first time this has been discussed. But, I would like to hear from folks about the subject (possibly again). If you think that I am beating a dead horse, please be kind enough and have the good manners not to express your negative opinions.[B)]
My layout will have about 120 feet of mainline. It is a point to point layout with staging at each end. I have about 30% of the mainline installed (but that includes part of the main yard. I have tried to make it single track with 2 long passing sidings already built. I will run N&W Y6b’s, J’s, and A’s. Coal trains with about 18 cars and a caboose. I have not decided about the rest of the mainline. That is whether or not to single or double track it. My layout is based on the N&W’s Pocahontas Division in the fall of 1958. The line was, of course double tracked. I thought that some areas of single tracks with long passing sidings might make for more interesting operations.[2c]
Please, let me know of your experiences and thoughts.[8D]
Single track or widely spaced (and perhaps non parallel) double tracks make the run seem longer. And at what point does a very long passing siding look like a double track mainline.
I guess it depends on how faithful to the original you want to be.
“I thought that some areas of single tracks with long passing sidings might make for more interesting operations.”
So would John Armstrong (or A.C. Kalmbach). If you haven’t ready chapter 3 of Track Planning for Realistic Operation 3rd Ed. by Armstrong, you should. Even with a double track you still need passing sidings.
The decision really hinges on what you consider more “interesting operations”.
Following the prototype’s track arrangements only works well if you are following the prototype’s operations.
In the '50s, Armstrong divided operations into 3 basic categories. Most of us tend to lean one direction more than the others, but few of us are totally in one camp.
At the simple end from a layout design perspective is the “spectator”. The spectator basically railfans in miniature. He recreates telltale scenes - in your case, perhaps watching a loaded coal drag pass a significant landmark - and watches the trains pass through them. Scenery is important to the spectator. So is plenty of staging, as the spectator generally doesn’t want to spend significant time working a yard making and breaking up trains. For the spectator’s layout, double track is often a plus, especially if it is prototypical. The double track allows longer trains and higher train density.
The engineer enjoys being the train crew on his train - conductor, fireman, engineer all in one person. Typically, this person en
If you are to be having operating sessions you might want to consider some things that were brushed against above.
What is it that you are trying to model?
If you are to be using a card or similar computer generated switching system, will a single track cause a bottle neck? This is important as you don’t want to punish your operators. There is a fine line between prototypical operation and frustrations of being backed up waiting for yard access.
Setting your times for route schedules can solve some of this but new operators will have trouble keeping up with the clock and what might have started out simple enough turns into something quite different.
Double track can be used for a passing track or left and right traffic in and out of a yard… Beware of CNW left side drive ! ! ! !
Many modelers put their pike into some service before extensive scenic work. You may want to run some operating sessions with single track and then decide if a second track is necessary before landscaping.
Recall that the big boys will add track options in yards or accesses if traffic justifies it.
You could always build a double main line with crossovers. That way, you have all of the benefits of a double main line with the operation challenges of a single main line with long sidings.
My layout is a double main line, and I would not do without it.
Gidday Craig, As long as you have made sure the horse is actually dead !!! [(-D]
Seriously as far as I’m concerned you have legitimate concerns / thoughts that you require opinions on, this topic was discussed here not that long ago,
but unless you were going to resurrect it or “hijack it”, I don’t see why there should be any negative comments for you starting your thread, besides it gives the opportunity for others offer “new” opinions.
As I said in that thread MY preference was having a predominately single track main with passing sidings but that I also wanted "a bob each way’ by having a double tracked "helper district.
"The engineer enjoys being the train crew on his train - conductor, fireman, engineer all in one person. Typically, this person enjoys running way freights so he can do switching along the route. Engine servicing before and at the end of the run are often important items for the engineer. Single track main is often better suited to the engineer so that he has to periodically clear the main for higher priority trains. Designing a layout to sit an engineer is more difficult than it may seem. If running a train is too easy, the layout is boring. If the obstacles become too difficult, frustration sets in. And the thresholds may change over time as the engineer gains oper
Just because one builds a double track main line does not necessarily mean it needs to be operated as a double track main line. For certain operating sessions just make portions of the double track closed (or even make certain they are closed by parking MOW equipment or some such thing on them). That way you can operate as a single track mainline. The best of both worlds.
the first time i read about this issue is probably more then ten years ago. In Model Railroad Planning, a layout built by Jeff Wilson modeling the joint track of several class 1 RR’s along the Ohio River, was presented. Followed a year later by a short message why he had given up the project. It also was a point to point railroad, with a rather “short” mainline. Beside having to build over 10,000 trees he became aware of operational, money and time issues. He felt he was ending up with huge staging area’s; with lots of cash and time involved by building or buying numerous prototypical correct and famous passenger trains. All that ado for a few minutes of fun, for the very short time it took his hot-shots to blast through between the staging area’s.
Not even 5 minutes of love for 25 years in jail, Jerry Lee Lewis made a song about it.
When you are after building a busy double track mainline, with huge engines and long trains, a loop to loop design or a continuous run probably is the better choice. On such a railroad the way-freight or local will need a playground completely independent from the main; so yards will become pretty large indeed . By doing more then one lap or using the same train “more” times during a session the balance between staging and the visible part will be more satisfying.
With a point to point system, you will need to find ways to keep the pace and the number of trains down, by giving switching duties to the through-trains or/and to have them wait in sidings. The length of these long trains however might cause a severe design problem. The question remains if your layout will still be a believable model of the Pocahontas division of the N&W.
What seems to be your big love for a real railroad, maybe due to the awesome pics by O.W. Link, is not necessarily the one that makes you happy as a model for the next decades. You are facing some d
Another possibility is a non-parallel double track mainline, somewhat like Southern Pacific’s Donner Pass line in the California Sierra Nevada mountains, or Santa Fe in portions of California and Arizona. In Espee’s case, a newer second track with easier grades was built somewhat parallel to the original grade, but not STRICTLY parallel (in some instances, the two grades are separated by several miles and enough elevation difference to allow for several crossovers).
Union Pacific, which owns the Donner Pass line now, made both tracks multidirectional several years back for double-stack tunnel clearance purposes, so it wouldn’t be un-prototypical on a model railroad to see, say, an eastbound train on a westbound track.
It’s a concept that I adapted for my own MR, which is a ‘loop’ instead of point-to-point, and allows twice the running space for my trains. And with the non-parallel concept, my train never seems to appear to be going through the same scenery twice.
LION has a FOUR track main line. An express track and a local track in each of two directions.
Time table calls for 478 local trains daily, I do not dispatch the express trains, they just run on closed loops by them selves, but in theory there would be about 500 daily express trains as well.
I have 6 train sets serving the local track from 242nd Street to the South Ferry Loop and back again a distance of 9+ scale miles, and making the run in 18 minutes, including all of the stops. Trains run on a five minute headway, and as the tower operator / dispatcher all I handle is the interlocking plant at 242nd Street. Operation of the trains is automatic.
At the moment there is just one train set in each direction on the express loops, but I really should have two train sets on each because my interval between trains is a tad bid more than it should be. If I did that I would have to coordinate with Nevins Tower and with Lenox Tower as those trains enter the Broadway tracks. It is doable by hand, but my automation is not that far along yet.
Hmm. So a train leaves staging at one end of the layout, travels the main line, and within 120 feet (two scale miles in HO) the train enters staging at the far end. Trip over? What happens next? Can you reverse the train direction in staging so that it sooner or later runs back to where it came? Or do you have to swap the engine and caboose by hand? Or do you run the train backwards to get back where it came from?
For me, the idea of getting a train on the tracks, coupled up, and out of staging, and then after just a couple of minutes, put that train into staging, and get out another one, is unattractive. Once I get a train going, I like to admire it running for quite some time. Was it me, I’d have a loop at each end to give continuous running.
As far as operation goes, a single track main with passing sidings keeps you busy if you have two trains running at the same time. The inferior train has to get itself into a siding and clear the main for the superior train. Whereas with a double track main you can have two trains running at the same time and never worry, they won’t collide.
Since I am modeling a stretch of Santa Fe in Oklahoma on three decks, which includes trackage at Oklahoma City, Enid and other towns, and since I operate it as the Santa Fe did in 1988-89, and since the mainline is single track with passing tracks, that is what I model. Works fine for me, I am happy with the operation, and it pretty much resembles the full size line it models.
Totally up to you.Single track increases the dependence on dispatching and creates more interaction between trains, double track looks better if you are modeling a line that had double track.
Either way, nothing prevents you from keeping speeds down as your trains moves along the layout, and having some passing sidings beside the double track, so a train can go into a siding to let another train overtake it, or declaring that some section of the double track main is out of bounds due to track work or something like that.
If you want to see an inspirational layout which is partly single track and partly double track, have a look at the layout belonging to Grampy’s Trains.You can see that layout in this thread: http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/p/135313/1517796.aspx#1517796
Here is the schematic, to the best of my abilities as judged from looking at the photos of the layout - bottom part goes on the left end of the top part:
I have thought that about 6-7 operators would be good. That would be 3 people for east bound trains and 3 people for westbound trains. There would be a yard locomotives in which there are 2 arrival/departure tracks, and 4 classification tracks along with a roundhouse, turntable and a few industries. This might mean that 2 people are needed for yard work. There would be a dispatcher. I plan to use the way bills for car routing. Thanks![tup]
I am not very experienced with operating a model railroad prototypically. I have built some scenery, but that is just a large mountain that has 42 inch radius (for inner track) doing a 180 degree turn. Then, there are background mountains against the wall. There is a mainline, large passing siding with crossover, and 2 tracks to the coal tipple. I plan for heavy coal traffic and at least 3 mines modeled. I will run one eastbound and one westbound passenger train daily. Wood products are another industry that I want to incorporate. Thanks for the help.[tup]
6 people running trains, while the running time between staging yards is about 3 minutes you could have a train entering your yard every minute. Here the pace of activities probably can’t cope with all the incoming trains.
With so many trains , and you have to keep your engineers occupied, you will need huge staging yards. Lets assume 4 of these engineers are running main line consists, lets assume it takes them 10 minutes to go from yard to yard they will run between 8 and 10 trains each during a session. Your staging yards should have a 16 to 20 train capacity at both sides.
The pace of the wayfreight or local will be much slower. Never the less with such a busy main line it will be hard to serve industries along the main. Without knowing much more about your track plan, you could show it on here, it is impossible to talk about possible operations on your layout.
For some reason, John Armstrong’s dictum “don’t do anything twice” always sticks with me.
I’d be tempted to look at having one end of the layout being a staging / fiddle yard, and the other end a “working” yard with a turntable / roundhouse, fueling facilities, and yard tracks to break down and assemble trains. A reverse loop as part of the staging area would be nice, allowing you to turn trains either to be re-used during the operating session (like a passenger train) or just to be turned to be ready for the next operating session.
As far as double-track vs. single-track, I always find when I get confused and can’t find the answer in a track planning book, the last resort is to look at what the real railroad did. [;)] With long trains running both directions, double track made sense for the N&W so I suspect would make sense for your model of the N&W.
