I am in the process of designing my new ho scale chessie system layout, and i am trying to make the decision between a single track twice around layout or a double track once around. I like the idea of the double track design as the layout will have “sincere” scenes, that is a train will pass through a scene only once. This will also allow for a larger yard area and decent Staging. On the other hand the single track idea doubles the mainline run and would include helper grades but i can only fit very minimal staging… from what i have seen the chessie was mostly a double track system save for a few areas. which sort of design would provide a more realistic layout, and would provide more operating potential.
It is a tough decision. I faced it, and actually originally laid double track, then decided to do a single track that looped the layout twice. There are advantages to both.
When I had the double track, I could run two trains in opposite directions which was cool, but I thought would get tiresome after a while. With the single track that runs longer I feel it makes it less boring. With strategically placed view blocks etc, it can make the long run seem more realistic. Take a look at my layout:
I’d say it would depend on your modeling goals. A model is always a very simplified version of some hand picked aspects of reality.
Mentally - what is your vantage point - are you standing trackside watching several trains running through or through one or more scenes (the railfan view), are you follow a single train as it goes up the line (the engineer view), or are you trying to handle traffic flow (the dispatcher view)?
Let me repeat Stein’s question. How big is your layout? The answer to that question could go a long way toward resolving your issue of a single main line going around twice or a double main line going around once.
In my opinion, the smaller the layout, the less appealing a single main line going around twice, because visually there isn’t much opportunity to create the illusion that the train is passing through two different locations. In that event, a double main line gives you the opportunity to run two different trains in the same location providing more visual interest.
In a larger layout, the added depth of the scenery provides a better opportunity for a single main line going around twice to create the illusion of thr train passing through two different locations because the track separations can be greater. Of course, in that event, a double main line with track separations permits you to run multiple trains through these different parts of the layout for more interesting visual effect.
All things considered, I would encourage you to consider a double main line going once around as opposed to a single main line going twice around.
the layout size is 15x17 feet. the maximum depth of a scene is 30" so i dont know if i can get the level of scene separation to pull off the twice around .
You seem to have your bench work ready yet. I do not understand what you are trying to tell us or asking us.
17 x 15 is quite a space in N-scale. There are things to consider:
a double-track layout can be used in two ways; first to allow lots of trains running at the same time. Which is nice from a dispatchers point of view, but such a layout needs lots of staging and large yards.Or it is used as two single track layouts to facilitate running a wayfreight between the always approaching through freights on model railroads.
a long single track main is very interesting; I do not know if you are familiar with Tom Barnaby’s Maumee or Tony Koester’s NKP, but both claim a 7 scale mile long main is needed to make such a layout interesting. Double decking and even triple decking was done to get the desired length. Both in a space larger then yours; both are sincere BTW.
3)If you do not want large yards, double decking nor a twice around scheme you’ll have to go for loads of switching.
A 30" wide shelf is a lot of width, you might get more length in by reducing the width of your shelves.
I would design a couple of alternatives, and take time to choose the one you like the very most.
As the layout is HO scale i have these benchwork limits due to the layout having to be built in modules so it can be moved. this has limited me to a shelf style layout with no lobes or turnback loops. so in saying this it will have a removable section at the entrance. I enjoy the engineers perspective far more than any other.
I have 2 designs at present, one which is a double track once around with a large yard and large engine service facility. It only has one town to switch and a large mine. i think this may limit its operating potential as there is very little room for staging.
The other plan is for a twice around single track main. This plan has approximately 440 feet of run according to the xtrkcad program i am using to design. same deal as before with one town and large mine to switch but this also has the benifit of being able to incorporate helper operations at the base and summit of the grade and as such has a modest locomotive service facility and yard. it also has room for more staging.
I guess i am just having trouble deciding if the double track layout would be suitable as i will be operating the layout mostly on my own, or at at best will have 1 other operator. I am mainly after opinions on whether double track operations would be too complex for one operator, as there are many more variables to control at once. i am also trying to portray the essence of the base prototype the chessie system. The question is, is double track or single track more realistic for part of the system set in the appalachians.
You are talking about sections and and not about modules. The difference is clear, all modules have the very same end, so they can be used in any combination or order. Grades on modules are impossible, due to differences in height. With sections your layout is split up into pieces, they might have the same length, but the place and height were tracks join are different. They can only be used in a certain order. Why using sections or modules is ruling out a peninsula, a lob or a turnback curve is not clear it all.
The Chessie had so many tracks and routes, to call one THE CHESSIE is not done nor wise. It is the route you prefer, a single track branch up to a mine in the mountains or the double track main down by the river between the East Coast and Chicago. Remember you might fancy the double track route, to be faithful to reality this also means large radii,100 car trains and huge yards. Looking to something smaller is about lesson one of model railroad design.
There are many ways to run trains. The American way is from the engineer’s view, one operator for each engine. When you want to serve industries (engineer 1) en switch a yard (engineer 2) and run trains over a busy mainline you’ll need a crew. For only two guys around it might be an idea to limit operation to one fellow, running a train over the main, setting out or picking up a cut of cars in a small yard, while the other is switching the mine and some local suppliers.
I do not know your way of counting, the length of the mainline will be 120 feet max, going around twice…about 2 scale miles.
there is a large pennisula in the middle of the layout so it is not just around the walls. the figure for the length of run came from the xtrk cad software. that is what the program told me the running length of the main was.
if you have a peninsula, you have a lob or turn-back curve (180 degree turn), you even have 3 of them; it might be language again.
The average length of your layout is 15 ft, you will pass it 4 times every round, such as the width.
One time around will be about 6 x 15 = 90 feet, twice around about 180 feet; far away from the 440 you claim. Your layout might be much more complicated, you could post your plans.
BTW your response is rather limited, no word about the main issue.
i did the math myself and the figure the layout design software is giving me is wrong. i know you are right with your math and i wasnt denying that. i was just trying to let you know where the figure came from. i think it works out at about 200 something feet.
anyway, my problem is i am torn between chessies double track main line such as some of the old b and o lines but i also love the single track lines like some of their lines into the coalfields. this is the dilema i face. i am starting to think a double track main will require more staging than i can fit to give enough train variety. due to the fact the line of the second lap will be at a higher elevation i can fit more staging underneath.maybe i should try and have a mix and double track some of it where i can fit it.
It would be best if you were to post the track plan as you have it now, along with the room the layout will occupy. You’ll get more focused feedback that may help with your dilemma. It may be possible to do both options - have a double-track mainline with a single track branch heading off to a coal mine. But it’s hard to tell without seeing the space.
I’ll speak from my experience. I recently took apart my N Scale door-size layout that was a single main line, twice around. I now have a double main line with an interchange track, 3-track yard and 4 spurs. It has a divider near the middle to create 2 separate scenes, one countryside the other urban.
I have found that I can get the double track running that I like very much, along with plenty of operational ability with the interchange, yard and spurs all in 39" x 80".
With a 30" wide shelf, it just doesn’t seem very realistic to me to have 2 separate mainlines running on it even with a grade change. Personally, if it were me, I’d go double main line only because I’ve been there done that. Good Luck!