I’m in the design phase of my 2nd layout (learned a lot from my first attempt at design and construction), and I’d like to include a switchback in my track plan to allow multiple-level track access. I’ve noticed that I haven’t seen any track plans published that utilize a switchback. Is there something inherently taboo about switchbacks besides the obvious space requirements? Switchbacks were common prototypically in logging operations.
Oregon Shay
I’d be willing to bet part of the problem is that you need a good length switchback to make any appreciable height gain…so even though prototypically they saved a lot of space, in model form, it doesn’t work out so well.
I put a switchback in my entry into the MR layout design contest a few years ago. Inspired from the D&RGW Monarch Branch.
I operate on many layouts that have a swtichback on a mine spur or logging branch. None that have a switchback on a major line.
I see a problem with a switchback in a model railroad is that most people want a loop where one can just put the train on track and watch it run. That is not possible with a switchback.
To pile on what TZ said about lack of continuous running, if you have a switchback in the main line, you have to use the switchback every time you operate.
That said, if you have a non-continuous run layout like a shelf switcher (even L- or U-shaped), a switchback in the main is not near the detriment it would be on a continuous run. There have been many successful “operations” layouts that used a Y configuration for the main line, with no provision for continuous operations. This is essentially a switchback to get from one fork of the Y to the other.
My HOn3 line is similar that one fork of the Y contains a switchback as a featured operating element. Time will prove whether it was wise or not. But it sure is fun to build. All my previous layouts have featured continuous run, so this is a step in a new direction for me.
Fred W
Please check out in Prototype Information for the Modeler, the thread, titled: ’ Learn about a UNIQUE NH shortline RR '. T’was a shortline run by local residents, who banded together to accomplish this, after B&M RR abandoned the 26 mile up-valley line as unprofitable. It struggled on 28 more years, keeping 10 small communities along it’s r-o-w with rail service, to ship/ receive commodities, haul passengers for the residents of the Suncook River valley. It was the ONLY NON-mining or logging shortline railroad in Continental US, which utilized a mainline SWITCHBACK, enabling it’s r-o-w to climb from the broad, north-south Merrimack River Valley area to the higher elevation, smaller, northeast-southwest Suncook River Valley. It ran twice-daily turn, except Sundays. I attempted to list some of the traffic it hauled, as memory allowed. Our local HO modular club tried to faithfully duplicate the line’s r-o-w and industries, building 26 modules to do so. Switchback was the focal point, as it followed 1:1 very closly by having tail track which could only hold 5 to 7 cars total, for the steeper climb up switchback upper leg. This made turns very interesting by limiting the loads and MTs IN/ OUT per train. It is/was a modeler’s challenge and, am sure, a 1:1’s nightmare. Maybe this might help you in your quest for info. TTFN…papasmurf
P.S. Please note that a book is mentioned, which was published after the SVRR Historical Society worked for over 10 years, putting all the info / photos they could locate, together. They got nothing for their long efforts, as publishing company refused to pay a dime for doing the book; wanting any and all profit from future
Another key to enjoyably incorporating switchbacks in a layout is some advance planning.
In a limited space, the trade-off is usually between grade steepness and tail track length. The longer the tail tracks, the less run for the rise (the reason for the switchback in the 1st place). Knowing the locomotives you plan to use on the switchback, and an idea of how many cars they will pull up what % grade helps in planning.
If there are multiple tail tracks and switchbacks, the shortest tail track and the steepest grade are going to determine train length. There’s not much point in wasting space on a 30" tail track in one location if your shortest tail track is 20".
Smooth grade transitions are very important. And the switchback turnouts need to be completely flat without any grade transition extending into the turnout.
Using my HOn3 Port Orford & Elk River line as an example: The total rise needed/wanted is 4", to be handled in 2 switchbacks. The shelf is 8ft long. With an 8ft shelf, my suggested maximum train length would be 24" based on visual comparison of view to train length. My intended switchback locomotives are Keystone Shays, about 4.5" long. 32ft cars are about 5" long. So a 20" tail track gives a 3 car train, or 2 cars plus caboose. Longest car would be a 50ft combine and passenger car (7" each). My sawmill, log landing, and dock scenes are all based on 2 car cuts, which works well with a 20" tail track.
Subtracting 2 tail tracks (20" each) and 2 turnouts (8" each) leaves 40" for a 2" rise. Doesn’t sound too bad initially with an average 5% grade. But I figure I need 14" of grade transition at each end for the passenger cars. That leaves 12" at full grade to achieve a 1" rise - about 8%. The other 1" of rise is achieved in the 2 transitions (1/2" each). With the Ke
Switchbacks weren’t common on busy prototype railroads because of the inherent operating issues. Most model railroads are pretty busy (relatively speaking) with a lot of traffic and the bottleneck of a switchback in the middle of the main line might be a hindrance.
If you plan to model a one-train-at-a-time logging line, a switchback is fine, just as it was for the real thing.
There certainly are plans published with switchbacks. One that I remember somewhat recently was the compact Bristol Ferry Terminal in the Nov 2009 MR (based on an E.S. Seely design). There have probably been some since, but they don’t come immediately to mind.
There’s also a rough conceptual design for a switchback logging line published in the Spring 2011 Layout Design Journal as an illustration of a mainline passing more than once through a scene.
Are you planning a layout with only one or a couple of trains at a time and aren’t interested in hands-off continuous running? If so, a switchback main line may be fine.
Byron
The Mount Hood Railroad at Hood River, Oregon, also incorporates a switchback in its day-to-day operations. The line was built by forest interests but for the past several decades has hauled fruit, finished lumber and plywood, and tourists. It was owned by the Union Pacific at one time but is now in independent hands.
The Great Northern in the Cascades utilized a switchback before the tunnel.
EDIT: (unless of course it was meant to say “at the time”)
The Northern Pacific had a set of 3 switchbacks (1896-1898) in the mainline going over the Stampede Pass in the Cascade mountains before they tunneled under. It had grades up to 6% with a ruling grade of 5.6%. They had specially designed 2-10-0 locomotives (Baldwin I believe) to work that section of track. Two of the locos (one on each end) took trains of 5 cars at a time through the pass.
I’d bet a lot of mountain railroads had temporary switchbacks…the CPR used ten switchbacks (5 on either side) at a 4% grade with a wye in the middle to get over the ridge of a mountain west of Nelson, B.C. for two years while a tunnel was being built (the 1km long Bulldog Tunnel)
You can still see some of the switchbacks on the east side of the ridge in google maps, although the west (and wetter) side has become more overgrown in 110 years. Mind you, at that time there was no through line across southern B.C., just a bunch of short GNRy and CPR railways connected by railbarges/steamers to get between rivers, smelters, and mines. This particular stretch operated from 1898 until 1990, and is now a trail (one that I’ve biked both ends of, but never over)
Anyway, the link!
THANK YOU for adding that info, as I could only quote what my SVRR history book stated. Since SVRR was chartered and began in second half of 19th Century, switchback might have been built/ first used in the same time frame as GN. The B&M/ SVRR switchback was in use a minimum of 60 years, so that might be a historical record for use of one on a conventional [freight -passenger] rr line…papasmurf