Ok everyone - here it is! I have incorporated many of your suggestions and hopefully solved a few problems on my own. Please check it out and let me know what you think. I may have finally achieved the right plan. My prototype did not run real long trains, once in a while one of the NY Central Limiteds would get diverted to the Put if work was being done on the Hudson Division. Otherwise it was strictly short commuter trains and even gas-electrics. Will make great fun modeling it because of the diversity of engines and even roads I can model (NY Central, New Haven, Penn Central, Conrail).
The Put carried the first deisel passenger train in the US in 1929. I’m really excited about the redesign - as you can see from the time posted, I’ve been up late working on it. So give me the good, bad, and ugly before I finalize the design and begin construction. I really appreciate all your help and you have all been an invaluable resource.
It’s not all sectional track - I use flex in key spots to join the overall plan together. I like to use sectional track for planning, makes turn radius easy to rely on. I will probably replace alot of sectional straight track with flex track in actual construction. But I like sectional track for turns for radius reliability. The overall layout is 12’x17’ with walls against the top, right side, and bottom.
Surf - Unless my memory is mistaken, most of the old Put’s mainline in middle and upper Westchester was single tracked, except where it approached major station locations. While I gather that you’d rather not resort to the hassle of a single track with return loops and its associate wiring, I feel making your pair of mainline tracks tightly parallel would serve to better depict the prototype’s trackage. Widely separating the two tracks (one northbound the other southbound) I think looses the feel of the Put and creates an odd discontinuity in the succession of stations. And while I understand that various allowances must be made in a layout, having both of your tracks bridge the Croton Reservoir at the same time would also be more realistic and appropriate. You might also consider cutting back just a little on the Brewster engine facility
Personally, I’d be interested in seeing your approach to the City of Yonkers and especially the Dunwoodie station area. I traversed the adjacent Yonkers Ave. underpass there countless times in the distant past.
Have you considered a yard lead for Brewster Yard so that your switcher won’t be blocking the main? I like the double-ended yard with the run-around for the switcher and for the road engines to get to the servicing area. Great job!
OK, how about easing the “S” on the right with some flex track and adding a passing siding to the area down by the beer place. It might mean a curved turnout to make it happen, but if you don’t have a run around over there switching will be very tedious. Changes are in red;
very nice plan , mind if i steal parts of it ? [:)]
only things i see as problems are the long reach over the turntable/roundhouse to get to that turnout in the upper left corner , and the lack of runarounds near your industries , meaning they can only be switched from one direction . of course if that’s prototypical it’s not a problem , it’s a design feature
You have made some nice improvements to an already good plan.
I just have one area of concern left - well, the yard drill track is another, but that’s livable as is. The Bronx/Yonkers area cries for a passing track. I’m afraid if you don’t, your operations become very limited to trains running the main while Bronx and Yonkers become industrial scenery only. The easist way I see to add the passing track is to put a #4 right or Walters curved turnout in the coal yard lead and extend the new track parallel to the curve over to the condensery lead. There put another turnout to complete the passing/runaround track. You will have to adjust the entrance to the condensery, shopping, and engine house a little.
The passing/runaround track does 2 important functions if you follow my scenarios.
Scenario #1 (plan as is): Train leaves Brewster yard through Yorktown Heights with a loaded hopper for the coal yard; there is an empty hopper already there to be picked up. Loaded hopper must be put in FRONT of the engine at Brewster Yard and train must run pushing the loaded hopper all the way to the coal yard. At the coal yard, the train couples to the empty hopper, pulls it out to the main line, pushes it forward of the turnout and uncouples. Empty hopper is blocking main line. Train now pushes loaded hopper into coal yard, backs out, and reattaches to empty hopper. Empty hopper is pushed to Mahopac siding, where the train resorts itself, putting the empty hopper between the engine and caboose.
Scenario 2 (with passing siding): Same assignment. This time train departs Brewster with loaded hopper behind engine in normal train running mode. Actually, for most efficient switching, loaded hopper would be “blocked” just in front of caboose, but that really doesn’t matter. Train pulls into passing siding at Yonkers. Train can leave main clear for most part for other through trains. When main is available for local freight use, front end of trai
OK gang - good stuff. Hey CN - this is not a double track mailnline. I will be using scenery features and elevation to try and give the effect of one long mainline. Everyone seems to agree that a passing siding is needed in Yonkers/Bronx area - I heartly agree and think I may have a solution (similar to Phil’s solution). Will work on it and post. This is not copyrighted material and of course anyone is free to steal design ideas from me I will also be sure to give you all some credit when we get featured in MR next year! LOL. Keep the ideas coming!
I will also be sure to give you all some credit when we get featured in MR next year! LOL. Keep the ideas coming!