I need suggestions. The trackage on the left is my current plan for my HO yard.
Trains arrive on A/D track, engine goes to Turntable area, and swticher brings cars to Yard. The mainline goes to a return loop. It seems TOO COMPLEX, TOO MANY turnouts, and a low-angle crossing if it fits (14deg ???).
In the next plan I avoid the crossing at the expense of maybe fouling the Main.
In the third plan I tried a 3-way instead of double crossover (DCC Code 83 most likely Shinohara $$).
I have Double Slips in my one yard and they work well!
They could replace the low angle crossing in the Left Drawing!
I used them to replace 6 turnouts in the yard which added one car on each of the years tracks and allowed the Yard OP to usilize the yard tracks much better!
I used Shinohara turnouts (but my track is c100) Walthers make them in c83 which are made by Shinohara anyway!
The turnouts get a work out during my twice mothly OPs Sessions and have been for 2 years now with no problems!
I use Shinohora and PECO double slips and 3 ways, no problems. I would ask myself if I need that seperate track from mainline to yard, it looks kind of yellow colored. A/D track with double crossover to mainline is fine to me. But, if possible I like taking yard leads off of side track such as your A/D vs mainline.
BTW, I have run double mainlines and have had one cross over the other into yard lead-A/D. Just make sure schedules are good–lol. Also, multiple A/Ds are find too, many times one for each is good so an A and a D track. Good time to consider drill track of some type.
what about a right handed turnout on the mainline replacing the double slip allowing a train to reach the yard, and a left handed turnout on TT allowing a train from A/D to reach the mainline?
Thank you for your suggestions. Several good ideas here, much to think about.
I have heard low angle crossings can be problematic (like 45deg better than 14deg). I like double slips because they are either straigth through or a gentle curve. Maybe the double crossover should be one too - just need to find or make a diagram with 2 of them.
The real probelm here is it works in one direction (top of picture to bottom), but opposite direction is inefficient. Wish I had more room (and more A/Ds).
Since your A/D track is adjacent to your mainline reverse loop all you need is the single crossover, without the two extra turnouts and the crossing. I would use the yard approach from the left (crossing) plan rather than a three-way. If the angle is appropriate, a double slip could be substituted for the low angle crossing on TT, which would allow for slightly longer trains to be assembled before adding the road loco, and would also allow for engine changes on the main without fouling the yard. (I assume that TT means turntable, and that your return loop loops around your locomotive service facility.)
Think like the prototype. Always try to use the simplest standard units when designing specialwork. (I roll my own, so cost limitations don’t apply, but two standard turnouts end to end have one less frog than a three-way…)
Thanks! The single crossover to keep is the one from the upper left to lower right, correct? This would be the mirror image of the other end of the A/D where it comes off the main.
Yes, return loop baloons around the engine servicing & turntable.
believe we’re both on the same page. Arriving trains will head into the A/D track after rounding the reverse loop. Departing trains head (drawing) downward and round the loop before heading upward on the main. Good way to add length to the run.
I have no idea what the space or the rest of the plan looks like so it’s easy to think outside the box… there is no box. [:)]
What if you moved the turnout that creates the loop farther back up the line before the A/D track so it simulates a transition to a double track main? You could then put the yard between the east and west bound mains and put the engine terminal in the loop.
No complicated trackwork required. But then complicated trackwork looks cool…
Thanks, but this change is not possible for me. The mainline, Arrival/Departure track, and loop are fixed. The turntable is inside the loop. I think I might be too hung up on “fouling the main”.
You only have to worry about fouling the main if a superior train has authority to use it. If your train has that authority, you have until ten minutes before the Limited is due to get out of the way.
Of course, since our model empires are Reader’s Digest editions of reality, your authority might not last very long…
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - TTTO 24/30)
I’ve been trying to follow this, but I keep getting lost in the verbiage. Unless I’m missing something, it seems like you can do what you want to do without all this complicated trackage. How about trying this:
Take a piece of paper and draw a pair of vertical lines to represent your tracks. Put a right-hand crossover at the top, and a left-hand crossover at the bottom. You can ignore the track on the right side. Draw two turnouts on the left side track leading downward, one above the other, in between the crossovers. Extend the lines downward.
This gives you four tracks on the bottom. From left to right, they are YARD LEAD, REVERSE LOOP ENTRY, TURNTABLE, and REVERSE LOOP EXIT.
No double crossovers, no slip switches, and no three way turnouts. Just four right-hand turnouts and two left-hand. Is there something I’m missing?
My first impression is that the double crossover is unnecessary, Since the A/D track branches off the mainline further up the layout, why would a train or loco coming down the A/D track re-enter the mainline via the double crossover. Wouldn’t it be headed to the TT or the yard? Trains or locos exiting the TT or yard don’t need the double crossover to re-enter the mainline since the A/D track accomplishes that further up the layout. So, I see the double crossover as unnecessary.
If you decide to go with the crossing option, I have a similar configuration on my layout, and the Peco Insulfrog turnout and crossing work best considering that the mainline and A/D tracks run parallel to one another with 2" spacing. I would stay with the crossing.
A double slip or a 3-way present switching problems because their point throws are not intuitive. Using a double slip or a 3-way requires two point throws, and it hard to remember which way to throw them for the proper track alignment. I wound up using a control panel and LEDs to remind myself.
Here is another thought. Why have the yard outside the loop and inaccesible from the TT and servicing facility? I drew up a plan in which the yard would be inside the loop, while eliminating the double crossover, the crossing and one of the RH turnouts. That way, you eliminate three of the six specialty tracks and avoid fouling the mainline.
After reading Richhotrain’s comments, I think my simplified arrangement may still be more complicated than necessary. Maybe the lower (left hand) crossover could be eliminated. That means you could do it with four right-hand turnouts and nothing else.
Your suggestion is by far the best for me. Simply moving the lower A/D-to-Main crossover so the yard lead and reversing loop branch off the A/D eliminates all the complexities.
My only problem is that the reverse loop will be automated (PSX-AR detects a train enters the loop and throw the turnout). With your suggestion the rev. loop enter/exit point is no longer a single turnout. Also the A/D becomes part of the mainline instead of a separate “siding”.
