I’ve been working on layout design for the CT River Valley RR and have a new variation. I would appreciate some feedback, mainly looking for operational issues and potential DCC issues (not sure if this is an Electronics Forum question).
There is a PDF version of the design that has lot’s of detail and also has the lower level staging (about 7 to 8 inches down using a ‘Nolex’).
Amtrak trains use the lower 2 tracks in the yard at top, CSX and other freight the upper 2 tracks. Passenger service will mainly use the outer curves (28in nominal); freight the inner curves (25in nominal) and branch (22 or 24 inch). No easements as of yet, but the larger (#8) turnouts provide a minimum easement.
I like the track plan, Alan. It is something I would enjoy. The only issues I see are that you have sharp corners showing on your bench, and they will be a problem with the tight squeezes you are going to impose on yourself and visitor in the operating spaces. Reaching into that lower blob may present some stiff challenges, too. But the arrangements of the rails appeals to me.
It would be a goal of mine to link the tail on that ‘middle’ yard in a curve, even if it had to be tight, to the inner vertical track where you show a split into double track. Just substitute another turnout past the split.
On the left side if you connected the wye track to the tail of the reverse loop and connected the lead on the right end of the station to a point on the reverse loop, you would create a continuous running loop around the visible portion of the layout. Might be fun for open houses, breaking in engines or just watching things go.
I’m using rectangles for now to speed up my planning efforts; corners will be trimmed back (assuming that plywood is used in the blobs). The lower blob is an issue re: reach. I can always build it in sections adding roadbed, track and scenery to the back half first. The staging level has a big hole in the center, that could be extended upward to the top level (thus needed a curved backdrop?)
According to DigiTrax, the lower level staging loop (minus the double cross-over) requires two auto reversing units. As the major loops on the main level are basically the same design, I’m thinking at least 6 at this point.
If you mean the one at the east (right) end of Union Station, lengthening the yard track impacts the reverse curve connecting to the main line.
Alan
Revised version of main level to reflect some feedback above.
I think you have taken a major step by creating staging under your lowest blob. But I have still a lot of questions.
Why not add a second loop under your central peninsuala? So you get a realpoint to point with both loops hidden and both perfect for staging.
Why the extra turnback connections? It is making your layout seem smaller.
I asked you a couple of times about your thoughts about a railroad postoffice or a LCL-building so your passenger train has something to do, beside running. The same about freight operations.
I would build something like this:
A much longer visible main and a small yard, freight trains can drop or pick up a cut of cars here. The local switches the spurs around Springfield. It seems to be a crossing, but in Springfield I have used one double-slip-switch. BTW the central peninsuala is a copy from Bob Smaus’ SP Los Angelos District; as I said before he has added a nice freighthouse, a ramp and team tracks to his downtown scene.
It could be accommodated, but I am trying to keep some storage space open under part of the layout (sacrificed the entire center of the basement for the the layout.
It was a decision to use Union Station in Springfield, MA as a prototype (with modification). The real yard is across the CT River in West Springfield (off stage top left).
I’m not much of an operations person; the layout is as much a creative outlet as something to have fun with as it get built. I have been adding yards and spurs to my original thinking to allow for some operations.
Really, I am not familiar with that layout. I picked up part of the yard layout from John Armstrong designs. As I said I have been adding possibilities for operation. Also, I have industries that are part of the scenery, and it makes no sense just to drop them into the layout without tying them to the RR. If I had the space, I would model part of East Hartford which has a large yard and multiple spurs serving manufacturing facilities.
A lot of the specifics are based on what I see in and around Enfield, Windsor, and Springfield. This extends to the planned AMTRAK station in Enfield (this is a real-life proposal) next to the abandoned casket factory (a double track reduced to single track with missing girder bridges). Or, adding a small lumber yard, John Deere dealership or the commercial, RR, shopping are in Windsor (along with my Kibri Roman Catholic church - which sites just south of the real downtown Windsor).
While on vacation I had time to think about the track plan some more (actually used it to go to sleep with).
Anyway, now that I’m back I made some additional changes to improve access to the layout and added some needed elements (e.g., a programming track.)
The RightTrack RAL file is HEREwhile a two page PDF file is HERE (better viewing of the design than jpegs).
