I recently fell in love with the #10 turnouts from Atlas, and decided to try and work some into my N-scale layout. This got me to rework my main yard area, and while I was at it I figured I’d try to find a way to incorporate better design. My original version had no drill track; I figured the yard ladders were long enough to facilitate classification switch moves. However, the lack of a drill meant that trains on the A/D track couldn’t get broken down without fouling the main.
I’ve already laid most of the track on the 5’ segment that includes the Depot, so any changes here mean taking up track and relaying it. Thus, I wanted to minimize the changes. Obviously, the new #10’s mean pulling up the Micro-Engineering #6’s that are there, and to get them to fit I had to reposition a few other things.
The A/D track is longer than the drill; there’s about 3 more feet of it not shown in these images. But if I moved the switch from A/D to drill further east, to equalize lengths, then the crossover from A/D to Main would have to move as well, and both these things would limit train length on the A/D. In my operational scheme, long trains arrive from points east and then get broken down to become shorter trains before crossing the mountains to the west. Some of these are cuts of empty hoppers - the “upper yard” is for coal marshalling, as there are several mines to the west. 25-car trains behind 3-unit lashups arrive, get received into the upper yard, and then later 15-car trains behind 2-unit lashups head out as mine turns. So, classification is not a terribly busy job; other traffic is primarily bridge traffic, with just a few cars for local delivery.
The drill will have to rise somewhat with the main, as it climbs the 3/4 helix. Initially, I wanted this to be lonely single track main to put distance between Winchester and the next town (Oxmore), so the length of the drill track detracts from this scenic goal; this represents a compromis
Actually the #6 switches would be more prototypical into the yard. Large number switches are used in high speed applications. Going into a yard isn’t a high speed application, so there is no real need for a high speed switch. If you like them there its fine, but comparatively the prototype would have used a #6 or #8 switch.
The drill being shorter than the longest track isn’t a problem, it just means you have to switch trains in two cuts.
If the appearance of “double track” bothers you, detail the two tracks differently, put the main up on a high ballast section (cork roadbed) and the drill on the subroadbed (plywood). Since you aren’t going all the way around with the lead (why not?) there is nothing that says it has to follow the main. after you come under the bridge angle the drill straight and level through the center of the loop. You aren’t going to lose much run and you physically separate the two. Other wise run the drill around the loop about another 1/3 of a circle and hide the backside of the circle behind trees or buildings so you can’t see it. You get a longer drill. Nothing says the drill HAS to go up. You could make it about 1/2 to 1" smaller radius and keep it level. Once again, that physically separates the two tracks and makes it look less like double track.
If you ever get into prototype operations you will want the A/D track to be either a siding or a yard track (A/D) but not both. If its a siding, then the yard can’t block it without the dispatcher’s permission. If its a yard track then the dispatcher can’t make a meet without talking to the yard.
You will want yard limits on the main track since every engine will have to cross the main track between the engine facilities and the yard.
I would take one track from the lower yard and make a 2nd A/D track. I would also move the caboose track to the back along the upper y
I’d go with the no. 10s. You aren’t losing much in siding length and they do look nice. You’ve located most of them on the main track. They aren’t too large to be prototypical. Prototype railroads use/d #12s and much larger.
Oh, what you label as the mainline is actually the main track. Main lines are the primary tracks of a railroad. A main track is a track extending through yards and between stations over which trains are operated by time table, track warrant, train order, or signal indication.
As for #10’s versus #6’s, my intention was always just to employ them on the main and sidings that tie into the main directly; my entire layout was initially planned around Micro-Engineering #6’s, and I’m now trying to work in #10’s where feasible. I’m also trying to be a bit more diligent about routing the main through the straight leg, whereas before I had the main sometimes running through the diverging route of those #6’s. I can’t avoid the diverging route everywhere, but if I can get a #10 in there, it’s almost like having two straight legs anyways, right?!?
As for a second A/D track, I’ve been wondering about that too. Maybe I’ll have to see what I can squeeze in there. I thought one of the concerns mentioned might be undersized yards, and yet I’m seeing advice to trade away one yard track for a second A/D. As to why there are two distinct yards, partly this is topographical - the town is on kind of a hill, with the main descending slightly (less than 1%) as it goes east, and the yards are on terraces at slightly different elevation. That’s primarily an aesthetic decision, though it does also fit with the geography of the area and the Class-2 nature of my railroad (they would not have spent huge money leveling a large plateau). I recognize that a second A/D track would permit one train to be under assembly by the switching crew while another track receives an inbound train. As for slow switching moves amongst the two yards, my intention is that such moves are rare, as trains are blocked either as coal drags or as any other freight, and one yard is exclusively for coal marshaling. But perhaps I can steal a track from the upper yard, shift the lower over, and find space for A/D #2.
Part of the length of the lower yard prior to ladder is due to the imposition of I-81 as a major overpass, requiring spaces for its supports. Another aesthetic choice, and I want to model this as a neat viaduct of art deco characteristics, based on a single span bridge