kevgos, I would be interested in prototype “route maps” that show evidence of a circle, oval, dog bone or anything else excpet a “Y” or turntables for reversing train direction. New York City’s Grand Central Terminal is one of the rare exceptions I am aware of that actually has a “U” shape reversing curve [not a “continous loop”)] which extends under Manhattan Burrough. I’m always excited over learning something new. Best regards.
As some of the guys in the previous replys have said, It’s probably best to have both point-to-point and a connector track between the end yards for continuous running. Without continuous running capability your engines never really warm up and get broken in, After too much point-to-point engines become stiff and balky, making operation a chore. Continuous running works in the lubrication and smooths out the gear teeth.
Prototype ovals? Biggest I know of is on the U.P.: Ogden almost to Green River; Green River to north of Montpelier; Montpelier back to Ogden (via Utah). The smallest was a freight-transfer railroad located in Manhattan, literally an oval running from a dock to a freight warehouse, with no interchange connections and curves sharp enough to put Tyco to shame. Unfortunately, I have forgotten the name but seem to recall it was mentioned in Droege, Freight Terminals and Trains (1916).
The U.P. oval covers a huge amount of territory. The nice thing about it is that there are major terminals spliced into each “corner” of the oval, so one can have his druthers whether to run point-to-point or continually.
I have a continuous loop and point to point where my yards are placed
Yes to all the above. Get experience operating as many other layouts as possible, and figure out what ideas press your buttons. My 18’ by 14’ double-deck has both options, utilising a double-ended partially-visible staging yard and a helix connecting this yard up to the top level “end-of-line” with respect to a point-to point theme, but the theory has both ends continuing on to other places. In hindsight, double-tracking would allow more action for solo operation, but could be dangerous with DCC…
Heef
I don’t know personally whether these loops are actually RUN as being such (logic would dictate yes, however, logic doesn’t always prevail), but they nonetheless abound - http://www.bnsf.com/about_bnsf/html/division_maps.html is the BNSF routemap with a plethora of ovals, and UP offers mre of the same at http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/maps/sysmap/index.shtml - just 2 examples.
kevgos yes, it is true: “what goes up must go down,” as well as “what goes East must go West.” There surely is a marked difference between a “circle” of many miles (prototype) compared with a few feet on a model Pike, isn’t there? Thanks for posting the maps, they are “keepers.” Best regards.
I’ve been on the VIA Rail train as it pulls into Vancouver. Actually, it pushes into Vancouver. There is not end loop, so they have to back into the station so the train is turned around ready to head back to Toronto. It seems to me that it takes up a lot of space to turn the train around, and freight trains are even longer.
I understand you want to be prototypical, but why can’t you just pretend that the train that left Vancouver and is pulling into Montreal is a completely different train (e.g. it was coming from Hallifax)?
jdbuss, you are right that it takes a lot of space to turn a train around on a wye. In fact, few layouts can afford such an expanse of area. I [like many others] use a turntable to overcome this conundrum. The “head-in cars” and steam must trundle to the turntable (reverse), then return to the consist (passenger) and “lash-up” front (loco, baggage, r.p.o., etc.) and rear (obs. car) Instead of using the road engine for “shifting” chores, I park that loco on a siding next to the turntable while a "yard goat " does the ‘shifting’ of cars to and from the consist. You bet, it is time consuming! However, this makes for some pretty interesting yard work. Lots of fun if you have another “through train” looming in the distance. Wow, does all that action impress guests, or what? Best of luck.
I’m glad to see some say “look at the prototype” to see what it should be. I’m doing the EJ&E which is P to P. Since it is multiple decks, continuous is tricky but I can add a lift out section at one end to loop back across an aisle for continuous runnning or for reseting after operations. The other end has a balloon track. Have fun planning and building. Sketch it both ways and see what works best for your want list.
Once upon a time, model railroaders would use “radial isle” as a track plan of preference. The bench work “snaked” from left to right exploiting maximum mainline length for linear distance available. This undulating configuration allowed easy access to every area on the pike as a bonus. Generally, the “radial isle” was point-to-point operations and caste in a mountainous setting. The advantages are obvious but the disadvantages aren’t readily apparent. Mainline operations are limited to back and forth directions (unless a hidden reverse loop is added). Rarely will a train attain speeds greater than a scale 40 to 45 m.p.h. due to the unending curves. This feature alone would probably lose over half of today’s MR’s instantly. However, for those intrested in scenic opportunities (mountains, valleys, lakes, trestles, etc.), realistic operation (way freight) and savoring a mountain division steam monster dragging 20 + cars through cuts and fills; the plan is irresistable. Nothing shows off fine detailed locos and rolling stock better than slow speeds at various angles through gentle radius “S” curves. Unfortunatly, natural scenery is my nemisis, so I opted for “city scape” but how I envy the MR with the artisitc skills for “bringing off” the serene majesty of a mountain Pike. Structures require craftsmen while mountains require artists, alas I fall into the first category. Still, it is railroading no matter our expertise and that brings us all together in these forums. “Enjoy yourslef, its later than you think.”
You appear ISO a method to employ both. Model Railroading is like landscaping. You are free to do as you please and nothing is ground in stone. Nevertheless, acknowledging a few principles will give you a more a more pleasing layout. Never employ a simple oval design and avoid a parallel tracks in your mainline (except if you are specifically double tracking). Consider a point to point with U-turns at each end. Have the return trip take a different route, to include differing towns and industrial areas. Your journey can employ modified figure eights to lengthen the trip within your space limitations. My layout is N-Guage on two 8’ X 4’ plywood tables layed out in an L shape. I have incorporated the Woodlands “SCENIC RIDGE” and the Terrain For Trains “HIGH SIERRA” and “QUARRY” moduals into my layout. My Mainline’s full journey is almost four scale miles. I also have a scale mile length trolley Ry and a branch line, both separate from the mailline and its sidings. Regardless of what scale you choose or your space limitations or lack there of, I’m sure you’ll find the layout that you idealise.
When I finally start my layout, it will be a shelf layout, with an unscenicked loop to make an oval out of it.
That is, imagine standing looking at an 8 or 10 feet long by 2 or 2.5 feet deep shelf layout. Then an unscenicked loop goes around your back, connecting the left and right ends. The unscenicked portion could also contain a double-ended staging yard.
I will “pretend” the staging is the rest of the world, and I’m just viewing trains as they enter and leave the switching layout.
This will allow both continuous operation, while not having a loop really in view. (if you want to be hardcore, you could block the return loops visibility from visitors for the ultimate realism.
My “loop” will be easily detachable, so it doesn’t have to up and taking up space in the garage all the time. It could also be cheap atlas code 100 flextrack, etc.
I don’t personally like the look of a loop on a table, but I also remember from my last layout as a kid, that sometimes I like to chill out and just watch that noisy deisel pull some cars by 2" from my nose over and over again…
I think this concept is a solution.
Do both, with some planning my layout is designed so it can be run either directly point to point, or it can be left on a loop for running.
http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudyDOWNSIZEnew%20studyB1-6-05.pdf
Keep in mind this layout is large scale and therefore the scales are bit large, but the same ideas apply to HO O or N.
My opinion is to have both options. Use point to point for operating sessions and continuous loop when you just want to run a train or for open house occasions. I’m still in the construction phase but plan for staging at each end of a point to point with hidden reverse loops which cut off just a little ways before the staging. By throwing a few turnouts, I can change from point to point to continuous run.
If you plan things right, you can have both. Originally I planned for point-to-point, and revised the plan and benchwork to add a continuous loop and a few extra staging tracks for my kids. They each want their own train, and only desire to see it come and go, unlike my liking trains terminating in a small yard, with rolling stock to be tacked onto a through freight or built into a local or two. So now I’m building a point-to-point with a loop in the middle – and the loop doubles as a yard lead to boot. As the railroad expands, (this means as I can steal more space in the basement from the family) a branch extension is planned to form a second loop, although more than half of that loop will entail hidden track. Do what you want – there are no concrete rules, except to have fun.
Very few model railroaders can afford a 747 size aircraft hanger, even if offered at a tremendous bargain. Therefore, harsh reality dictates that our dream layouts be somewhat smaller than our dreams. A reasonable compensation is to provide (or allow) tracks to serve as multiple functions to match the overall usage of the layout.
From this, I gotta go with the several who suggest including provisions for both point-to-point and continuous running. Very prototypical. Trains run only on the tracks they need to run on; they don’t run on every track in sight !!!
As my soggy memory would now serve, some years ago, in one of the hobby magazines, there was a concept plan for an interesting multi-use yard. The layout was a basic loop, around the walls of an average size room. Along three walls were a few sidings, small industries, etc. The “heart” of this concept was a very large, double-end yard, with roundhouse, etc. etc. (Lottsa ETC.) This layout could be used for:
- Continuous Running: (Obvious)
- Through Freights: pull out of one end of the yard, run for the needed mileage, then pull into the other end of the yard. Your basic point-to-point, with a lot more running between the “points” and done with a single yard. (And where are the Model Railroad Police to say ya can’t use a yard more than once ???)
- Drag Freights (or whatever ya wanna call 'em): pull out of one end of the yard, run a shorter distance and pull into an on-line yard for a set-out and a pick-up (more than one one set-out or one pick-up, ya gotta use a yard crew). Pull out and repeat as desired. End the run by pulling into the other end of the yard (through freight style - but with the prototypical intermediate stops).
- Way Freight: Pull out of the yard and work the industries & siding between the yards, as needed. Terminate as above.
- Transfer Freight: (ala Chicago, yard-to-yard drag): Put everything except the yard office behind one SW or one 0-6-0 and let it take all day to drag on
wccobb, “wise beyond your years!” I only wish all of the options you mentioned were possible in a garage layout with the car inside or an apartment Pike where the Landlord doesn’t even allow pets. Oh well, all of us are Dreamers, Gypsies, Empire Builders, Displaced Historians, or just plain “Train Nuts.” One day, I will buy a building devoted entirely to MRing and live in either the attic or the basement. Best regards.
[quote]
Originally posted by nobullchitbids
The smallest (loop) was a freight-transfer railroad located in Manhattan, literally an oval running from a dock to a freight warehouse, with no interchange connections and curves sharp enough to put Tyco to shame.
Actually, the ‘dock’ was a car float apron, the ultimate interchange track! RR was the Jersey Central, minimum curve radius was 90 feet (12.5 inches in HO) and the loop wrapped around a freight house. This was the home of CNJ 1000, the first U.S. diesel. Needless to say, the designers never anticipated auto racks, 89 foot hi-cubes or hundred ton hoppers!
My feeling is that for a home layout people would like to have the best of both worlds. We like to have realistic operating sessions with our fellow hobbyiests. At the same time, we like the continuous run option when we are the only ones around and are doing some scenic work on our layouts or when non-model railroaders are visiting. The key is finding a clever trackplan which can incorporate both aspects without people realizing it.
A really great trackplan is Paul Dolkos’ Boston and Maine RR. From an operations standpoint there is more than enough to keep a crew occupied. It is listed as a 16 by 29 foot layout but that includes the second room which functions as a staging. But on close inspection the layout is a well executed dog bone. The looping ends of the bone are hidden from the main layout – one underneath the scenery and the other in an adjoining room. On that layout the point to point aspects can provide a satisying operating session. The continuous run option could keep a den of cub scouts engaged for 45 minutes.