Happy New Year!! This is my first post… I’m in the midst of planning my N-scale layout. The dimensions are 22’ x 2’ with 4’x6’ peninsulas at each end. My question is whether a 2 track mainline is preferable/ better than a single track mainline with sidings?? I will be running both passenger and freight. Thanks
Happy New Year!
Welcome to the forums.
It’s really up to you and what you are trying to model. If you want to be running two trains at once, the double track is better. If you want to model a smaller railroad, single track where trains have to meet at designated sidings would be the way to go.
Even with the double track you may want some crossovers between the two and sidings where your trains can deliver and pick up cars.
Do you have an era, location and prototype you would like or you totally freelancing?
I suggest you get a couple of books on starting out in model railroading either from our host at SHOP above or at your local hobby shop. Many of them will give you some ideas to help you focus on what type of railroadiing you want to do.
Have fun,
Richard
Hi Jim,
I think the question is what are you trying to model? I’m sure you will get lots of opinions on both sides.
Locally, the Springfield to New Haven line (Amtrack) was double mainline. Amtrack took out the double and went to a single in the 80’s to save money. Now the State of CT is going back to double to get higher passenger speeds. What a waste of money. Plus on part of the line, the third right of way is being converted to a busway.
I am just in the research stages of starting a new layout based on the New England Class II Pan Am railway (ex-Guilford). In places on their system they have a triple track main. Two for Pan Am and one for Amtrack.
So are you basing this layout on any Prototype? If so what is common on the prototype.
If you are not, then two questions to ask yourself.
Do you just like to watch trains run? Then a double main might be for you.
Are you more into operations? Then a single main might work better.
One last option gives you an interesting modeling feature. A single main while modeling a second being installed track crews.
As someone else says on the forum. My thoughts your choices.
Posting a track plan may help you get better advice as well.
Good Luck, Derek
Definitely double mainline. I love to see two trains passing each other in opposite directions.
HI,
On a single track mainline on a layout the size you are building, the number of passing-sidings can easily be sufficient to have more then one train running at the very same time. However how would you operate those trains?
Do you like to watch them rolling unattended with you as the sole operator? In different directions? Then a double track main would do great.
When a second operator is involved and you like to set up meets or you like to have a fast hotshot overtaking a slow drag probably a single track main would be interesting.
I would pay attention to staging as well. It will anable you to let a train leave the scene for far away destinations while another train can be entering the scene.
Smile
Paul
Hi, and welcome to the Forums!
Your layout dimensions are a bit unusual, but since you are modeling in N, you should do just fine.
I wrestled with your question when I rebuilt an 11x15 HO layout. The first version (1993-2008) had a single main with a couple passing sidings. The new version is a double main with crossovers. For me, the double main is much more “entertaining”.
The problem I see with a 2 foot wide layout is (assuming you are doing this) getting half circles on the ends (or wherever). An 11 inch radius for N is OK, but to have a parallel track means it would be perhaps 9 or 9 1/2 inch radius, which for anything of size would look “funny”. If you could widen the ends of the 22 foot shelf by say 6 inches, you could do so much more with it and a dual main would work out great.
Of course, it all depends on what you are trying to do, and maybe a double main on the long side that blends to a single return 180 degree loop on the ends will be fine too.
Generally speaking, the 2-track mainline, is preferable as per previous thoughts above.
Note, each double mainline track does not need to be at the same elevation as each other on their 22’ run. Do allow for “gentle curving” on that 22-footer avoiding the less-interesting scenery with straight-track mainline(s) 100% parallel to benchwork and backdrop edges. You can still easily do sidings with a 2-track mainline.
The 4’x6’ end-peninsulas have neat possibilities for different dogbone-designs plus gentle elevation planning due to the 22’ runs to each peninsula gaining elevation with a lower grade. These designs include overpasses, spirals, yards, figure/8, etc. For example, there could be an overpass of one end of a staging yard, or engine servicing yard.
You get my vote for a double main line with crossovers and sidings.
That’s my arrangement in HO scale, and the operating possibilities are virtually limitless.
Rich
I am a long time HO modeler going back to the 1960’s. Now, having established I am an old " "', have had layouts since my father, a Santa Fe engineer built the first one. I don’t know what you are modeling or if you are a serious modeler, beginner, tinker, etc. But I have always modeled prototype (real railroad) since 1960 and with the exception of one freelanced branch railroad that connected to my Santa Fe (and still does) I modeled the Santa Fe. The current layout is three decks and models the Santa Fe in Oklahoma, running from Arkansas City Ks (staging) through Oklahoma City and into staging. In addition, I also model the Enid District branching off at Guthrie and running through Enid to Kiowa Ks and Waynoka. All of this on a three deck layout 36ft by 33ft.
Now the point is, I am trying to model the railroad in 1989-1990 so where there was double track on the prototype, there is double track on the model, where there was/is single mainline on the prototype, I model on the layout, plus the towns, local industries etc. I use hidden staging. It is complete with scenery and is operated on a regular basis.
The whole point I am trying to make is this. If you are modeling a real railroad in a real location, your mainlines should reflect the prototype, same with yards, industries, etc.
If you are freelancing, which it sounds like you may be doing, then single/double track is at your choice.
But again, if you are prototype modeling, you will want to stay with the prototype track as much as possible.
Bob
LION has FOUR TRACK mane line. Well, lions are different. My previous layout was a single track main line, with more than 100 scheduled daily trains. (All passenger trains – LIONS like passengers – taste like chicken.) The problem, a fun problem with which I spent many many hours manipulating with string charts is to schedule meets in such a manner as to run trains as needed by service demands (rush hours) and timing to meet at stations that had passing sidings. The fewer sidings you have the more difficult it is to schedule a decent flow of trains. My timetables extended well beyond the layout that I modeled, but I created on paper the entire railroad with its passing sidings, so trains arriving from staging had to take into account that they were running on a single track and had to meet trains that were leaving the layout: A train could not disappear around the bend, just to be replaced by an incoming train. They had to have time to stage their meet and the next passing siding out of town was at least a 30 minute run.
Right here, in our front yard, so to speak, we have about 20 trains a day, all on a single track. Passing sidings are in Taylor (7 miles west of us) and in Antelope (5 miles east of us), and the trains are all dispatched out of Fr. Worth, TX. There is an Ethanol plant in town, a Brick Factory and a new grain elevator east of us, a grain elevator west of us, and Halliburton has plans for a big material depot here in town. There are oil loading facilities in Dickinson, and most of our traffic consists of through coal trains.
Coal, Grain, Oil, Corn, Ethanol, Brewer’s Yeast, water and sand are all big commodities out here. There is a lot to do with a ten mile stretch of track in the middle of nowhere.If you like mind puzzles, single track is the way to go. If you want to run trains, put in a double track.
ROAR
With single track, you can do it one way. The meet way. One train holds up while another takes the main beside it. Then that train moves on. Therefore, you will still need sidings of a length.
With double track, you can do it both ways. You can pretend that there is heavy maintenance or a derailment in a section and still make trains meet on the one track if you would like the more intense and involved operations. Otherwise, let trains pass each other, or overtake one another when both lines are clear.
Crandell
It’s your railroad, …run it as you wanna!
I prefer to have two track mainlines as I like to have at least two trains running at the same time that don’t need a lot of fussing over them. But that is ME.
What do YOU prefer?
Are you going to run passenger and frieght on mixed trains, or separate each? Or do you really want to trade them off on a single mainline?
I would still have siding spurs for interest, and an engine facility and yard If I had the room.
Speaking of trains running…have you decided on DCC or DC operations? DCC operations would make it easier on you as you controll each loco {or MU’d loco sets} individually rather than control the track current for the locos to run on.
DIgital Command Control info is here: http://www.tonystrains.com/tonystips/dccprimer/index.htm IF you are unfamiliar with it.
Decide on your power options and your track requirements and go from there.
Have Fun and [#welcome]
[8-|]
My vote is for a double main line for the reasons mentioned above.
Use a double or two single crossovers to enable the trains to change tracks.
Another interesting possibility is to create two reversing loops. Each of these will require an electronic reverser to keep the track polarity correct.
With these two options you can change tracks as well as the direction the trains are running.
Keep in mind the importance of laying perfect track. Laying track seems simple and it may look good but your engines particulary steamers may find otherwise. Now is the time to get it RIGHT, not after it’s been glued down, weathered, and ballasted.
Good luck
Bob
Sounds as if you have a classic dogbone layout footprint, which lends itself to any kind of track arrangement you prefer.
So, are you trying to follow a specific prototype, or prototype practice of a specific area and era, or are you going to freelance? Do you like to watch trains meeting each other at track speed while you relax in your La-Z-Boy? Would like to do road switching with a local freight while all those rush-hour commuters fly by nose-to-tail on the other main track? Or would you prefer to be Harry Dispatcher, fighting to keep the single track line (with barely-adequate sidings) over Nameless Pass from strangling the rest of the railroad? (there’s a pun in there, if you can catch it.)
My suggestion is, sketch up plans for both varieties, then ‘operate’ train markers over both and try them out.
If you are a trainwatcher at heart, and not locked to a single prototype, you will probably find that double track is more to your liking. If you want a railroad that requires constant attention then build a single track with sidings. If, like Pastor Bob and myself, you are modeling a specific prototype at a specific place and time, build what the prototype had and live with the consequences.
So, what does this oddball Japanophone have? A really long loop, mostly hidden, which has one stretch of single track but is mostly double. There’s also a second route which is ‘pure’ single track point-to-point. This is the final distillation of a master plan that has been forty-eight years in the making. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone not walking in my shoes.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - since 1964)
Thanks for all of the your thoughts!! I will be “freelancing” as they say,the inspiration being the SP Sunset Route. I will be modeling the WWII era with both steam and early diesel,both passenger and freight. The way I look at it a double main will allow me to let the trains go…2 at a time and I can add sidings/ crossings to it to create areas of congestion/ operations(freight yards/ industries,etc). I would love to have a prototypical layout depicting the SP operations in LA during WWII,but it just seems too difficult to do. This being not only from the size standpoint but also available structures,etc…
The prototype and era I am modeling was double tracked and in my early years of railfanning I never saw complications of meets or passes – the local switcher would be out of the way for the scheduled passenger trains, and the freights were few and far between because the same railroad (C&NW) had a parallel freight only line just a few miles to the west. Now and then you’d see two trains at once but they were on opposite mains. I mention this because for some people it is the challenge of meets and passes that make operating sessions fun. I anticipate that once my railroad starts operating sessions they may well seem rather bland to experienced operators, and the DS is likely to want some magazines to read to alleviate boredom.
Once Amtrak came along and CNW passenger service ended it did not take them long to rip out the second main – and now very few freights use it as well. But there are other local railroads who ripped out second mains in reliance on what CTC could do for them that have come to realize that the old railroad planners in the pre CTC era knew a thing or two about practical realities – sometimes you need a passing siding and there is no passing siding. Crews go dead and yards get plugged.
Obviously a double tracked main takes up some real estate that might otherwise be devoated to lineside structures and the like. A double, triple (as in the CB&Q/BN/BNSF between Chicago and Aurora IL) or LION’s quadruple track main can certainly look visually impressive particularly if you have broad curves. I would say however that a double track main where the curves are, say, 18"and 22" radius can actually look more toylike than if you had a single track main, even if the curves were 18" I do not know why this is so, it is a psychological thing somehow.
Another factor is that a single track line can be a lonely branch line or
My previous railroad looked like it was double tracked, but it was not. The tracks were different routes with different destinations, they just ran side by side for a while, and I thought that looked good.
ROAR
Mine is double most of the layout other than one section that goes to a single main line before doing a climbing loop much like the Tehachapi Loop.
The SP Sunset route was single tracked for most of the route outside of major terminals.
As others have said, it really boils down to what train density, how many operators and whether you want train “scenery”.
Do you really want to have the same train orbiting by you every 2 minutes? If its just you operating you will have to stop what you are doing to change out the scenery trains. Will you have enough staging capacity to have prebuilt scenery trains or will you have to switch them up and assemble them. Build a train run it clockwise for 20 orbits while you build the next train, then run that train counterclockwise for 20 orbits while you switch the first train and build a 3rd.
The advantage of a single track line on a one operator layout is it forces you to pretty much operate one train at a time, which is really all you can concentrate on anyway.
Just for information, if you are modeling WW2, you won’t be modeling many freight diesels (other than switch engines). The only freight diesels available were EMD FT’s and RS1’s (not owned by the SP) and switch engines . All other freight diesels were post WW2. F3’s were 1945 and F7’s/GP7’s weren’t made until 1949. RS2’s were 1946 and RS3’s 1950.
I will put a good word in for the single track line… unless you have a lot of room (like a basement), the single line looks better. Moreover one line meandering through the countryside is more common and looks more realistic than a double track line.
Also keep in mind the motive power and rolling stock you will be running. If you’ve got tight curves you will need lots of room between the tracks, and that takes away from the realism. Also, keep in mind that tunnels and bridges will need to be double tracked too… a headache you might not want to undertake.