Wouldn’t the location of isolation matter if DC or DCC?
One thing I like is the idea of making a train appear that it travels “beyond the layout.” You can do that my removing the reverse loop by the double-ended yard (the one without the turntable). In doing that, you now have two parallel tracks.
No, that’s not what I meant. WHat I meant was remove ALL of that track. Come off the other end of the yard to go over to the turntable area. ANd JUST to the turntable area. Heck, there’s enough toom ro add another track to the yard as well. ANd then for the industry on the right, use a right-hand turnout off the passing siding a the top. Those tro tracks don;t need to cross. I don;t see what purpose that serves, other than to get a single direction reverse loop in there, which isn;t really needed. For out and back operation, you don;t need a reversing section, you can turn the train in the yard and go back the way you came, and for continuous running, you just go around the loop, so without ANY reversing section, you’ve got both out and back type operation as well as an option for continuous run to just watch the trains roll by.
Trainzman2435, you do have options. If you are reluctant to follow Randy’s suggestion, then stick with your original idea of reversing the upper loop, using the Peco double slip as part of the reversing movements. The only limitation with that plan is that you can only reverse trains in a single direction. However, if you add a second reversing section to the bottom loop, you can then return the trains to the original direction. That would give you lots of flexibility.
Personally I miss the ability to reverse the direction of an entire train. The final drawing takes that away. A passenger train with an observation car would have to use the turntable or the five finger method to reverse directions same as the locomotives.
My layout isn’t large enough to have dual loops so I built in a wye into the loop. I have to back the entire train into the wye to turn it back to normal which is a PITA but I can reverse the complete train without the five finger mode.
At least with a wye you can go both ways. The way this was, you could go from ccw to cw, but not back again the other way.
Passenger cars? What are those? Even thr prototype had a way around turning the train - the Reading Crusader ran an observation car on each end, the loco just switched ends. The tender of the assigned locos had an extended shroud to hid the observation end on the one coupled to the loco.
Yes, either add the second one to go back, or take them both off. Not have one reverse loop connection which just seems like a bunch of contrived trackage to me with that double slip and the same track serving both the engine facility AND industry all the way down at the other end - ruins the illusion of distance.
If the yard at the bottom of the upper leg and the passing siding at the top of it are supposed to be two different places - they shouldn’t be directly connected with a relatively short track.
Also, here is the design as Rich suggested with the double slip removed as well as the industries being accessed from the upper passing siding as opposed to running from the lower yard tracks…Let me know what you guys think…Thanks!
The problem I have with the reverse loop with double slip one is there’s no way to get to the engine facility from the yard, like in the second one, which is what I was talking about. Now, if there is still room to sneak in a diagonal track, then maybe you can have both - the two reverse sections PLUS the enginer terminal connected to the yard.
And I think you could fit that in, the upper one would go the other way - upper left to lower right, from the siding to the right side of the yard. And the lower one would go from the right side of the staging yard up to the main just before the loop.
Another reason to do away with the reverse loop connections is that in the second plan, you can have the track at the top, and that industry, at a higher elevation than the yard. Cross the tracks over one another with a grade separation at the base of the middle pennisula instead of a level crossing. Flop sides on the penninsula - so the track makes an X at the base, one track over the other. Go all the way to the bottom, so the loop at the lower right has the train go around clockwise, on a downgrade, with the staging under the main. Reducing that section’s width, allowing for bigger aisles and/or making the penninsula wider to put more industries along it.
Okay everyone, thanks for all the excellent input, suggestions and recommendations…Now, what is your alls final concensus…With the double slip and reverse loop like shown or without the reverse loop or just relocate the double slip lol…You guys have gotten me this far, lets hear your final decisions…Thanks everyone!
I like Randy’s idea. Reverse the reversing section at the top and create one from the top of the staging yard to the main(or to the inside loop if you want the section to be a bit longer).