staging, is it worth the headache?

[wm3798]

Well, if hidden is the issue, why not break a wye off of one of the corners and throw a shelf with a yard somewhere "off layout"... maybe a movable segment that temporarily makes the U into a G.

[asciibaron]

Well, if hidden is the issue, why not break a wye off of one of the corners and throw a shelf with a yard somewhere "off layout"... maybe a movable segment that temporarily makes the U into a G.

i think you missed my last post.  i'm looking for other ways to model railroad operations.  look at the meltdown that was the Conrail merger. shoving everything into "hidden" staging isn't always the right answer.  having fewer tracks of staging means less space is needed for staging.

[MichaelWinicki]

i have only ever seen this once on a layout and it made perfect sense.  you don't need to have massive amounts of staging, you just have to consider how railroads operate...


look real hard at this picture:



that's CSX Q410 passing Q406 which has been sitting without a crew for over 8 hours... so with limited staging tracks, putting staged trains in sidings along the main is very realistic.  the issue becomes balancing the numbers -how much staging vs. number of trains to operate vs main line siding space.  that's where i am right now.

i'm just looking for some other solutions to the large hidden staging space that seems so common.  on a smaller layout, hiding things in the open might just be the correct solution.

Sure you can do that.

But I think if it's done too much the "illusion" that you're trying to create becomes convoluted.

You probably only need 4 staging tracks.

Two for through-freights, one in each direction that do not stop anywhere on visible portion of the layout.

Two for freights that terminate in your yard.  And then you'll have two freights that originate in the yard and terminate at the staging area.

Instead of being intimidated by the design or benchwork or trackwork necessary by the staging, just pitch into it.

Do it carefully and you'll minimize a lot of the issues.  Suggestions have been made on how to make it somewhat accessible.

[asciibaron]

Instead of being intimidated by the design or benchwork or trackwork necessary by the staging, just pitch into it.

i'm not intimidated, i have a handle on what i'm doing.  my first post hinted at my later post.  not all staging needs to be staging.  i think we get hung up on having an off layout area to stage trains.  trains can be staged on the visible layout and it can make perfect sense.  not all posts about layouts are centered in my struggles.  not many people start operating sessions with trains in sidings on the main.  most bring a train onto the layout from staging and that in my mind limits the true nature of the prototype - at any point in time there is a train somewhere on line waiting for a signal.

[wcfn100]

at any point in time there is a train somewhere on line waiting for a signal.

Not necessarily.


Jason

[Ed Kapuscinski]

i'm just looking for some other solutions to the large hidden staging space that seems so common.  on a smaller layout, hiding things in the open might just be the correct solution.

That's pretty much what I'm going for.

[John]

Just about all of my staging will be "visible"

[asciibaron]

Not necessarily.

of course your prototype is the exception.   ;D

[Hyperion]

not many people start operating sessions with trains in sidings on the main.

I've never once attended, or even seen video of or the like, an operating session but this is an impression that I've got before from many articles (both design and general layout) as well as posts.  And it's always struck me as sort of odd, particularly if when talking about the bustling prototypes that are most commonly modeled.

Your railroad, unless for some reason you really like to model recessions, should be fairly "full".  You shouldn't have 10,001 different open places to hide a train.  If you start your session empty, your first trains always have a place to 'park'.  Sure you might be able to "make" it full by running your trains out of staging and onto the layout, but that's not even remotely close to the same thing, and you're still not really gaining ground on imitating a bustling portion of a railroad because for every train you bring onto the layout you've created a hole in staging for another to go in.  Your layout is really never as busy as it is when you start out -- so if your start out "empty" you're really always empty. It may not seem that way when every siding is full, but all that means is that you emptied out your staging, there's plenty of places for a train to go, they just happen to be off stage and out of minds eye and you never even approach the ability to be "stuck".

That doesn't mean that every staging track and every siding needs to have a train on it.  You'd come to a complete standstill if that were the case.  But if your supposedly modeling a busy railroad, then when you start it should look like you had just hit "Pause" on the real thing.  The key to successful railroading isn't getting a Train from A to B, it's getting all your trains from A to B as consistently as possible.  A railroad is a pipe, and while some Terminal Managers love to flood the pipe in one direction at a time (i.e. "fleeting"), it ultimately screws everyone else down the line.  The key is to level-load, not to ebb and flow -- this means your layout should get no more "full" than it was when you started, your staging tracks (the "rest of the railroad") shouldn't get appreciably more full than when you started.  It should be a fluid motion of trains coming on and going off the layout.  Do it right and you don't need the "2n+1" that Koester talks about in regards to staging track needs.  And, yeah, it'll make things "tighter" -- that's part of the fun.  So that when you have that BO setout that blocks the mainline, it really does impact things because now that train can't leave staging and since it can't leave staging it has a chance of keeping another train from entering it because there's no room in staging (i.e. there's no open passing siding prior to the oncoming train on that imaginary mainline to the next terminal).  You've created the exact same kinds of bottlenecks that happen every single day on the real thing.  Start your layout empty and you will almost always have an "easy out" to a situation.

I've attached a current screenshot of what BNSF looks like right now in the 50-mile stretch leading into Corwith, what would seem to be a stretch of track that I could see someone modeling.  And while no one would expect you to have 13 full trains on your layout (unless you did a darn good job faithfully modeling this segment), the point is that they're there to begin with.  They're there right now.  And they're getting in each others way -- 4 of these trains are actually DOL and are in need of crews to continue.  If you started out "empty", it'd be real easy to get to Corwith.  Start out with life on "pause" like shown, and suddenly things get a lot more complicated.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[wcfn100]

Not necessarily.

of course your prototype is the exception.   ;D

Yeah, at only four trains a day, things get a lot simpler*.

*still lots of staging issues...one way cars with open loads, trailer flats having to face one direction and cars that leave mid-layout having to find their way back to the starting line.

Jason

[wm3798]

Wye?  Wye not.



just create a little junction somewhere so you can run off the layout to some storage tracks someplace.



steal about 12" x anywhere from 3' to 6' and you can work wonders....  I like to include a wye so I can turn engines, and also run out onto the main loop from either direction.


This is the basic arrangement I've used on several layouts, including the last iteration of the WM (with a bit of embellishment)



With the crossover, I could run in or out of the yard branch from either direction.  The yard lead itself became a staging track, since I would hold one train on the outbound track until an inbound train went through the junction to go in to the yard, off to the right there.

But I do agree, a train in a siding is in fact "staged"... And for the record, I usually have at least two trains on the line at the start of a session.

Try it like that and run some schedules, and see how much of a pain it is.  If it's not, you're done.  If it is, you have an option.

[John]

I think this is a pretty good discussion so far .. I plan on having enough staging to allow me to "start" trains from one of off stage locations, these will be mainly run thru .. going from north to south, east to west, and vice versa.

I also plan on having at least 4-5 trains online at any given time working whatever they need to work .. as well as yard jobs and some locals ...

But, my layout has some bottlenecks built in .. on purpose .. much of the upper level is 1 track with passing sidings, and on the lower level there are some sections where I go to 1track from 2 .. purely for the enjoyment of watching the DS try to figure it out .. I can run about 4-7 trains on the layout at one time .. but it's tight ..

I think it will be fun ..

[DKS]

Wye?  Wye not.

Wye not? Lack of space. Unless one is willing to accept 9" radius curves, it's simply not an option for the space in question.

[asciibaron]

mark has pretty much nailed the concept i'm after with an operating session - the session starts with a railroad on pause.  jump in the cab and take over when the play button is hit.  much like everything is a file in unix, everywhere on a layout is a location.  for a realistic operating session, a train does not need to begin a session at a terminal or even a siding, it could be sitting on the main theoretically paused in Run 8.

so how does this bode for my operational needs - if i have a train in the yard, a train on the main, some trains in staging that enter the session some hours from the start, i can put a train in a siding and even have the mid switching at industrial complex on the branch.

it's far easier to plan sessions with trains coming from staging or a terminal, but as mark stated, that misses the realistic nature of railroading - there is always a train somewhere doing something, even if that something is crewless and being in the way.

with this in mind, i think i can get away with a total of 5 tracks of "hidden" staging to balance the various places of visible staging.

[DKS]

with this in mind, i think i can get away with a total of 5 tracks of "hidden" staging to balance the various places of visible staging.

Then you're in luck.