staging, is it worth the headache?

[sizemore]

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here...this layout is small yet we're comparing it to a 1:1 prototype...division, sub-division whatever. Everytime we've started comparing 1:1 to all the layout designs there has always been a conclusion that it does not compare and provide what you want in your layout. I fear that we're going down that route again.

Steve, I say go with the 4/5 track staging yard and then let the operations be dictated by the model railroad not the 1:1 instead of going into this "scientific study" of a prototype. KISS method. There are 12 sidings that can dictate a lot of traffic -a few locals with something zipping around from staging to staging. Hours of enjoyment.

The S.

[asciibaron]

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here...this layout is small yet we're comparing it to a 1:1 prototype...division, sub-division whatever. Everytime we've started comparing 1:1 to all the layout designs there has always been a conclusion that it does not compare and provide what you want in your layout. I fear that we're going down that route again.

then we are simply playing with trains.  if a layout is to be operated in a prototypical manner it should be designed as such.  the prototype has locations in the middle of nowhere for a reason.  those home signals are there for a reason.  to ignore the traffic handling aspect is to ignore a major component of modeling railroad operations.

i am a railroad modeler, not a model railroader.  there is a difference.

[conrail98]

Lee, you bring up a good point. Just because a session ends and a train is in a siding, doesn't mean the owner doesn't move the train into a yard or staging yard between sessions and then back out prior to the next one,

Phil

[sizemore]

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here...this layout is small yet we're comparing it to a 1:1 prototype...division, sub-division whatever. Everytime we've started comparing 1:1 to all the layout designs there has always been a conclusion that it does not compare and provide what you want in your layout. I fear that we're going down that route again.

then we are simply playing with trains.

By that notion if you can't do it right, don't do it at all. You have a great layout design for the space available, space is limiting that 1:1 "feel" for the railroad. I think you need to go a little more freelanced operations dictated by the model not the prototype. We're narrowing down on a plan that you like, now just add some industries to it. Grain, Coal, Stone...Beer etc.

With the current plan you're going to run into -big trains that run from staging to staging (ie. roundy rounds), locals that will diminish in size as you add more locals.

There is not a lot of "big" operations that occur that a  1:1 might follow. You want a "big train" in the hole waiting, its going to be maybe ~15 or so cars plus two loco's. If you have 4 locals they'll most likely be 5 cars in/out per local. If you want a "proto" quality train of say ~30 cars it's pretty much going to come out of staging and head back into staging. Following the Koester "2n+1" your staging may only be enough for one "proto" sized train and the previously mentioned locals

The S.

[asciibaron]

You have a great layout design for the space available, space is limiting that 1:1 "feel" for the railroad. I think you need to go a little more freelanced operations dictated by the model not the prototype. We're narrowing down on a plan that you like, now just add some industries to it. Grain, Coal, Stone...Beer etc.

please stop looking at this discussion through the lens of my layout.  having the model dictate operations is playing with trains.

[wm3798]

Yes it is.  And I like it.

And doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

Dr. Freud

[N_DaveS]

As someone who has not operated a layout in literally decades and whose own layout's construction is stalled at the moment, I hesitate to jump in here. However, it seems to me that we have to take the model railroad into account when planning operations, but we can also keep the prototype in mind; it doesn't have to be an either-or.

Regardless of how big your layout is, there will always be necessary compromises in rendering the prototype, based on the layout's physical limitations (beginning with the absolute impossibility of representing every mile and every feature of the prototype) and your givens and druthers. These compromises will more or less dictate operations, but as long as the compromises are acceptable the resulting operations scheme should be acceptable as well.

As far as "looking at the discussion through the lens of your layout," you began the discussion by asking about the utility of staging, presumably for your layout, so it makes sense for the rest of us to refer to your layout when addressing the issue.

[Hyperion]

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here...this layout is small yet we're comparing it to a 1:1 prototype...division, sub-division whatever. Everytime we've started comparing 1:1 to all the layout designs there has always been a conclusion that it does not compare and provide what you want in your layout. I fear that we're going down that route again.

then we are simply playing with trains.

By that notion if you can't do it right, don't do it at all. You have a great layout design for the space available, space is limiting that 1:1 "feel" for the railroad. I think you need to go a little more freelanced operations dictated by the model not the prototype. We're narrowing down on a plan that you like, now just add some industries to it. Grain, Coal, Stone...Beer etc.

With the current plan you're going to run into -big trains that run from staging to staging (ie. roundy rounds), locals that will diminish in size as you add more locals.

There is not a lot of "big" operations that occur that a  1:1 might follow. You want a "big train" in the hole waiting, its going to be maybe ~15 or so cars plus two loco's. If you have 4 locals they'll most likely be 5 cars in/out per local. If you want a "proto" quality train of say ~30 cars it's pretty much going to come out of staging and head back into staging. Following the Koester "2n+1" your staging may only be enough for one "proto" sized train and the previously mentioned locals

The S.

Ignoring the points about asciibaron's particular layout, which really isn't the point I think he's really talking theoretically, you bring up something that's been brought up a few times here already that I find interesting.  And that is that, apparently, people want to run "proto"-length trains (i.e. "long ones") without any desire to actually be able to store them anywhere on the layout aside from staging.  Someone else mentioned that they couldn't possibly store trains on their layout to start a session because they just wouldn't fit.  And I find that... bewildering, I guess.

Sure, there are some, even many, cases where this is completely prototypical.  If you're modeling a branchline that truly cannot do anything with a 'full' train aside from allowing it to run through, then by all means have them run through on your model.  You are, in that case, completely modeling the prototypical operations.  If you are modeling a very specific portion of a railroad in a very specific manner -- ie you're going to faithfully recreate a particular 5 miles of track, then it's quite likely that the trains did nothing but run through there, and again that makes sense to model that with super long staging tracks and you "just railfanning" your layout, that's great.

But in my experience, most people model a fairly large portion of a railroad.  And it's usually a fairly large/busy railroad at that.  So they're modeling a 50-mile or even 250-mile segment of a busy prototype and selectively compressing where they feel it's necessary.  And if you're going to model such a section, and if you're going to claim to be "operations-oriented" how could you possibly not have a place to store trains on your actual layout?  

Surely along such a segment trains didn't just march on through in procession and surely at any given moment in time there were trains spread all across that prototype.  So if you really are modeling a railroad, why are there no trains spread across your model of the prototype too?

Which brings up back to the "they can't fit" argument.... and why not?  And, apparently, the response is that "it's a model and I've compressed it".  Fair enough.  So why not compress your trains too?  If the prototype had sidings that were 5000 feet and therefore were limited to trains of 5000ft why are you modeling it with 15ft trains with 6ft sidings?  There's nothing particularly prototypical about operating long trains if you can't operate long trains.  History has shown that any railroad can couple up a bunch of cars together and run them -- it's making them work within their system (whether as a whole or on the more microcosmic territory level) that's the challenging part.

My layout will, hopefully one day, feature trains of just 6ft long.  Some people will assuredly be mocking me, even just a little in their head, for trying to model modern operations with just 6ft of train.  But the key is that I'm running that length because I'm designing the layout around that granularity of train size -- sidings, radii, service facilities, everything's designed around that size just as the prototype tries to design everything around, say, 7500ft or whatever.  I didn't want my trains hanging from one 'town' (or whatever) into the next all the time, and I wanted the ability to have multiple areas for trains to pass one another, so a particular length had to be settled on.  From the perspective of operations, it doesn't particularly matter whether my trains are 50ft long or 2ft long, as long as my railroad is designed around that same unit, and both are scaled appropriately.

Everyone's free to do whatever they want, and I don't want to make any illusions that I care otherwise what anyone else is doing.  All I really care is that people are having fun and showing off their work here every week for me to drool over.  But, it's just, to me[/u] running your model like I described above is akin to running a SD90 on your 1960s WM layout or whatever.

[asciibaron]

As far as "looking at the discussion through the lens of your layout," you began the discussion by asking about the utility of staging, presumably for your layout, so it makes sense for the rest of us to refer to your layout when addressing the issue.

not every topic is a self serving discussion that requires advice or presumption.  intelligent people have discussions on all manner of topics in which they have no personal gain.  it's the cornerstone of debate.

[Ian MacMillan]

I personally think staging is a must but I dont look at it like all of the magazines seem to be pounding, or at least how people are interpreting how the magazines are putting it. A layout is not like most plays where its an empty stage and then everyone comes out on cues.

I am planning a 12 track 30' hidden staging yard on my layout, but this is for through trains and off layout trains. Since I am modeling only 6 miles of actual track, the possibility of dumping a 50 car train some where on the layout is slim. However the layout will never be an empty slate. Ops sessions will be run very prototypically, so if at any point in a session a crew outlaws then thats where their train sits until recrewed. If it outlaws at the end of the session then thats where it remains. Some trains will even come right from staging and go into the main yard to be broken down. But mostly the staging yard like I said is for off layout trains, that have no business ending on the layout, such as coal trains, and rack trains. Yes they can outlaw on the layout until the next session, but mostly the staging yard is to supply a steady stream of freight and commuter train traffic to cause purposeful bottlenecks for the locals, Amtrak, and off layout trains built on the layout.

My staging yard is "hidden" in that it is in another room and not visible, but it is open topped.

[John]

Sorry for begin the ignoramus here (I'm a roundy-rounder), but it seems to me, as a casual observer, that ops sessions tend to run as if there was a beginning and an end to it. When, in real life, as Steve points out, there's no beginning or end, but a continuum. So, do ops sessions assume a clean slate for the start and end points? Or do they present a starting condition, where certain trains are at certain locations before the clock starts (and likewise when it stops)? If the former, is this done for convenience? And if so, why not make it a bit more realistic, and begin/end sessions with trains at various locations, as if a big pause button is being pressed?

David .. many of the car card guys seem to "reset" the layout between sessions .. the session usually consists of a "day" or half of one .. so considering most railroads run scheduled trains, thats where the "reset" comes in .. for example on CSX,. the Juice train leaves Bradenton several days a week, each and every week .. You can also account for Q17x to pass through baltimore each day about the same time .. so operating isn't any different ..

where you need to mix things up, is the cars in that train, and where you leave them .. you dont need to move each car every time ..

[Mark5]

I am aware that there are other reasons to stage, but this is the aspect that really sold me on staging:

I model the pokey (Pocahontas District) of the N&W. Through freights are an important part of what's "going on" on this east-west artery. Long trains with 86' auto box cars, intermodal, etc. Staging is the only way to get these in on my layout.

Mark

[John]

My sidings are a mere 7-9 feet .. my trains may or may not be a bit longer .. if they are longer, they are a challenge for the DS to deal with .. if they are shorter, then they fit nicely in the hole ..

If you want to "operate" .. operate ..

if you want to watch 100 car trains running around in numbing circles, there is NTRAK .. for most of us, everything else is a compromise

[mcjaco]

I've yet to operate a model railroad that doesn't use each session as a "day" of operations.  Each session presents itself as one 24 hour period on the railroad.   And each of those railroads had some form of staging.  

I've operated on ones that use open staging, and others that had hidden.  Open is nicer to get to problems, but if hidden is planned properly, it's just as beneficial.  The last ops session I went to had stub ended hidden staging at one end and stub ended open staging at the other.  One (the open one) represented the end of the line for the railroad, so a yard made sense, the other was hidden as it was points beyond.  The hidden has large open "windows" in the fascia so you could still see, and reach in there for any problems.  

I built a three staging yards for my Father's HO branch line layout.  Two of them are open, one is hidden.  He loves them, as it gives him a lot more options in operations, and he can keep more rolling stock on the layout keeping it fresh.

[cv_acr]

My club layout represents the area around Sudbury, ON, a location that is on CP's main east-west transcontinental line, that also has junctions with two other lines (the mains to Toronto and Montreal split here, and there is the junction with the branch to Sault Ste. Marie, connecting to SOO Line and the midwest USA) and a fair bit of local industry (mining, forestry and paper).

A lot of the operation on the layout is through trains from Montreal or Toronto to Winnipeg & beyond. Many run straight through and others drop cars at Sudbury to transfer to other routes or for local traffic. All these through trains need to come from somewhere off the modelled part of the layout. If it doesn't connect with the rest of the continent's rail system somehow, it's difficult to actually represent a real operation.

The yard at Sudbury is a constantly living thing. Through trains drop and set off, locals originate and terminate. There's no reset for a yard like this, as everything there is in transit-waiting to be picked up or sorted.

Resetting a layout at the end of a session involves turning the car cards for cars spotted at industries to simulate the day's loading/unloading (some may be left unturned to simulate taking a few days to load/unload) and turning everything in staging and remaking the off-layout trains for the next day's schedule. Anything left in the yard or on the layout is left alone. Ours is a large layout and much of the mainline is still being constructed. At the end/start of a session there will be through trains that will only be halfway across the layout, and they'll remain there to be trains in-transit at the beginning of the session. It should be common for a couple trains to be outlawed somewhere in the middle of the layout, whether at the yard or the middle of the line somewhere. These will be the first trains that get crews at the beginning of the sessionto keep the in-transit trains moving before getting the first scheduled train of the session going. Some of the trains that we run now as the first ones of the session will probably end up being the last ones on the schedule as there is more mainline to run over, and in order to have them arrive at Sudbury around or shortly after midnight, they'll need to be started the session before and be in-transit.