Need help planning a Station in a 18"X15' space

[DKS]

...I'm getting worried that you're trying to cram that 11th pound of railroad into a 10 pound layout.

Moi aussi. Although the referenced "conversation" may have been lost to the ether, I feel there is merit in the idea of modeling just a portion of the passenger terminal. This would reduce clutter, and give you space for more interesting, less space-hungry features.

[CodyO]

Davd this is why we decided to find a different track plan one that left more space open. As you can see on the most recent plan though it is still an underground station it will be confined to a smaller footprint. We still wish to fit in an rpo and a REA area this is just the first design and by no means the one I would throw down on the benchwork. I`m just trying to explore other track plans...

[DKS]

Davd this is we we decided to find a different track plan one that left more space open as you can see on the most recent plan though it will still be underground much of the station will be confined to a smaller footprint and That I like I do still wish to fit in an Post Office area but that would be about it this way the design remains clear and simple and not as filled with trackage across the whole piece of benchwork

Um... I don't mean to sound pedantic or elitist or anything of that nature, but... some punctuation (a few commas and periods) might help make this post a bit easier to follow. 

[eric220]

Um... I don't mean to sound pedantic or elitist or anything of that nature, but... some punctuation (a few commas and periods) might help make this post a bit easier to follow. 

That.

I don't like the new plan.  You've added a third platform, but you've sacrificed the freight runaround and passenger engine runaround.  Like you've said, you've lost the Post Office, and unless the REA is going to occupy part of the freight terminal, you've lost that too.  In essence, you've sacrificed all of the passenger/express ops opportunities in favor of a freight terminal.  If I understand correctly, you're looking for more open space.  Most of the space that you've gained in the new plan is under the city, so it won't make any visual difference.  You've dumped the coach yard in the new plan, and if you do the same in the old plan, I think you'll actually gain more open space in visible areas than with the new plan (plus you'll avoid the nasty grade issues that the coach yard created).

[CodyO]

Eric the coach yard has been long gone from the plan that was just a brief flirt with an 11 pound railroad.
I really like the plan this station offers and the mixed use long station platforms make it a bit more compact




Starting from the top platform and going down they will be:
Freight platform
passenger
passenger
freight

So the 4 platforms will each have there own use with only 2 platforms serving 4 tracks being dedicated to passenger, while the outer two platforms will be for freight and REA use. 
A runaround will be at the bottom of the station and a post office was added on the right
the 4 tracks on the top of the drawing feed into one side of the reversing loop while the 3 lower tracks feed into the other side, a design change yes but since every train needs to run though the reversing loop we thought it would be better but I`m still unsure it may go back to all tracks feeding into one or 2 tracks which then goes around the helix and connects to the uppermost track

[CodyO]

EDIT: Here`s a quick change that puts the reversing loop all going into one  track arrangement could be better but it can work

[eric220]

Interesting idea, although I'm not sure that I'm a fan. In general, the plan might be more compact, but I think it will be a lot simpler (less fun) to operate. One specific thing, I don't like the idea of forcing all of the trains through the station twice. Might be better to make the upper leg of the reverse loop run past the station, rather than through it, especially since stopping a train on that track effectively blocks trains from leaving the station to the left.

Just out of curiosity, I thought that we were onto a winner back there. Why the total redesign?

[DKS]

In addition to Eric's observations, I'm more than a little concerned about the engine facilities being tucked that far back behind the helix. Looks like quite a reach...

[CodyO]

Why the redesign- well I really like the station plan I posted a photo of, it's the track plan for Memphis central station.
It was designed to be compact and I feel that it can still support good operations the freight tracks will be longer and easier to acess will be easier to see across the lesser number of tracks along with the passenger tracks also being longer
Trains from Philly will still need to be broken up and added onto other trains or just terminated there-the Philly link is represented by the tracks off the right edge

David there will be access back there if you noticed the lower left has a piece out of the corner not exactly what we want but we don't want to destory the bench work underneath so where stuck with it


Do you guys think I can adapt the track plan from memphis central better
Or do I just toss it

Sorry if I'm not that clear posting quick while at work

[DKS]

David there will be access back there if you noticed the lower left has a piece out of the corner not exactly what we want but we don't want to destory the bench work underneath so where stuck with it

That's not exactly the kind of access I'm referring to; the notch in the corner is fine for maintenance work, but what about a derailment in the enginehouse? Or maybe even just a stalled loco? Crawling under the layout and reaching through a hole isn't the most convenient way of addressing simple day-to-day issues.

[eric220]

Per our offline conversation and your desire for a more compact station maximizing platform track length, I played around with my design a bit.



The upper runaround track was eliminated, and a crossover added on the right allowing the reverse loop return to do double duty as the upper runaround.  I also repositioned the lower ladder approach to squeak a few more inches out of the platform tracks.

[eric220]

Previous design, for reference.

[S Class]

Sorry guys, just a quick one

If you're going with a design like Memphis why have the return loop at all and just use the station as a terminus and through station? or just terminus?

I'm assuming that the tracks to the left of the plan will rejoin the double main running at the back of the layout? I'm sorry if I'm not following the redesign, but very interested in the mechanics of operations design.

[CodyO]

Thanks Eric as I told you I do like it


And tony there needs to be a reversing loop so trains can head back down the helix to the lower level then staging
One track at the left of the plan rejoins the mainlines the other 2 tracks feed the reversing loop.
In the last "Memphis option", the tracks all go into the reversing loop so that trains go into the station and leave on the same sets of tracks.
The double main provides loops to just run trains on in circles

I'm not exactly seeing why I should provide one track to leave and rejoin the mainline to the left, believe it may be better to just force them all to reverse so they can head back down
For operations I would imagine "westbound" trains would run right into the station while "eastbound trains" would reverse first

Back to work hope that was all clear

EDIT: got more downtime at work:

Also the reason no tracks are stubbed in the "Memphis option" is for easy of operations plus I'm not a fan of stubbed tracks

I'm at a crossroads now to decide which plan to push forward with
Eric is helping alot with the "Eric Option"
I like how he has compacted the plan and the nice flow of things

With the "Memphis option" I like how the freight and passenger tracks are mixed and how I have very long tracks 110-130" :O
The mixed use trackage arrangement will make it easier to switch cars around for ops.
Along with it's small footprint and long platforms, it seems very much a win in my mind
But the Eric option is very appealing

We also have to decide if all tracks enter the reversing loop or if a track going up to the mainlines is needed on the left

[CodyO]

Also will be using all peco code 55
Mainly medium radius turnouts