Oregon Joint Line N Scale

[coldriver]

All I can tell you is that the op scheme is one of the best I have seen.  I have run Monument Yard twice and he provides a "playbook" telling you what trains are coming, what to do with them.  Not a lot of cherry picking switching, as per prototype.  And, from time to time you look up and ask "Hey, where it train 357?" only to find out it has been delayed for some reason, so you go on to whatever other task you can do while waiting.  Also fun is walking around the corner to the Dayville operator and asking "you ready for my cut yet?"  There are radios, and some jobs need them, but its also informal enough which is good, too.

Its non stop action, but at the same time, not the pressure some yardmasters get on big layouts (might have as much to do with host's personality as the op scheme, but both contribute)  Dean describes it as a result of a flexible schedule, where he may only release trains sequentially.  If a particular yard is jammed up, he may just hold the train an extra scale half hour.

Thanks Jeff.  We move a lot of volume in a session and the yards do a lot of switching.  What makes it possible (even for an operator that's never been there before to easily run Monument Yard by himself) is that I use cartabs and hand throw switches.  So you almost never have to take your eyes off the layout - there's no looking at a stack of car cards or a switchlist and then trying to match it up with car numbers.  There's no looking at the switches and then down at a control panel and then back to the track to see if the right switch has thrown, etc.  That being said I use the Caboose Industries handthrows which are functional but look horrible.  But it's worth it to me - having been a real switchman I want to mimic the activity of throwing a switch, not pressing a button on a panel.  At any rate, unlike many operating schemes, my yard operators often are able to keep well ahead of the mainline activity even though it's coming at them at a frantic pace. 

Jeff alludes to something that I learned in my real yardmastering days.  Most of you who have participated in operating sessions know that if a session is going to melt down anywhere it will be in the yard.  The same is true on the prototype and unlike a mainline meltdown the consequences of a yard meltdown may take days to recover from.  To keep that from happening the yard switcher needs to be the highest priority job in the yard.  So when a mainline freight shows up wanting to get into the yard, we hold him out until it's convenient for the yard to bring him in.  This really throws a curveball at most model dispatchers who think that clearing the main is the highest priority.  Of course if you need to clear a path for a passenger train or hot intermodal then clearing the main can be the highest priority.  But from my prototype experience there's typically a conversation that goes on between yardmaster and dispatcher before a train leaves the closest meeting point outside the yard where the dispatcher will ask if the yard can take an approaching train.  Often the yard will say, "I need to get a train out before I can bring one in so put him in the hole at Snowline (in my case) and by the way, my outbound won't be ready to leave for a half hour."  It's perfectly acceptable practice. 

[Denver Road Doug]

Uh oh, we've turned coldriver into hotriver.      

My excuse is I didn't see your update, and I'll echo others...I don't really have the skins on the wall to comment too much.   Although, as a former technical consultant I learned that you don't have to have vast experience to provide valuable insight as long as you have knowledge/expertise.   Here, I don't really have that either.   

Seriously though, Dean knows that I have provided feedback... I can echo Jeff's comments that the operational aspects have been impeccable.   Some things are still in development since Dean is maybe in double-digit ops sessions at this point but just barely.  I did provide some feedback and amazingly (unfortunately?  ) Dean did listen.   I proposed track warrants which Dean then educated me that track warrants weren't in use until post-1970...and then he went ahead and tried them anyway.     I don't think he was happy with the results...I liked it because it was very familiar to me (that's how BN operated in the area I grew up, and using a scanner I knew exactly what was going on during that timeframe...unlike now where it's a crapshoot.)  and I probably thought it went better than he did.       But anyway, I know signals are high on his list and is ultimately where he's going for mainline running.

Regarding the trackplan, well it's right up my alley....single track main and passing sidings make my day.   And I guess the yards are ok.      One thing I'll comment on that struck me...the geography is such that the layout has the summit (Snowline) that keep the yards at an elevation to clear the staging yards and then gradually (or not) descends to eventually wind down into the staging yards without using a helix.  The Fossil/Picture Gorge area is essentially a nolix of sorts that replaced a helix that Dean had in place and nixed early on. (if I recall his account correctly)   I assume that was part *actual* geography and maybe part by design but it seems to work well.   I would love to apply it to my future layout but my geography is the exact opposite, the middle being a river valley which would put staging on top.  Not unprecedented, but not ideal either....lower staging only needs minimal clearance, whereas visible layout would (potentially) require much more and making the nolix grade impractical.

Anyway, the BEST thing about the posted trackplan is it lets me get more familiar with the layout locations and station/yard names and so forth for the next ops session.   I do much better when I have the ability to study things even just a little before being thrown in.  (not an indictment of the OJL mind you....just a weird quirk of mine.)

[MichaelWinicki]

What makes it possible (even for an operator that's never been there before to easily run Monument Yard by himself) is that I use cartabs and hand throw switches.  So you almost never have to take your eyes off the layout - there's no looking at a stack of car cards or a switchlist and then trying to match it up with car numbers.  There's no looking at the switches and then down at a control panel and then back to the track to see if the right switch has thrown, etc.  That being said I use the Caboose Industries handthrows which are functional but look horrible.  But it's worth it to me - having been a real switchman I want to mimic the activity of throwing a switch, not pressing a button on a panel.

Definitely a win using hand thrown switches so you don't have to step back to read the fascia to pick out which button to push... That takes away from the moment.

[coldriver]

I worked at USACE down in SODO on East Marginal and I heard some of those contentions from our parking lot!

I had to look up what USACE meant and where it was...  Yes, you would've had a front row seat! 

[coldriver]

  I proposed track warrants which Dean then educated me that track warrants weren't in use until post-1970...and then he went ahead and tried them anyway.     I don't think he was happy with the results...I liked it because it was very familiar to me (that's how BN operated in the area I grew up, and using a scanner I knew exactly what was going on during that timeframe...unlike now where it's a crapshoot.)  and I probably thought it went better than he did.       But anyway, I know signals are high on his list and is ultimately where he's going for mainline running.


Anyway, the BEST thing about the posted trackplan is it lets me get more familiar with the layout locations and station/yard names and so forth for the next ops session.   I do much better when I have the ability to study things even just a little before being thrown in.  (not an indictment of the OJL mind you....just a weird quirk of mine.)

I'm willing to give the track warrants another shot Doug, we got off to a decent start when we tested them but things went way down hill when the throttle issues pretty well brought the session to a screeching halt.  I did learn a lot from that session and have some ideas for making it easier on everyone (#1 - you can't expect someone to copy a track warrant if you don't provide them a writing surface).  And everyone's a lot more familiar with the siding names now so that will help.  You weren't the only one who mentioned that you liked the track warrants and it's certainly a lot more prototypical than me dispatching the layout "yardmaster style". 

I'm with you on needing to study the names on a track plan.  It seems like I can't remember the location names on Ole's layout from one month to the next.  BTW, I'm looking at the possibility of a session on April 26.   

[Denver Road Doug]

Ha, I was gonna say the same thing about Ole's but I didn't want to embarrass myself *too* much.   I am probably in on the 26th so keep me posted.

[Rossford Yard]

To be fair to ourselves, Ole did change some his town names a few times.  Seems like me learning them is his cue to make subtle changes to his layout.....

[coldriver]

It's the North Texas Staging War!  As soon as I found out that Rossford Yard and Soo both had significantly more staging tracks than I did, I decided to expand my staging yards to add more capacity.   Not too mention that the operating crew has become efficient enough that we're starting to run out of trains before the end of our three hour sessions and I didn't really want to recycle trains during a session.  So, the new totals are:  NP North Staging = 7 tracks, GN North Staging = 4 tracks, NP South Staging = 8 tracks, GN South Staging = 3 tracks, and coal staging (on the continuous run connection) = 2 tracks for a grand total of 24 tracks and capacity of roughly 600 cars!  Problem is that I believe Soo has 25 tracks and Rossford Yard recently scored some more real estate for his own staging expansion.  But at least we should keep our LHS's busy.  Here's a shot of the reconfigured north staging yards. 

[SSW7771]

You mean we ran too many trains?  I think we just a really good dispatcher, especially issuing all those track warrants.

The extended staging is looking good. More staging + more trains = more fun!

[GaryHinshaw]

Nice.  You can never have enough staging. 

I am in the process of installing my first permanent staging yard now; it will be a 9-track stub-end yard with 15 to 16' tracks for long trains.  I could have gone with 10 tracks @ 1 1/4" spacing, but I decided to go with 9 @ 1 3/8" so I could deal with mishaps a bit more easily.  Hopefully I don't regret losing one track, but vertical clearances are tight, so this seems wise...

[basementcalling]

Nice.  You can never have enough staging. 

I am in the process of installing my first permanent staging yard now; it will be a 9-track stub-end yard with 15 to 16' tracks for long trains.  I could have gone with 10 tracks @ 1 1/4" spacing, but I decided to go with 9 @ 1 3/8" so I could deal with mishaps a bit more easily.  Hopefully I don't regret losing one track, but vertical clearances are tight, so this seems wise...

Staging = N + 1 according to Tony Koester, with N being the number of tracks you think you need.

I am going with 1 1/2 currently, Gary, probably because of my NTRAK experiences where that spacing is finger friendly even at a stretched arm distance.

The OJL is more and more impressive every time I check in on this thread. A layout that not only looks stunning, but operates fabulously.

[coldriver]

Nice.  You can never have enough staging. 

I am in the process of installing my first permanent staging yard now; it will be a 9-track stub-end yard with 15 to 16' tracks for long trains.  I could have gone with 10 tracks @ 1 1/4" spacing, but I decided to go with 9 @ 1 3/8" so I could deal with mishaps a bit more easily.  Hopefully I don't regret losing one track, but vertical clearances are tight, so this seems wise...

As much as more staging is almost always desirable I'd say you made a wise choice from my experience.  I feel like 1 1/4" is the absolute minimum spacing under the best of circumstances but would be too tight given limited vertical clearances. I actually started with 1 3/4" spacing in my staging yards and managed to squeeze in another track with the rebuild by taking it to 1 1/2".  I end up doing a fair amount of "manual" restaging where I'm swapping out open loads and empties (primarily lumber and chip cars) between sessions so even though my staging is double ended and continuous on both ends (via reverse loops) I still need to get my fingers in between tracks - which is impossible with 1 1/4".   

My sidings are set to 11' trains but four of my new staging tracks are more in the "Gary Hinshaw range" of 15 feet.  I may implement a non-clearing southbound scenario just like BNSF uses today on the Oregon Trunk/Gateway Sub where they run up to 7,000' south, but no more than 5,300' north.  As much fun as a 28 car helper train is a 40 car helper train even sounds better.  Have you experimented with running both mid-train and rear end helpers on the same train?  I'd like to give it a shot...

[Rossford Yard]

Think I went 1.5". My rule (don't ask how I know this.... ) is to be far enough apart that a stack train tipping over won't affect the next track.

Dean, I think this will replace the Alamo as Texas' best remembered battle!

For the record, and conservatively figured I have:

1 main level staging track hidden under buildings/scenery, used by CSX and others at 13 feet
22 lower level staging tracks (although 2 are really running tracks, averaging about 11 feet (representing all Chicagoland connections east and west)
6 next room (representing Hammond) staging tracks averaging 6 feet (really 7, but one will be an oil tank industrial track in the final scheme)

Total of about 269 feet and about 725-807 cars (which I could fill to the brink!)

Capacity measured in 50 footers, but modern fleet probably should be at 55 or 10% less, accounting for the range.  To compare to Dean's should measure in 40-45 ft average!

[GaryHinshaw]

My sidings are set to 11' trains but four of my new staging tracks are more in the "Gary Hinshaw range" of 15 feet.  I may implement a non-clearing southbound scenario just like BNSF uses today on the Oregon Trunk/Gateway Sub where they run up to 7,000' south, but no more than 5,300' north.  As much fun as a 28 car helper train is a 40 car helper train even sounds better.  Have you experimented with running both mid-train and rear end helpers on the same train?  I'd like to give it a shot...

40 car trains with helpers are great fun!  I have tried to run the grain train with mid and rear helpers and was pretty successful.  It will be even more successful with body-mount couplers, at least on the cars ahead of the pushers.

I am definitely planning some non-clearing trains in my sessions for added interest.  On Tehachapi, they run trains in both directions that don't clear the short sidings (especially Walong, the Loop siding).  A 16' train on TBC will not clear my Loop siding either, so the dispatcher will have to cope.   

[Noah Lane]

How was it building the Long Valley Lumber kit?  I like the colors you chose [and overall way it turned out] more than any examples I have seen.

I picked up the LVL kit at a train show in Roseville, CA for a steal ($30).  I haven't started building it yet, but the N-Scale Architect kits seem to have stellar instructions.

Any tips/insight is greatly appreciated.