Scaled Down: Mopac Jville NW branch

[MichaelT]

Good day all,

Been away for awhile busy with work and church and some housing issues, and finally spent some time in the train room studying and reviewing what I would like to do with all the failed attempts to get a working layout off the drawing board.

I realized that I just don't have it in me currently to build a layout to span the entire 10x11 room, and I need some of the room for my music gear and some library space, so I started reading through the layout reports from Foxx and Vollmer again. As impressive as they are, I know I can't match their abilities modeling wise, but knew that a scaled back railroad would be easier to get going, and maintain with the limited amount of time I have currently. While I appreciate the HCD approach, I wanted to use as much materials as I have on hand instead of purchasing even discounted doors, so I moved some modules that I do have around and have come up with a little 8x8 L shaped layout that I believe will serve my wants well. Here is the first rendition below;



I've borrowed the double mainline idea from Mr. Vollmer (to have two trains running continuous when I just want to watch trains run), and liked the up and over idea from Mr. Foxx (extends and gives another branchline opportunity. The "yard" plus a few more industries to serve will give a couple operators some work to do when we want to do an ops session.

So, this is version 1 of the latest idea. Would love to read some suggestions, ideas, changes, etc. from folks. This is Atlas c55 track, with a few #6 ME turnouts, the rest are c55 Atlas #7s, and also have a few curved turnouts but the RR Track package I have doesn't have curved turnouts in the library, so I can't put them on the drawing.

Will be running mainly Mopac GP38's, GP40's, and an older GP18 and GP7 for the most part. I have an MP15DC switcher that will more than likely stay in the yard area, and the lower line of the yard will/can be the interchange with/to the Jenks yard from NLR to Jacksonville AR where this layout will be set. Main industries will be agriculture (at least one seed/grain mill), a cabinet factory, box and plastics industry, a small fuels/oils dealer, and just above the yard area three industries, Chemicals, electrical components, and an aluminum products plant.

I did setup the dual line tacked to foam to let it run a bit, and as time allows in the upcoming month(s) will start setting roadbed and landscapes. The up and over section (middle) will be branched off the mainline to a small lumber mill, an industrial fan company, and then off layout will be going to the Air Force Base for mixed freight.

So there's the newest plan. What do you guys think?

michael

[MichaelT]

I might add that a majority of the time I'll be operating this on my own, sometimes will have my good friend Larry (an HO guy) over to run with, and very seldom will have any more than three on the layout. For the most part this will be a small comfortable layout (I hope) to operate/run.

Also, the curves on the loops I'm planning on 18.75 outer curves, and 17.25 inner curves. The smallest I'm planning is 16 curves on the industries above the staging yard.

I'll be running DCC on the layout with Digitrax.

mdt

[Philip H]

Michael,
Based on your Givens and Druthers (!) I think you have a sound plan that you can build, learn on, and grow comfortable with for many years.  That said, what's the reasoning behind the viewblock across the "top" of the yard to separate it from the three unnamed industries?  Seems to me that having that open to the yard is more prototypical (KCS In Baton Rouge has 6 industrial spurs coming off the outside of its small class yard).  I'd either pull the view block up so that it's end aligns with the "top" edge of the yard as drawn here, or just truncate is off at where you have the bottom corner shown now.

And as to Dave and Dave's skills - they both started off as newbs, same as we all did.  Don't sweat it.  You're probably better then you think.

[MichaelT]

Michael,
Based on your Givens and Druthers (!) I think you have a sound plan that you can build, learn on, and grow comfortable with for many years.  That said, what's the reasoning behind the viewblock across the "top" of the yard to separate it from the three unnamed industries?  Seems to me that having that open to the yard is more prototypical (KCS In Baton Rouge has 6 industrial spurs coming off the outside of its small class yard).  I'd either pull the view block up so that it's end aligns with the "top" edge of the yard as drawn here, or just truncate is off at where you have the bottom corner shown now.

And as to Dave and Dave's skills - they both started off as newbs, same as we all did.  Don't sweat it.  You're probably better then you think.

thanks Philip,

Actually the "viewblock" is a two lane road. RR Track is not as detailed as some of the other track planning programs. It's what I have so it's what I use...lol. The road meanders through the layout from bottom left along the side of the yard, through the layout to top left, eventually going "under" where the track will rise for the extended branch to the airbase (the blue track line).

[DKS]

Michael, good to see a project launch. I have a few suggestions about the plan. I see a few issues that you might want to address.

First major issue is the cluster of sidings along the right. You've got what looks like a runaround that's too short to be of much use, and an unnecessary switchback that effectively kills one of the other sidings. By adding another crossover to the main, you'll get a nice long runaround, and by undoing the switchback, you'll be able to make full use of all sidings.

On the opposite side of the layout you have yet another unnecessary switchback, which once again will kill a siding, and two of the sidings seem almost uselessly short. Recommend just ditching one of the sidings and making the other two longer.

Kinda like this:

[MichaelT]

Michael, good to see a project launch. I have a few suggestions about the plan. I see a few issues that you might want to address.

First major issue is the cluster of sidings along the right. You've got what looks like a runaround that's too short to be of much use, and an unnecessary switchback that effectively kills one of the other sidings. By adding another crossover to the main, you'll get a nice long runaround, and by undoing the switchback, you'll be able to make full use of all sidings.

On the opposite side of the layout you have yet another unnecessary switchback, which once again will kill a siding, and two of the sidings seem almost uselessly short. Recommend just ditching one of the sidings and making the other two longer.

Kinda like this:

Hi David,

I was hoping you'd see this and chime in! I always like to get your changes and as before those are definitely good ones that I didn't see. thanks! I'm not sure if my LHS has any crossings in, but what angle is that crossing on the right and I'll check with him and see. Thanks for the suggestion on the left side as well. I'm guilty of adding too much most times where less is surely better!

Also, on the lower right where the turnout takes the line to the staging yard, would it be of any benefit to put that on a curved turnout a little farther into the outer curve?

When I put the blue branch line into RR track, it gave me a 2.5% grade from 0 to 2.75" at the over/under top right. That's probably higher than needed, should I lower it a little to lessen the grade?

michael

[DKS]

Crossing is 22.5 degrees (Atlas 55 2041). As for the grade, you really only need about 2" for clearance, and that brings the grade down to 2%.

The only benefit I see from using a curved switch for the track to the yard would be that it's located on the lower end of the crossover, which might make access to/from the yard a little more streamlined. The problem with using a curved switch is that the inner radius is 15", which doesn't blend well with the 18.75 inch radius of the outer curve.

One other note, I think you could get away with much sharper curves leading into the industries across from the yard. You'd then be able to actually store some freight cars on them.

EDIT: I tinkered with the staging yard area to give it a little more interest. The sidings have their own runaround so that the staging yard can be completely independent from the rest of the layout (the crossing is the same as the other one).

[MichaelT]

David, you're a layout planning MACHINE!!

I really like the yard/industries changes too. As far as the rising branchline to the base, I'd like to have one side look like a rock face wall going up, as if they dug out some of a hillside to put in some businesses along the main road. The other side/left side I think will be a sloping hill covered in trees and brush to the point where it butts up to the new river you've extended.

I'm planning on varied businesses along the main road (calling it Redmond Road as it is in Jacksonville here where I live) to fill the empty spaces and give the layout some character.

I'll have access to three sides of the main layout. Right side is about 28 or so inches, top is a good three feet to closet, then the left side is almost five feet to the outer wall. The staging yard is against the wall on the bottom and left side of the staging yard is the outer wall.

I'm really excited about this new plan. I think it's something I can sink into and not get frustrated over being too much to work on.

[wcfn100]

On a small double track layout like this, I would avoid a runaround that ties up both mains.  Also, the current crossover to the yard from the inner track cuts off half the layout.


Jason

[MichaelWinicki]

I'm not sure I would keep the cross-over in the yard.  You have a run around track near-by, that serves the three industries... I would use that as my arrival/departure track and keep the 4 track yard, a 4 track yard.

[DKS]

On a small double track layout like this, I would avoid a runaround that ties up both mains.

That would only affect someone who wants to have a train running laps while doing switching ops at the same time. Also, a separate runaround starts choking the layout with more track.

Also, the current crossover to the yard from the inner track cuts off half the layout.

I pointed this out in a prior post.

[MichaelT]

On a small double track layout like this, I would avoid a runaround that ties up both mains.  Also, the current crossover to the yard from the inner track cuts off half the layout.
Jason

Adding a separate runaround starts choking the layout with more track.

True, and when doing some operations on the layout, will rarely have a continuous run going at the same time. Even so if there is, then the crew working the switching duties will have to ensure they do not foul the mainline, and get proper permissions to work on the main. It would add some flavor to an ops session!

[DKS]

Here's what it looks like with a separate passing siding on the right. (IMO it's looking a bit too track-heavy.) I also moved the lower right crossover to a better location, and streamlined things in the yard.

[MichaelT]

I liked it with the runaround as it was...like you said that starts getting into "too much track" ....want to keep it somewhat simple and not overgrown with rails.

[DKS]

I liked it with the runaround as it was...like you said that starts getting into "too much track" ....want to keep it somewhat simple and not overgrown with rails.

I agree.