New around the walls layout

[GMTrainNut]

Guys,

I've been without a layout for quite some time now. The last one was a tabletop affair, and was never that happy with it. I'm planning on an around the walls shelf layout in a spare bedroom, and just wanted to bounce some ideas around here, as track planning is not my forte.

The room is roughly 11.5 x 13. It has a entry door, an infrequently used small closet with bi-fold doors, and a double window on one wall. So a duckunder/liftout/swing gate will be required.

The room room also has to contain my worktable and some storage, which should work out well underneath the shelves.

I'm planning on shelves in the 16-24" range, and will be mounting them to the walls with a shelf track system.

Method of construction will mostly likely be open grid.

To the heart of the matter: the plan. Freelanced, generic Northeast US scenery, era 70s to 80s. HO scale.All I'm really looking for is a yard and several industries to switch, and an interchange. Continuous running is a must. I'd like to squeeze in a little staging but may pass on that. The type of operation I envision is taking a train out of the yard, doing some switching, running some mind numbing laps, and returning to the yard. Maybe if I have a friend over one can run the mainline train, the other can sort some cars in the yard.

I'm trying hard not to jam track in everywhere. Some of my previous planning efforts had much more track, a turnout on the liftout, a runaround on the liftout...

It's hard to accept the compromises of such a small layout, but I keep telling myself at least I'll finally be able to run something.

The room plan and one of my sketches is below. I'm sticking to 24" minimum radius, using Atlas Code 83 except for Walthers #7 curved turnouts.

The mainline is very rigid, but I'm planning one some gentle curves using flex track.

Walthers Backdrop buildings will be used in a few spots, I'm planning a masonite backdrop for the layout.

Sorry for what seems like rambling on, I know I really need to compile a list of givens and druthers, but for now I'm more or less just thinking out loud.

Any thoughts at all will be greatly appreciated, thanks in advance.

 

[North Coast Railroad]

Cool. Maybe a passing siding on the bridge side of the layout? I'm not a good track planner, but it might be cool to have a passing siding, so you switcher can park and let mainline traffic through. Also, you might be able to pull of some simple staging by putting a backdrop up on the bottom side of your plan. Maybe in the middle. The staging will be a huge plus operationally. Your trains can 'leave', and come back. Maybe you can have through traffic with different types of rolling stock.

 

[GMTrainNut]

Thanks for the reply Devin. I thought about having a hidden staging track in the area that you mention, it would help. One of the concerns I have with my plan is that it's "bi-directional"...in other words, if I stage a train to arrive in the opposite direction of the "normal" train there's no way for the power to escape when it arrives in the yard. I did think about a short passenger train or RDC that could be stashed in staging for a bit, but haven't pursed that angle too much.

I really wanted to have the interchange in the area where the single truss bridge is, as it would be the furthest point away from the yard. But it was too close to the point of origin to be believable. Plus the way I have it now would allow for some point to point operation without having to leave the liftout in place.

I also kept that same area somewhat bare in an attempt to have a "scenery only" section of the layout. But it sure is temping to put another industry in there...again, trying to keep it from being a spaghetti bowl!

 

[Doughless]

Looks good. Can't say I see any major problems with it. You might want to lengthen the interchange track and its siding to make it even more useful.

Another thought:

You might get more main line run if you changed positions of the bridge section and the yard section. Operations could run clockwise and the lift out would provide a natural scenic break between the interchange and yard. The E section is a smaller section, but you could use your Walthers curved turnouts to start the yard section to the north while the main line is still sort of running east and west.

As it stands now, I'm kind of thinking there would be no real purpose for the train to cross the bridge if going clockwise. Where is it delivering cars to? To the interchange it just left from the other direction? A more logical place for the liftout would be in between the train's origination point (the interchange) and its destination point (the larger town with the yard). You can incorporate the liftout section as a place for engines to escape a runaround, allowing you to push the runarounds as close to the liftout as possible. Unless you want the liftout out most of the time for point to point ops.

 

[GMTrainNut]

Looks good. Can't say I see any major problems with it. You might want to lengthen the interchange track and its siding to make it even more useful.

Another thought:

You might get more main line run if you changed positions of the bridge section and the yard section. Operations could run clockwise and the lift out would provide a natural scenic break between the interchange and yard. The E section is a smaller section, but you could use your Walthers curved turnouts to start the yard section to the north while the main line is still sort of running east and west.

Excellent thought. I initially dismissed having the yard there since it would be very short, but yes, with the use of curved turnouts for the lead it might be adequate. And that would maximize the space between points A and B for sure.

As it stands now, I'm kind of thinking there would be no real purpose for the train to cross the bridge if going clockwise. Where is it delivering cars to? To the interchange it just left from the other direction? A more logical place for the liftout would be in between the train's origination point (the interchange) and its destination point (the larger town with the yard). You can incorporate the liftout section as a place for engines to escape a runaround, allowing you to push the runarounds as close to the liftout as possible.

You're right here as well. I think one of the fundamental flaws in my concept is that it doesn't provide well for out and back ops. The train should be able to run around itself at the interchange, and arrive back at the yard in the opposite direction that it left. Which requires either a decent length A/D track, escape track within the yard, or perhaps a switcher pocket off the yard lead. All of which I had a hard time shoehorning into the plan!

These are great thoughts, exactly what I was hoping for, many thanks.

 

[Doughless]

You're welcome.

Yes, the shorter E section might not be ideal for the yard, and your yard may not be quite as nice as you have now, but I think the relocation would be worth it.

And looking at the W wall, I see 2 facing spurs when the train is delivering cars from the interchange. I like that. Facing spurs there require those cars to stay on the train all the way around to the yard runaround, where they then head back and be switched as trailing spurs. That adds operational interest, IMO. Don't know if you meant to do that, but I wouldn't change it. I think the natural impulse for most modelers would be to add a runaround on the W wall. I like it better without one.

 

[GMTrainNut]

You're welcome.

Yes, the shorter E section might not be ideal for the yard, and your yard may not be quite as nice as you have now, but I think the relocation would be worth it.

And looking at the W wall, I see 2 facing spurs when the train is delivering cars from the interchange. I like that. Facing spurs there require those cars to stay on the train all the way around to the yard runaround, where they then head back and be switched as trailing spurs. That adds operational interest, IMO. Don't know if you meant to do that, but I wouldn't change it. I think the natural impulse for most modelers would be to add a runaround on the W wall. I like it better without one.

I'm working on a plan to see how the yard would fit on the E side. As far as the facing point spurs, that was actually one idea that I came up with and was pleased with! I've also avoided having any switchbacks on this layout, another mistake I made once and won't do again.

Some good ideas are coming out of this discussion, which is great. Thanks!

 

[GMTrainNut]

Ok, I haven't hide time to nail down all the details, but is this the basic configuration we're talking about as far as yard and interchange locations?

Again, thanks.

 

[Doughless]

Yes. That is the idea.

 

[GMTrainNut]

Ok, thanks, I'll fill in the details this afternoon and post a new plan.

Looking at the yard, I'm wondering if I should make the first (longest) yard track an A/D track instead...to allow bi-directional arrivals at the yard. And then there's the issue of having an escape in the yard. Being a shortline type of operation maybe I should just use the road power to yard the trains..

I like the distance between the yard and interchange area, will make for more enjoyable point to point ops.

 

[Doughless]

Ok, thanks, I'll fill in the details this afternoon and post a new plan.

Looking at the yard, I'm wondering if I should make the first (longest) yard track an A/D track instead...to allow bi-directional arrivals at the yard. And then there's the issue of having an escape in the yard. Being a shortline type of operation maybe I should just use the road power to yard the trains..

I like the distance between the yard and interchange area, will make for more enjoyable point to point ops.

You're getting into ops ideas that only you can formulate, based upon what you want the layout to do. I'm no yard expert by any means, but I would think that if you have a separate switcher to handle yard ops, the layout would have more spurs and yard tracks than what you have indicated so far; an overall increase in the number of cars on the layout in total from what looks to be the case. Based upon what you've shown, I would have the road power handle the yard, but you might find it more fun to have a separate switcher.

Personally, I run only locomotive at a time and that suits me fine. Others may find that to be dull.

You may have mentioned staging in another post. IMO, bi-directional train arrival would occur from a potential staging area behind (a backdrop) or underneath the interchange area. That's a question only you can answer.

Also, I don't see the need to have more than two or three yard tracks in total. You could add an engine escape with another curved turnout to link the a/d track to the main near the liftout and that would serve as an escape, right?

A short line really doesn't need to have a large classification yard, just a few tracks to sort cars or to store extras for a larger industry. You could also put one or two storage tracks near the interchange to have a place to build a train when cars are taken from/swapped at the 'change.

 

[steinjr]

I don't think you need a dedicated A/D track - an A/D track (or an A/D yard) is a feature of a larger and busier yard - so trains can arrive without interfering with switching.

But it is not a given that you need a dedicated switching lead and an A/D track.

Instead you could have one train (from another railroad) that comes from staging (e.g. hidden behind something on the yard wall), crosses over a removable bridge across the entrance door, picks up outbound cars from the interchange track, leaves inbound cars on the interchange track, and heads back towards where it came from - i.e. into hidden staging. The lift-out across the door can then be removed.

Then your railroad's engine will come from the town/industry area, go counter-clockwise around the E, N and W wall to the interchange, pick up inbound cars and take it back to the town/industry area.

Where inbound cars will be sorted on a couple of tracks, before you start pulling and spotting cars, re-spotting cars which has to be moved to get to other cars.

At the end of the day, your engine will take the outbound cars back to the interchange.

If you have two operators, one will be the engineer and run the throttle, the other will be the conductor, and decide how to switch, throw turnouts, uncoupled cars etc.

At other times you will want to just run trains - then you can use the continuous run connection.

Anyways - that is one (of several possible concepts).

Another possible concept would have the yard right at the junction (instead of a dedicated interchange track) - say along the top wall. Foreign power (Conrail) delivering cars to your yard, picking up outbounds and disappearing into staging again (maybe have the hidden staging track behind a low backdrop along the right wall.

Then have your engine organize cars at the yard along the top wall, before two trains go out and switch - one along the left and bottom wall, one along the right wall (in front of the hidden staging track).

Maybe somewhat similar in concept to the Raritan Center Business park in Edison, NJ: http://www.raritancentralrr.com/pdf/raritanmaps.pdf, http://binged.it/xycR64

Lots of options here

Smile,
Stein

 

[GMTrainNut]

Thank you for all the great advice. I really like the concepts that are being put forth here. While initially I was sitting on the fence regarding staging, it's becoming clear that even on a simple layout like this it would go a long way towards operation.

I agree that I was trying to make more of the yard than is necessary...always tough to try and reel myself in with track planning, of course we want it all.

So a simplified yard arrangement and hidden staging is the way to go. I may see if I can keep a small yard lead so a little shuffling could be performed without venturing out onto the main too much.

The thought of having the interchange performed at the yard was something I wouldn't have come up with, I was locked into this "point A to B and back" mode and wasn't considering other options.

Stein, funny you mention Raritan Center, my work takes me there 1-2 days a week. I occasionally catch them doing their thing.

Again, many thanks, this discussion is going a long way towards coming up with a vision for this layout. And therein lies one of the cardinal mistakes of track planning...drawing plans without having the concept in mind first. Shame on me!

 

[GMTrainNut]

I drew the below plan up, and as soon as I posted it I realized that it's missing a key element. The blue is the hidden staging, green is the mainline. But what I've lost is the runaround that was along the N wall. As Doughless pointed out, that was a great spot for a crew to service the two facing point industries on their way back from the interchange. I tried adding a runaround in, but man, that area just got too turnout heavy...too much complexity.

So I'll keep forging ahead, but posted the image anyway to keep the progress (or lack thereof) viewable!

 

[joed2323]

I like you design. I like how you added hidden staging.
Also like what you did with your yard.

are you adding more industries/ town or what do you want to include on your layout? what are the buildings you have on your plan now?

I wanted a paper mill, but i soon realized when i started laying my cardboard track mock up that i have no room for it, and that idea is thrown out the window.

I wanted other smaller industries and it would just be too much.

Im finding out less is more.

Keep up the good planning, your on the right track.

 

[Doughless]

You've been hit with some ideas and you have a nice plan going. I would advise you to settle upon a operating theme and visually run some trains to see how things flow before you try many more options. If you haven't read any publications on layout ops, it might be a good time to do so, in order to hone the layout into its best form. There are many options.

As mentioned, probably the best option would be to have the interchange and the yard together. This way, the loco can pull cars from the interchange and sort them with other cars at the yard into the proper order for switching around the layout. Use this as your point A in a A to B and back concept. Locate the 'change and yard on whatever wall works best. (You might even try the S wall, it looks to be a bit longer than the E.)

Put your largest industry at point B, on the farthest wall away from the yard to maximize the run of the layout. The large industry gives the railroad a reason for being. You can have another industry at point B as well. One or two storage tracks at point B can provide some space for swapping cars there. A runaround there can get the train set for the return trip. Point B trackage really doesn't have to be complicated. Have facing point switches along the route to fill in gaps and add ops.

This set up would be best if you wanted to simulate a rural shortline. Stein's option of a centrally located yard and interchange might work best for an urban setting or an industrial park, sending short trains in both directions.

We can throw many scenarios at you but ultimately you have to determine what works for you. It can be fun to try different arrangements. I think the foundation for the layout is set up well for you.

 

[GMTrainNut]

Many thanks to all, I've gotten a lot out of this discussion.

I'm going to tinker with various options and will post them here as time permits. Most likely on the weekend, I've been working 13 hour days lately.

The one thing about the last plan that's bugging me is having curved yard tracks. Even though as drawn they're 24+ inches in radius, coupling cars on these curves could be quirky and might involve some reaching in with a skewer. I'd much rather have straight yard tracks, and if I go with the idea of having the interchange and yard at the same location I may be able to pull it off.

Thanks again to all, I appreciate it.

 

[GMTrainNut]

I like you design. I like how you added hidden staging.
Also like what you did with your yard.

are you adding more industries/ town or what do you want to include on your layout? what are the buildings you have on your plan now?

I wanted a paper mill, but i soon realized when i started laying my cardboard track mock up that i have no room for it, and that idea is thrown out the window.

I wanted other smaller industries and it would just be too much.

Im finding out less is more.

Keep up the good planning, your on the right track.

I do intend to add more to the plan, for now I've just been focusing on the major factors, will come back in and add more detail later.

Size of industries is a concern on a shelf layout. I'm planning on using at least a couple of Walthers Background buildings. One industry will be a scrap yard, which only requires a small footprint. Maybe a team track as well.

You might be able to pull off a paper mill if you only model a portion of it. Lance Mindheim's books are a good source of information on just this kind of thing, I've purchased two of them and they've helped me a lot.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=lance+mindheim&x=0&y=0

Hopefully the two of us will get our acts together and start building very soon!

 

[Doughless]

Not that you want more suggestions here, but for others who may be interested...

Remove the inside building that's angled at the NW and used its spur as the interchange track. Flip the yard tracks so they face west, starting the yard with one curved LH turnout ( a Walthers 7.5 w/b best). Use the E section as the yard lead. Place a small industry along the E wall and another along the inside edge. Embed a runaround along the curve but have enough straight track at the left end to foster hands free coupling. (If you're pushing a train into the yard or onto the runaround, you don't need to couple it so no need for much straight rack at the right end of the runaround.)

Ops would go like this: The loco pulls the train off of interchange around the curve and onto the lead. It pushes the train into the yard for sorting with others. Pulls back onto the lead. Pushes up to the runaround. Gets into position to pull the train counterclockwise and then delivers cars around the layout. At the S wall you could have: A fairly large industry to justify a good size train, one more industry, a runaround, and at least one storage track for any overflow or somewhere to place an odd car while switching the area.

This arrangement would not change the look of your layout hardly at all.

Having the interchange track facing the same direction as the yard eliminates a lot of back and forth movements you would get if they were opposite. More fun, less frustration.

Also, the interchange track might be angled to end at the edge of the layout as to use staging cassettes, which allow you to stage more than one train, unlike a single staging track.

 

[zoegraf]

I like how your layout plan is coming along.

I had a layout I just tore down last fall in a room the same size as yours with the door in the same location. I used the closet as a staging area.

http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16941&highlight=narrow+shelf

http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16986&highlight=narrow+shelf+continued

Here is the track plan of the layout that was in it.

My next layout will probably again be in a room about the same size, but I'm going to try to make even simpler to get the feel of a branch line.


Cheers.