|
Support TrainBoard | Forum Home | RailImages | TrainStore | TrainBlog | TrainBoard Groups | RailSeek | TrainBoard Albums
New Posts | 24 Hours of TrainBoard | 24 Hours of RailImages | Member eBay Auctions | Advertisers
Here's an eBay tip: Did you know that when you search eBay (or make a purchase there and the search started here) that you are helping TrainBoard greatly? The traffic that we drive to eBay helps us pay our bills. Is there a model railroad product you are looking for? Type a road number or item description in the eBay search box and hit "Go." You may find what you're looking for and help TrainBoard at the same time!
|
|
|||||||
| Layout Design Discussion Discussion on general layout designs for all scales. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi,
I'm considering relocating the yard on the GD&R. As you can see in the image below yard is located on a 12 inch wide section of the bench work and has a couple customers and an interchange behind it. The current location of the yard was at one point the end of the line and started as two, two track staging areas. My thinking is that I would move the yard to the section of bench work that has customers 10 & 11 and the interchange. The top of the yard then would be at about the area that reads "10". I'm not sure if I should do a double track to the yard from the Y at the area of customer 5 or make it single track from the Y to the yard. This move would result in the yard becoming also an interchange and I might then run the layout as a point to point rather then an out and back as I do now. I could then use the yard as if it were two instead as one as I did before I ran the track to customers 10 & 11 etc. ![]() The tight curve at customer 5 will remain since I have grandbrats that like to watch the trains go round and round, okay so does Grandpa. Other then customers 10 & 11 getting relocated or removed and the interchange removed there would not be any major changes to the track plan and no additions to the bench work. If I make this change I could split the yard again and make it two three track yards and that would require the double track. Doing that I would do away with the Y and an auto reversing device. It would also result in some changes to the operating plan see A Workday on The GD&R on the railroad's website. Anyone have any thoughts, ideas, suggestions Gary ![]() |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
My first thoughts are:
I'm sure you know your turnouts are not to scale The area around the interchange and Cust 2, 3, 4 is a bit messy to for me to follow. I think if I had the yard where you do I would eliminate the customers there and build an engine terminal / station / town. While an interchange could be anywhere it is frequently best represented by a track leading "off" of the table. Beyond all of that it looks like a good switching plan with room to run. ![]() |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Grey One,
Thanks for the feedback. Gary ![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Yard design review, please | TwinDad | Layout Design Discussion | 16 | February 8th, 2010 03:08 PM |
| V&T project rolls along, faces funding shortfalls | John Barnhill | Narrow Gauge & Tourist Railroads | 1 | July 6th, 2007 03:17 AM |
| New yard in TX... | John Barnhill | Union Pacific Railroad | 4 | June 23rd, 2007 09:54 PM |
| Logical Yard Design | BrianS | Layout Design Discussion | 6 | January 30th, 2003 10:21 PM |
| L.A. TIMES: Intermodal Yard Story | ten87 | The Ready Track | 1 | April 5th, 2002 12:15 PM |