I'm currently finishing off my attic to make some room for my big layout. In the meantime, I bought an AnyRail license and started working out the benchwork and trackwork. I'm not dead set on this version, but I do like it.
Looks like a good start Jason. Sidings for each industry would be nice, rather than switching directly off the mainline. Sidings will give you run around capabilities, so trains coming from either direction can switch out the industry. You may also want to consider an over and under approach to your design. This would give you some variations in landscape with some bridges for your trains to cross over and under. The addition of an interchange track would provide additional switching opportunities and a feeling of traffic coming from off the layout. Track planning is a lot of fun, enjoy!
Ah, thanks for the suggestions, Jerry! I'm not sure I want to do any cross overs, mainly because I like the double loop all the way around. Simple, easy to follow, but I will consider the change. For the sidings, you make a pretty good argument. I may go back and change some of the spurs into sidings. The APMT intermodal yard would be a good candidate for this change. I was basing it off of an actual container yard that I worked at. They had three spurs coming into the yard and used a single switcher loco to pull them out. The sidings would be much easier to deal with.
When I mentioned cross over and under each other I was thinking of a folded dog bone design. Keep your loops, but twist them. This would require grades compared to an all flat layout. The suggestion for sidings was not to eliminate your spurs, just add sidings to work the spurs from, rather than off of the mainline.
I'll echo Jerry's suggestion about bridges and elevation changes. In addition to adding visual variety, passing under a bridge (and behind hills or buildings) takes a train out of view, even if only briefly, and this contributes a great deal to the illusion that a layout is bigger than it actually is. Also, when a train passes to the left at the front of the shelf, and a moment later is seen passing through the same scene again to the right, it calls our attention to the smallness of our layout. We can try hiding all the tracks at the back of the shelf, but that makes our layouts seem smaller by cutting the length of our visible mainline in half. Suppose you flipped the track loops around Tolner Grain and Shaffers Loco so your double mains would leave Opel Yard at 0 inches elevation and pass under a bridge to the outside right edge of the shelf, proceed toward the lower right corner while rising to about 2 inches elevation around the bottom of the loop, and then aim toward Lansdown Coal in the upper right corner. Adding a 3rd track siding along that level track between Shaffer Loco and APMT Yard would let you switch cars off of the double main, and will bring the APMT Yard toward the front of the shelf where it will be easier to couple/uncouple cars and throw manual switches. If Lansdown Coal does not need to be located immediately next to the APMT Intermodal Yard, you may want to shift it toward the left to separate it from the APMT Yard. Even if you do want them close to each other, the layout will still seem a little bigger if you visually separate them at least a little (perhaps locating them on either side of the bridge over the tracks that come out of Opel Yard). As the track passes from right to left behind Opel Yard across the top of the layout, it will be visible, but separated from Opel Yard by its elevation and perhaps by trees and/or buildings (as well as by the length of time since disappearing going left to right under the bridge), which will minimize any negative effects of going through the same scene in different directions. If the left side of Opel Yard is slanted upwards toward the upper left corner, it could remain visible for a short distance as it begins its curve to run down the left side of the layout and then disappear under a bridge (carrying the other tracks) or behind Blue Ridge hills/trees as it runs along the back of the shelf, so it is not seen paralleling the other tracks at the front of the shelf. The tracks from Opel Yard will be rising from 0 inches elevation as the other tracks descend from 2 inches elevation. If Tolner Grain and Schupe Dairy are set at 1 inch elevation (and perhaps flipped in location just like the loop is flipped), a 2% grade rising and descending would let all the tracks on the left side loop reach 1 inch elevation within 4 feet of where they cross at the bridge, giving you lots of level track for switching the 2 industries. If there is no aisle for operators along the left side of the layout, make sure there are no view blocks preventing you from seeing the crossovers or the turnout to Schupe Dairy. In my proposed plan, Schupe Dairy would be flipped to the back of the shelf, moved closer to the lower left corner, and served by a right side running, trailing point turnout, instead of a facing point; Tolner Grain would be located about where Schupe Dairy is on your plan, and would also be served by a right side running, trailing point turnout. Please keep giving us feedback (preferences, dislikes, potential barriers or problems) on proposed ideas so we can answer questions and tailor our suggestions to best match what you want for your layout.
Well, you could. But on the other hand, you could also run those spurs into the loop on that end. You could essentially use them to replace the Shaffers locomotive shop, putting that yard up front where it's easier to work and to admire, and in the loop where you have more room for incidental scenery. A locomotive shop is much less direction-sensitive, so it could be beside that yard and accessed from the other side of that end loop without necessitating additional runaround movements. I'd lengthen Opel Yard and eliminate S-curves all in one shot by swapping the switches that lead to the ladders. Run the main line through the curved legs and let the straight legs lead to the ladder tracks. I'd also include some crossovers in that area so one leg of the main line can be used as a switching lead, while the main trains engage in a little left-hand running to get through.
Hi Jason. You haven't told us much about your operating interests, so it's a little difficult to know what sort of advice might help you. If you're mainly interested in kicking back and watching trains run, then this should do you quite nicely. You can have a variety of trains made up in Opel Yard, and send them out to the main as your fancy dictates. If you want to do much switching though, as Jerry mentioned, having the industry spurs lead from the main instead of sidings will be limiting. Even more of a problem is that you have no switch leads for your yards. In order to switch your industries, or shuffle cars around your yards, you will almost certainly have to shut down continuous running on one or both of the mainline loops. If you'd like to be able to have one train running continuously while you switch with a second, and possibly have another operator working the yard as well, then you can do that with a single track mainline, provided that: (i) your industry spurs run from double ended sidings, and (ii) you build your yards so that they can be worked without interfering with the main track. An example of a suitable yard would be: The run-around, caboose and engine terminal tracks are all optional. More details are here: http://www.theweebsite.com/trains/yards.html Regards, Ron McF
I'd move APMT yard to the front somewhere if possible to avoid reaching across the mains, especially if you'll have trains running while working the yard.
I assume you are using remote switch machines for the operation of the switches. I see some issues with the location of AMPT Yard. The reach (arm length) distance to the switches is long specifically at the cross over. If you have a derailment there you could be causing other issues near the front edge while reaching. Gary
I would add a couple of spurs close to the main track, at your grain facility. Those would be used to hold empties coming in, after loads are pulled out. Then I would buy myself a switcher for the facility, and there would be some very interesting activity potential.
I would try to broaden the radius of the tightest radius curves on your mainline, currently shown in red. One way to do this would be to not have straight track segments at the front edge of the portions of your layout which are labeled Schupe Dairy and APMT Yard. Instead you could have arcing curves between the "re-marked tight curves" on your mainline, and the 90-degree curves which lead into both sides of Opel Yard. These arcing curves would be further away from the front edge of the layout, than the straight track shown in your current plan. If you make this change, I am not sure if you would want to still have the ability to switch between the two mainlines in the Schupe Dairy and APMT Yard areas. One possibility would be to add turnouts to your Opel Yard which would allow trains to switch between the two mainlines there. This would not be as flexible as what you have now, but would allow you to get rid of those tight radius red-marked curves from your mainline - which I think you will end up regretting, if you build it this way. It's not just the tight radius, but also the rapid transition from those tight curves to the straight track.
