Geeky: That inner oval or circle is completely useless. It ties up adding any other significant additions to the layout. I like Steve's second plan. It incorporates a passing siding and some interesting yard situations utilizing all available space. At least the new trackplan will provide intersting operations. Stay cool and run steam.... [ January 19, 2006, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Powersteamguy1790 ]
Thanks Bob. Five Flat - I'm glad you liked it. I moved the yard up about 10 inches to keep the switching loco free of the main line. Even if you are just running a train around the main while switching clogging the main for a few moments will mess you up. After thought: You could use the bottom "passing track" as a longer yard lead / passing track. [ January 19, 2006, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: Grey One ]
Oh, I see what you're getting at. This is another reason why I'm glad I'm starting with a small layout. I want to get a good idea of the kind of operations I like also. I've got another kinda off-subject question. Do you all run your locomotives backwards alot? I don't quite like seeing locomotives (especially steamers) running backwards, but if that is prototypical I guess I should get used to it and do it?
My switchers work alone or with a calf unit. MY road engines work in pairs nose to nose, (long hood to long hood). It is your thread, you can always go off topic. I added a comment to the bottom of my last post.
Real steam engines couldn't move very fast backwards, so they never led trains that way. (Well, except for some tank engines made for commuter runs...) Diesels - Early roadswitchers like RS-1s, GP-7s, SD-7s, etc. ran either way frequently. Once high hoods and low noses became standard, backward was rare. (I won't get into Southern or Norfolk & Western here, since you're not modelling them.) At least for the first engine in a consist. Engines after the first, whatever their type, can face either direction because they're unmanned - controlled from the lead engine.
Yeah it is , but something about the shape appeals to me. I'm very odd like that, I guess, in that track plans have to have a pleasing shape to them. It looks like he's onto something he likes so I'm keeping out of it.
I think you could also consider taking steves plan and instead using your switches so that they connect end to end, they would be side by side as cross overs between two large ovals. Here is a link to an example of how the two ovals woudl connect. http://www.atlasrr.com/Code100web/pages/10006.htm It would allow you to run trains on the outside track while the yard was being switched on the inner siding and another train was just waiting on the inner main. sheesh I hope that makes sense. A big advantage to that design is that so long as you like how your outside oval is shaped , you can lay that track and get running while you work on the rest of the inner part. [ January 19, 2006, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: traingeekboy ]
This is great guys. I've got alot to good stuff to try for that inner line. What do you think of this now? I could make that inner loop on the right side down at the bottom like I made the left side regarding the turnout maybe too.
I moved the grain elevators to the inside loop so you can run a spur there. I suggest putting a hill or trees between the two loops to break up the curve. The spurs in the industrial area are abstracted. I’m not sure what will fit where. If possible continue the bottom curve directly into the yard. [ January 19, 2006, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: Grey One ]
FiveFlat: Well you now have a very workable trackplan, that you won't get bored with. It utilizes all available space, has interesting scenic possibilities and allows you to have fun with switching opportunities in your yard. I think it's a go... Stay cool and run steam.....
It looks good! Now how about making those yard tracks longer. Are the ovals 11" and 9 3/4 " radius? oh oh... I see one little problem that is easily fixed. See the cross over right by the throat of your yard tracks? flip it and move it past the switch leading into the yard. If you leave it switched the way it is trains can leave the inner loop when going clockwise, but connot re-enter the inner loop while going clockwise.
You've made some nice changes. That's a big difference from your original layout. Have fun ...... Stay cool and run steam....
Geeky, "make the yard tracks longer", you mean like this? Ya know? I really like it! I have put so much time into this plan that I started to think I had seen it somewhere before. I have. In a way it is a variation on the Grey and Grandure. Outer loop for running trains. Inner loop with yard and switching and running trains. I _swear_ it was sub conscience.
Whoa, I popped in and figured i'd make a comment, but it looks like I've sidled up to a table of invisible people who read my reply instantly. lol Looks good grey. For now to save money on switches the mainline cross overs can serve as a run around.
Wow, you all are good. So I think I have a good plan now. I think I'll start small (to save money on switches, etc.) As long as I make it easy to replace little by little as I go. Here's the latest:
Any time you want to IM me: Yahoo: grateful_grey_one Gtalk: Asymmetrical.Embracer@gmail.com (google's IM. I really like it)
Five Flat - If I was going to eliminate any of the turnouts they would be: Lead to the engine terminal -2 Top yard track - 1 Cross over in the yard -2 Maybe the switch back in the top center - 1 Maybe the siding in collum 1 row 3 - 1 Enjoy, and please keep us abreast! I put a lot of time, (about 5 hours), into those plans. I'd love to see the results.
