Liberty Hill Junction - New Layout Coming Soon

Hoss Jan 4, 2025

  1. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    Alright friends...I think I'm real close to having the design finished. Any feedback on either of the options below is much appreciated. Especially if you see trouble spots. I'm also somewhat undecided on which one I like better, so if you have a strong preference and want to say why I'd love to hear it.

    Option 1 - Single main twice-around. Generally speaking the outside tracks are 2 inches higher than the inside track. Grade changes happen on the left side between where the tracks cross at the top and the lift gate at the bottom and are 2% or less. New River Mining Company is also elevated at 2 inches.

    [​IMG]

    Option 2 - Double main once-around or twice-around. Generally speaking all tracks on this one are at the same grade with the exception of the tracks at the New River Mining Company (which are still at 2 inches).

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2025
    BNSF FAN, jhn_plsn and Sumner like this.
  2. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    4,097
    9,307
    81
    I like the twice-around best.

    The changes in elevation, grades, and accompanying terrain, add lots of operating and visual interest.

    And you could always add a double crossover on/around the lift gate, to selectively transform it into two separate, intersecting roads.
     
    Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  3. jhn_plsn

    jhn_plsn TrainBoard Supporter

    2,845
    4,143
    76
    #1 #1 #1.
     
    Hoss, BNSF FAN and BigJake like this.
  4. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    4,097
    9,307
    81
    A six-around?!
     
    Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  5. country joe

    country joe TrainBoard Member

    1,747
    6,283
    63
    I prefer option 2. It has the same operation possibilities as option 1 but allows 2 trains to run unattended. I mostly enjoy watching 2 trains running and occasionally doing some switching. You can operate the double track as single track like option 1 but can run 2 trains when you’re in the mood to just do some rail fanning.
     
    Hoss, BNSF FAN and in2tech like this.
  6. jhn_plsn

    jhn_plsn TrainBoard Supporter

    2,845
    4,143
    76
    Great point. In plan #1 Shane could double track from Superior Paper to New River so that he could have one train running continuously while working the industries off the siding.
     
    country joe, Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  7. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    4,097
    9,307
    81
    Having a free-running through-freight or passenger train orbit around a layout, as a local freight dodges the former while serving the various industries is a great recipe for fun!

    How long can you run without hitting the emergency stop button?!
     
    country joe, Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  8. in2tech

    in2tech TrainBoard Member

    3,068
    9,812
    83
    I agree #2 with the two trains running when you want too. It even looks like you can throw switches where they are next to each other going around? Of course I might be wrong. Which one do you like better, it's your empire :) TBH both looks really cool. Almost everyone changes their mind once they start to lay track down and run trains :) We will see.
     
    Sumner, Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  9. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    Thanks for the feedback and comments! I still don't really know which one I like better. There are pros and cons to each. I'm at a point where I know about how much track I need though so at least that.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2025
  10. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    I think I'm going to go with Option 1 with a few minor tweaks...

    1. Added a siding behind the lumber yard and depot. This will serve as a run-around or siding for the local freights as well as a passenger train siding if I ever decide to add Liberty Junction to Amtrak's Texas Eagle route.
    2. Deleted one of the staging tracks. I'd like to have three staging tracks with the main passing behind them but with the added siding it was just too crowded. I'll manage.
    3. New River Spur (top) now comes off of the "high" main instead of the "low" main". This allows me to put New River Mining Company higher than everything else at an elevation of about 3.25 inches. There's room to raise that to 3.5 or maybe 4 inches if I decide I want it higher.
    4. I extended the siding on the left side (middle double tracks).
    5. Mostly for y'all's benefit, I color coded the elevations and added directional arrows where there are grades.
    6. Mostly for y'all's benefit again, I added bridge elevations at the three bridges along New River.
    The one thing I don't have is an interchange for an off layout railroad. It isn't a necessity but it would be nice if I can find a place that makes sense for it. I could repurpose the bottom track by the engine house for that, but I really want that as a fueling track for locos. I'm open to suggestions if anyone has a good idea but I'm also content with leaving things the way they are.

    [​IMG]
     
    country joe and BNSF FAN like this.
  11. Sumner

    Sumner TrainBoard Member

    3,276
    7,775
    68
    How about moving the engine house up to the top right in the area before the entrance to the staging or yard trucks and above that green truck?

    Then using the bottom like you suggested for the interchange. To me the engine house by itself down there looked kind of out of place. At the top you would have a little bit more room to do some other detail around it.

    Sumner
     
    BNSF FAN, country joe and Hoss like this.
  12. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    jhn_plsn, BNSF FAN and country joe like this.
  13. country joe

    country joe TrainBoard Member

    1,747
    6,283
    63
    Sumner had a great suggestion. I like this plan a lot.
     
    BNSF FAN and Hoss like this.
  14. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    I spent a little time drawing in some scenery and roads this evening just to help illustrate the vision. I think this should just about wrap this thing up from a design standpoint. Time to start spending some money.

    Thanks for all of your feedback getting to this point. It has helped tremendously!

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2025
    BNSF FAN and country joe like this.
  15. in2tech

    in2tech TrainBoard Member

    3,068
    9,812
    83
    I really like these track plans of yours. I think you should start over so we can see more of them :) Just kidding, but kind of not! Now if it was just as easy ( yes I know it's not east drawing track plans ), to actually build it, and as cheap :)

    Spend that stuff. You decide on the brand of track? I might have missed it.
     
    Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  16. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    4,097
    9,307
    81
    It looks really good!

    A couple of very minor nits:
    1. Extend the interchange tracks by sliding the switch feeding them to the right as far as practical. No since having a longer single track feeding a shorter set of interchange tracks.
    2. Two short tracks for a grain elevator that size, with a single loading chute doesn't make a lot of sense, especially with the at-grade road crossing that close. Unless you plan to add a 2nd chute on that elevator...
     
    Hoss and BNSF FAN like this.
  17. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    I'm not gonna lie...I really enjoy drawing up different track plans. If I thought I could make a side gig out of it I would! Even though I really like this one part of me still wants to clean the slate and see what different idea I might come up with for the same space. But alas, at some point I have to stop drawing and start building. :D

    I'm most likely going to go with Peco code 55 simply because the consensus seems to be that they have the best turnouts, but aesthetically I do like the look of Atlas better. I'd like to use ME but it's a lot more expensive and hard to find.
     
    country joe and in2tech like this.
  18. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    Here's the kit I plan to use for the grain elevator. Are you saying the tracks are too short or that only one track is really needed?

    [​IMG]
     
  19. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    4,097
    9,307
    81
    The un/loading shed is single track, so you do not need double tracks there.

    As for the length of the siding, a couple of points:

    You need not have much more siding track behind the chute than in front of it, just enough extra room after the chute for the loco(s), with the last car under the chute, and you are pulling the cut of cars from the main, through the chute.

    You might need more track in front of the chute than behind, just depending on the distance to the mainline.

    This may/not be obvious, but you need not have a train with more total hopper capacity than the elevator, to service that elevator.
     
    Hoss likes this.
  20. Hoss

    Hoss TrainBoard Member

    1,028
    1,286
    45
    Hmm. Seems like a siding may be better than stub end tracks for a grain elevator. I'm wondering if it might be better to move the grain elevator to the other side of the layout near the interchange track and farm supply. Over there I have room to put it on a siding.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2025
    BigJake likes this.

Share This Page