I understand one part of your layout is to represent an interchange with another railroad. You presented the other railroad on several plans with a short bit of track across the corner of the layout, in one case coming out of one tunnel and running into another. Of course, tunnels are rare in Texas. A common place railroads interchange is where one railroad line crosses another with a X crossing, with a track connecting the two lines. Is your layout supposed to represent a portion of the Santa Fe in Texas? Here are some of the X crossings of other railroads on the Santa Fe between Cleburne and Rosenberg, based on a 1963 Official Guide and a 1973 Rand McNally Railroad Atlas, plus Junctions and 1 Grade Separation (over and under) McGregor X crossing SLSW (Cotton Belt) Temple X crossing MKT (and Junction Santa Fe’s own line to Lubbock and Texico) Cameron Junction SP branch to Rosebud. (Since this branch was isolated, it must have used trackage rights over ATSF to get to it, most likely from Caldwell) Caldwell GRADE SEPARATION Santa Fe over SP Milano X crossing MP Somerville, Junction Santa Fe’s own line to Conroe and Silsbee Brenham X Crossing SP Sealy X crossing MKT (and Junction Santa Fe’s own line to Matagorda) Wallis X crossing SP (ex-SAAP) Rosenberg X Crossing SP (short parallel running ATSF & SP) The interchange with another railroad at an X crossing would be easily represented by an interchange track that cuts off YOUR railroad, and either connects or seems to connect with the other railroad’s mainline which crosses your mainline at a non-operating dummy X crossing. Here is one way it could be modeled in your 10 x 10 room with your vertical train elevator. The interchange track disappears from view behind a viewblock. A line of trees would be especially appropriate for the part of Texas I guess you are modeling. I drew this corner out with 24 inch radius curves and #6 switch. I believe the crossing is 30 degrees but you could probably lay it out for a 45 degree or a 60 degree crossing. Two “tricks”. The dummy track for the “other railroad” is non running. It could be laid out with a substandard radius anyplace that would help. I drew it running off the front edge of the layout, crossing the mainline and disappearing alongside but not actually connecting to the interchange track. You don’t need a switch if you hide the point where the tracks would supposedly join. Trees would be an appropriate viewblock for an East Texas layout. I had a layout divided down the middle with a cutout outline of pine tree shapes with a little tree foliage stuck to it. The forest in this picture is only an inch thick. Another example of a viewblock: For a more city/ industrial setting in a Texas seaport I am currently building, I am running a track in between the silos of an export grain elevator to hide staging. MORE IDEAS another time ABOUT INTERCHANGE & “ANOTHER RAILROAD”
MORE IDEAS ABOUT INTERCHANGE & “ANOTHER RAILROAD” The level X crossing is one way to depict our railroad being crossed by another railroad at a point where an interchange would be appropriate. Modeling it would require finding a crossing of a suitable angle. But another way avoids the crossing, by using a grade separation. Here is one at Caldwell, Texas. The Santa Fe ran north and south on the overpass in distance, over SP tracks running east and west below. The SP - ATSF interchange track is at right. If we let “our” railroad be the one that goes over the overpass on top, it can be all level (gradeless) while the “other” railroad is in a cut. The interchange supposedly going to the other railroad could drop down a bit. This shouldn’t be a hard grade to lay out because it doesn’t have to meet any critical elevation points. It would only be used when switching the interchange. Whenever the interchange was being switched, the loco would be pushing downhill to leave cars and pulling uphill to pull them out. Someone suggested “outside staging.” Staging is important to represent a line like the Santa Fe across Texas. If the layout represents a small town on a main line, there should be a lot of traffic that just runs through, and an occasional local train that switches the visible industries. For the mainline trains, there is NO NEED FOR A “YARD”. They can come from staging, run through the scene and disappear back into staging. The yards are “somewhere else.” How about the local train that switches the visible industries? It could also originate from an unmodeled yard via staging, come onto the scene to switch and leave back to staging. I did this on my East Texas Santa Fe layout, a small “island” type layout. The main scene was a town the trains ran through, not a yard where they originated or terminated. The town scene had a station with a freight loading spur, a long passing siding, several industries, and a REAL interchange with a fully modeled logging short line. I had 3 staging tracks, 2 were double ended, 1 only single. So I could have a mainline train set up in either direction, and a local that could arrive from staging, come onto the scene to switch, then return in the opposite direction back to where it came. I wished for more staging, and for curves less sharp. Probably the main reasons I abandoned the “island” layout for an around-the-walls shelf layouts. You might be able to use something from a scheme I came up for in a layout that never got built. This one was to be a point-to-point except that one end would be plain stub staging, and the other a visible yard used mainly for staging but with a runaround and small turntable for minimal switching. Not a fully functional working yard, but a staging yard where I could run and turn a doodlebug. But that’s not what I wanted to show you about the plan. Suppose the staging tracks at each end were extended around the outside of the layout to join each other. For your layout, suppose that outside staging turns into a long double track passing siding around the outside of the layout, with a crossing located halfway down the passing siding. In your room it could hold 2 or 3 medium length 8-10 car trains. Where the mainline crosses itself going from the inside of the layout to the outside staging, it makes a crossing that could be scenicked to appear as one railroad crossing another. I drew in a connection made to look like an interchange track. My intent was to operate the layout as drawn point-to-point and switch that connecting track as an interchange FROM ONE END ONLY. (I wouldn’t switch it both ends because then I would just be interchanging with myself…) When I go over the crossing on one track, I call the junction by one name, and when I cross on the other track, I am in a different named place. However, if I wanted to run trains just roundy-round and not worry about realistic operation, I could use that connecting track to make a continuous roundy-round loop route. For your situation, if you used outside staging, you would HAVE a continuous route and could use the connection at the crossing As an interchange. By doing this is your room, I think you could have staging for 3 moderate length trains, 8 to 10 cars, a crossing that LOOKS LIKE crossing of two different railroads, an interchange track, one visible “town” with a passing siding long enough for your longest train, and several industry tracks. (But no “yard” as such…)
I like this one best of all. You'll have room for plenty of train operations as well as more room for maximum scenery.
