im stuck on my layout

[bigsteel]

yes my bench work is in place already,the only sides with walls are the top of the pic and the left side,but in the top left coener there will be an opening underneath to reach it.and i not sure yet but i might have magnetic uncouplers in the steel mill.but after i stated this does it look O.K but if i had too id move it out 2 feet from the walls.but since its open on 2 side i think ill be ok

 

[Ralph]

Bigsteel, I like your latest plan! The only thing I wonder about is what would have to be a pretty sharp grade on the far right side of the plan where you have the mainline and a siding connecting with the yard before ducking underneath the yard tracks at the top right corner.
Otherwise the plan allows for continuous running or point to point from yard to branchline and mine with good placement of turnouts.
Ralph

 

[MadHatter]

announce1 Love the layout plan!!! :thumb:

Even if you did battle to reach the back, you could always use a step ladder or something to gain a little hight.

 

[bigsteel]

i thought the same thing about the grade on the inner mainline too that is why right bafter the crossover it starts to drop and im concealing it behind a full length mountain around the back drop so it doesnt have too drop so steeply to clear bench work.i think i figured it to be a 4 percent grade which if you cant see it doesnt matter if it isnt prototypical, right?

Even if you did battle to reach the back, you could always use a step ladder or something to gain a little hight.

LOL simple answers to complicated problems ,i like that.

 

[bigsteel]

alright here it is with a little more detail.ive added a wash rack and sand and deisel facilities and also added a maintenence house connected to the turntable.where the lines aere near the mine those are driveways for the mining town.ill come back later with some more details like the mountain and stuff.

 

[pgandw]

Big Steel

Issues I see:

- You still are planning on reaches of at least 36" in many places. While you may be able to do that with just benchwork, will you still be able to reach that far to rerail a car over scenery?

- not much room for an access hatch by the turntable area or the engine servicing area. Hatches need to be a minimum of 18" by 18" (assumes you are thin and will stay that way). You should probably cut them out now before the track plan takes away the space.

- the engine terminal and servicing is on the opposite side of the layout from the yard. Normally, a way is devised for the main line engines to proceed from the yard arrival/departure track to engine servicing/storage.

- the yard is not functional as drawn; it only supports counter-clockwise trains, and not very well even for those. The passing siding on the far right is the only possible arrival/departure tracks for a train going clock-wise. I see no way for the yard switcher to get a cut of cars from any a/d tracks to the yard without fouling the main.

- The passing track on the far right must be on a steep grade to duck under the yard tracks, which means it can only be used by intact trains - no uncoupling allowed. This conflicts with its use as an a/d track for trains going clock-wise.

- The mine is strictly a push-pull operation because there is no run-around on the mine branch. Any running-around must be done at the passing siding where the engine servicing area branches off, further tying up the main line.

- servicing the steel mill will effectively remove one yard track from classification/car storage. Again, there are no run-arounds other than the passing siding which cannot have cars standing on it because they will roll away, and the run-around by the engine servicing. This means all putting of cars in proper order in relation to the engine for spotting them at the mine or mill must be done at this one run-around track.

- have you checked the run-around, passing, and yard tracks for consistency with your desired longest train length?

my thoughts, your choices

 

[bigsteel]

alright time to answer some stuff
1.ill probably move the layotu 2 feet a way from any walls.
2.if there 2 feet away i wont need a hatch
3.i dont know moch about arrival departure and operations , just the basics any help please!thanks
4.could you draw a way to make it work with a blast furnace, BOF, rolling mill,and yard tracks to store 10 coal hoppers,10 lime cars,and 10 iron ore cars thx.
5.i might do the complete opposite and raise them OR shorten my yard tracks for clearance
6.im redrawing it and adding a runaround.
7.im redrawing to add a yard track for the lost one and another run around ill post it in a minute.
8.my longest train will only be 8 2 bay hoppers at approx. 6in each

P.S way to break a guy down man while hes feelin good pgandw LOL

 

[bigsteel]

i also just wanted too say real quick before planning goes on that,i really dont care about 'realistic operations' as long as its all there and is functional.thx

 

[Wildcatfootball]

When I posted my plan awhile back pgandw did the same thing to me too, in the end though, after going back over my layout, it did need revising. Your layout is looking good so far, just need's some "prototype" in it.:thumb:

 

[bigsteel]

ok guys sorry its been so long and thanks for all the kind complements about my layout

you like me you really like me,the mask/QUOTE] , but i had to rush into work lasdt night to fix one of my colleages mishaps with some gas...well anyway pagandw i finally got it revise and here it is , i added most of the things i could understand...anyway

i added a yard track and raised the hidden track and shortened the yard to make the grade about .5 pecent.i added a runaround track near the mine if you could tell me anything else i need,i didnt understand what you were talking about with the engine terminal.and i also dont know what to do about my mill if you could can you maybe revise or draw something so its easier for me to understand?thanks

 

[pgandw]

ok guys sorry its been so long and thanks for all the kind complements about my layout

you like me you really like me,the mask/QUOTE] , but i had to rush into work lasdt night to fix one of my colleages mishaps with some gas...well anyway pagandw i finally got it revise and here it is , i added most of the things i could understand...anyway

i added a yard track and raised the hidden track and shortened the yard to make the grade about .5 pecent.i added a runaround track near the mine if you could tell me anything else i need,i didnt understand what you were talking about with the engine terminal.and i also dont know what to do about my mill if you could can you maybe revise or draw something so its easier for me to understand?thanks

Big Steel

I didn't mean to be hard on you. The point in my criticisms is that this a large layout by my standards. It will take several years and quite a bit of $$ and time to get to an operational state. I would not want you to be faced with tearing up the layout at that point because it doesn't do what you want it to.

This is a long response, but I don't really know how to condense it. I also recommend you have Andrew move this thread to the Track Planning for the Future Forum. Read some of the other threads to assist your insight.

You have made some significant improvements in the track plan. The next step is to make a decent layout plan great. But first, let's take a step back and reconsider the plan in the light of YOUR vision. You have 3 primary scenes on the plan - the mill with yard in front, the mine, and the engine terminal.

Are these the scenes you most want to have on your layout? When you picture your layout in your mind at night or away from the plan, what are your favorite scenes? If the 3 I listed are not your top 3, then the layout needs re-thinking until it does better reflect your vision. When you walk into the room what do you want visitors to your layout to see first? Is that what they will see? To me, this is the difference between the great and other layouts. When I walk into a great layout, I readily see the story the owner wants me to see. I can grasp and understand his vision.

To share a vision, there must be believability and/or shared reference points. If it looks nothing like any prototype I have seen pictures of, or doesn't look like there's any reason for the track to be where it is, then I have a hard time identifying with the owner's vision. Same is true is almost any art form. If I see a painting of a harbor, there has to be something that reminds me of some harbors I have seen for the painting to communicate a message to me.

So think about how a stranger would enter and view your completed layout.

The catch I see in the scene presentation is that normally engine terminals are near the yards they serve. A train arrives in a yard, and the road engine is sent to the terminal for servicing. The yard switcher breaks up the train and makes a new one, and a serviced road engine(s) are brought out and attached to the new train.

Obviously, in full size life, railroads avoid breaking and making up trains as much as possible - it costs money to do it needlessly. But it has to be done sometime somewhere unless you have unit trains running from a single loading plant to a single receiving facility. True unit trains were rare until the '70s. And depending on era, a road engine would need servicing and perhaps a new crew after traveling a certain distance.

I strongly recommend John Armstrong's Track Planning for Realistic Operation to get an idea of how prototype practices influence layout design. It's a re-read of many times for me. Others consider it the bible of good layout design.

If the layout at least reflects your priorities in terms of scenes presented, then I recommend reviewing the plan against the following criteria (I partially did this in my earlier critique).

Number of operators and control system: How many operators do you normally expect to have to operate the layout? How many trains can be operated simultaneously without interfering with each other too often? Do those numbers match? On your plan, 3 trains simultaneously is probably about the max, and at most one can be unattended running. The unattended train can be running loops on the main, while a train is servicing the mill/yard and another on the mine branch. But eventually the latter 2 will need access to the main as well.

Your plan will also work well in one train (one operator) mode. The single operator can operate the various trains in sequence as desired. From my perspective, it is not a layout that requires trains running everywhere constantly to be enjoyed, but it can support 2-3 trains and operators when desired easily.

Another comment in this area: wiring for DC control of more than 2 trains simultaneously is not trivial and requires planning and forethought. I recommend DCC from the beginning if you ever plan to operate 3 or more trains simultaneously.

Due to limited aisle spaces and a non-linear type plan, tethered walk-around control is going to be limited to the yard area. Walking through an operation reveals another problem with the engine terminal being on the other side of the layout from the yard. How are you going to control an engine you are taking from the yard to the engine terminal or vice versa. Because of the backdrop location and the duckunder, you are almost forcing yourself to have a wireless throttle for this task. Operation of the mine branch, OTOH, is probably going to take place from the central pit, and could be a throttle mounted in a control panel instead of hand-held.

Last thought in this category - In walking through controlling locomotives and trains along their logical routes, that duckunder is going to get a lot of use during operations. To reduce the number of model earthquakes, and accompanying derailments, bruises, and scrapes, I recommend you put your layout as high as you can deal with, and pad the under side of the duckunder.

Normally, I am dead set against duckunders, especially ones that are used during normal operations. The need to use it during operations pretty much precludes a swinging or hinged mechanism because of the time element.

Access for construction and maintenance: Your duckunder is pushing the layout higher to avoid becoming a pain in the neck (literally). The higher the layout, the shorter your reach for construction and maintenance.

The steel mill side has a 3ft reach to the backdrop. Unless you make the backdrop easily removable, the shorter reach from the octagon doesn't count. From the top of the octagon to the hidden main line and mining branch is also 3ft. The corner where at the backdrop is even further. Finally, I don't see enough room for the planned (but not shown) access pit in the upper left corner.

A 3ft reach is the max for a reasonably tall person on a low layout; 30" is often recommended as a maximum reach. I don't have any brilliant suggestions to resolve this issue with your current track plan, perhaps others can help here.

Length of longest normal train: you stated 8 2 bay hopper cars at 6" each, which is a total of 48". How long are the locomotives you will use to pull the train? Will you attach a caboose at the end? Add this all up in inches or cm to get your longest normal train length. Then measure your sidings and tracks to make sure they meet this minimum - it's at least as important as the minimum radius of your curves.

All passing sidings, staging yard tracks, yard switching lead, the yard arrival and/or departure track need to be this long to avoid creating operational bottlenecks. The longest yard track must be at least as long as the cars in the longest train.

Towns generally need to be separated by at least 1.5 times normal longest train lenght to avoid having the train appear in 2 towns at the same time.

Tail tracks on switchbacks must also be long enough to handle the expected train length using them.

In your case, is the run-around track on the mining branch long enough? Can it be shortened? How about the arrival/departure track? And last, how much clearance is left on the lower mill tracks after cars are spotted there for a train to access the upper mill buildings? Will the cars in the lower tracks have to be moved prior to servicing the upper mill buildings? If yes, is this an acceptable operating bottle-neck to you?

Grades and vertical clearances: How are grades used on the planned layout? Is the maximum grade compatible with the normal longest train? Was there room allowed for vertical transition curves in the grade calculations?

In your particular case, the critical grade is the mining branch. The addition of the run-around track on the branch complicates things because it needs to be level. If you let the main dip down from the cross-over at the 6ft point on the left side, as well as the mine branch climbing, you will have about a 3% grade on both tracks until you get to the mine branch run-around. This will be difficult to handle scenically with 3.5" vertical separation between the 2 tracks, and less than 2.5" horizontal separation. With the mining branch sitting a scant 3.5-4" above the main, there will be little room for you to get a hand in to fix anything on the main track - especially 3 ft away from your access point!

I recommend you shorten the mine branch runaround to the minimum needed for the train length on the branch, and push the runaround as close to the bridge as possible. This will give a gentler grade, and reduce the amount of mine branch track sitting directly on top of the main.

Where the main and the mine branch track separate the main will have to climb back to its normal level. This has to take place before the trunout for the passing siding on the far right side of the layout. Could be a steep grade.

Minimum radius: I have not checked what your minimum radius is, and what your longest planned cars and locomotives are.

The recommended minimum radius for problem-free operation is 3 times the length of your longest car or locomotive. Many model railroaders violate this rule, and it can be broken. But you should understand the consequences of doing so.

Operation at 2.5 times longest car length is usually reliable. Long trains may tend to stringline on curves, and problems between cars of greatly different length may appear. Diaphrams on passenger cars may not match up, and certain models may have to have some underbody detail removed to allow trucks to swivel sufficiently. Couplers may not line up on curves.

Operation at 2 times longest car length can be done, but usually requires truck-mounted or special couplers to succeed. Modified underbodies are often required. Some failures should be expected where a piece will not work on this sharp a curve without extensive modification.

Less than 2 times longest car length requires testing of each piece.

If you are planning passenger car operations, your curves are probably too sharp as per the above guidelines.

Vertical and horizontal separation for scenery: Normally, Nature does not allow earth to stay in place at vertical angles greater than 30 degrees. I arbitrarily tighten that to 45 degrees for my standard. This means that for 2 somewhat parallel tracks at different elevations, the minimum horizontal separation equals the vertical separation plus 2 inches (in HO). Anything closer than that is going to require cliffs, walls, or retaining walls as a scenic treatment.

The other aspect to watch is where the closer track is higher than the track further away. One can easily get into situations where the further away lower track cannot be seen, admired, or reached to be maintained. This situation can also happen with tall structures placed in front of track. Making a 3-D mockup or drawing vertical cross sections in critical places can reveal these problems in the planning stage.

As discussed earlier, you will have problems where the mining branch is climbing while running parallel to the main. There is no room for any normal scenery slope until the vertical separation is great enough to put the main in a tunnel.

Another problem area will be where the main is climbing back up to level at the upper right corner of your plan. Although your shortened the yard tracks to avoid a tunnel situation, you still may have to build a retaining wall or similar here.

Throwing turnouts and uncoupling: Again, the desired methods have to be matched to track placement and proposed scenery.

If one is a "manual everything" with adjacent ground throws and coupler picks, then one must have all throws and uncoupling points within reach - and reach must not be hampered by scenery and structures. More than 2ft reach for uncoupling and turnout throwing becomes difficult. Trains running down a main in front of where one is trying to reach in is also a disaster waiting to happen (don't ask me how I learned this one!).

Using uncoupling ramps and switch machines or extended manual linkages introduces further complexity and cost into the layout. Uncoupling ramps require much closer tolerances for coupler mounting and operation than picks and skewers do. Also, trucks and car weights must be right to prevent accidental uncouplings, yet uncouple when desired. Electromagnets may be required on main lines.

Despite the negatives, I personally prefer remote uncoupling and turnout throws. The "hand of god" reaching into my layout is more distraction than I normally want to the visuals I have worked so hard on. But even with remote uncoupling and turnout throws, adequate sight lines to see which way the turnout is thrown, or to see whether the cars are spotted correctly over the uncoupling ramp or not, are still required.

In your case, the mill building construction and positioning is going to be critical for tracks going into the buildings so that you can see what you are doing. You wouldn't want to smash a car into the back end of the building, would you?

The above are just planning guidelines I and/or others have learned the hard way. Will following them cut down on track location possibilities (and likely the amount of track)? You better believe it! But these guidelines often mean the difference between a satisfying, buildable, and useable layout, albeit more limited, and a layout that gets torn down before completion because it just doesn't "work" for the owner/builder.

again, these are my thoughts, you make your choices

 

[pgandw]

Big Steel

The more I look at your plan, the more I believe there might be a better way to achieve your goals.

Having your steel mill complex on the right side causes your layout to be in two almost separate rooms, with the attendant awkward access issues. Would it be possible to move the steel mill complex to the left wall? Or even move it to the top wall? If moving it against a wall, I would also suggest reducing the depth slightly (to 30") by reducing the number of yard tracks and/or passing siding in front of the yard.

The rearrangement will greatly expand the possibilities for the rest of the layout, including the engine terminal, as well as improving access.

just my thoughts, your choices

 

[MasonJar]

Big Steel,

If you would like this thread moved to the Track Planning forum, please just let me know. You could also start a new thread there, with a link back here for continuity.

Fred's advice is good - and it does give you a lot to think about. One relatively quick solution that at least addresses the engine servicing/yard point is to flip the steel mill and the servicing area. That way, the operations from mine to mill are run from the pit, and the servicing area is now adjacent to the yard, as per prototype operations. I think this is a variation on Fred's suggestion...

I agree with Fred that the yard is still not easily operated. And the only way to get into the mill is to use the lead into another building (lower right) as a switchback. I know you said that prototypical operations were not high on your list, but as Fred said (I'm paraphrasing), if you've gone to the trouble of making a believable steel mill, it should operate in a believable way, or at least a less-than-frustrating way. I think that the two switchbacks required to get intot the mill (at less than 2 feet long each) will prove very frustrating.

I have to ask too - why the opening in the benchwork in the lower left? If the bottom and right sides are open to the rest of the room, why are you leaving that corner open too? Is there a door or some other access required? Could you post a drawing of the entire room with all windows. doors, stairs, closets, etc showing? There may be a better overall configuration (without requiring you to renegotiate with the "Lands Commissioner" ).

I think that you can "thin down" the shelves/benchwork to provide a better environment for the operator(s) without losing much or any of the features that seem to be important (are they as Fred listed?).

Hope that helps.

Andrew

 

[bigsteel]

thanks for the help pgandw i might just reconfigure the whole thing but i still want alot to pack in this limited space.i read a small book on the ten commandments of yards and i got a good idea of everything now.mason jar it would help alot too move this to track planning and ill post a layout of the room too.see yah later.oh and also the mountainous terrain on some parts i really wanted too show off the C&O area and i wantred to have the steel mill and engine servicing those are the main things.

 

[bigsteel]

OK heres the whole room.the area i was 'given' is the 10.5 by 10.5 ft area in the corner.the reason i had an open space in the corner of the layout is for people to walk down on the landing and have wiggle room.but i cant go in the aisle way,so pretty much the spot i have is the spot i get,ugh:cry: .but i know of worse.well any new bench work ideas would be great.i can modify the stuff im working on now to work for 3 feet.but in the open places i could probably keep it 4 feet since its is technically 2 since you can reach both sides.but others i could change.i just want to get the most of this space as possible.and also have continous running with turns so no totallypoint to point layouts.

 

[bigsteel]

ok here it is.

 

[MadHatter]

New Idea

Bigsteel, I see everyones' worried about you not being able to reach if there is an accident or mishap or if you need to clean in those hard to reach places.:cry:

Heres an idea.

Why not make "access hatches" in two or three of the corners- if they can do it on the larger layouts why not on the smaller ones too? :thumb:

 

[MadHatter]

Maybe you should make your put a bit wider, after looking at the plan on the previous page I see that you can make it closer to the Steel Mill.

 

[MadHatter]

Heres what I think:

1) Move your loco Facilities to the upper left (maybe even on top of the tunnels).
2) Your Steel Mill Needs some Loops for the locos to run around theoir train- In real life it is considered dangerous to push a train over long distances, thus locos should always be in front.
3) As was said by a few of the other guys, maybe your yard needs to be reconfigured. The way your buildings are placed makes it look like a train need to manuver into that bottom building to get to the top buildings- maybe put all your buildings on one side or shift the bottom one to another location.
4) You need a shunting neck to come down past that bottom building as long as your longest yard track. You want the shunter to stay off the mainline.


Otherwise the plan looks cool.

Don't stress we will find a way that you can have your cake and eat it!!

 

[MadHatter]

Sorry that this is off topic, but is there anywhere I can download Xtrack Cad- the links at their site don't work or don't have it anymore.