Reverse Loop...Or NO Reverse Loop?

[Lighthorseman]

I submit for your comments, a 1:1 scale mockup of the engine-servicing area of my new On30 layout. My question, as stated, deals with a planned (?) reverse loop. You'll note that there are a few fill-in-the-blank spaces. Sorry.

Here is the section without the reverse loop. Looking from the top left, the train arrives and goes through a #6 turnout, allowing the train to do one of a few things.

--> 1.) Run past (or stop at) the water, sand and coal buildings, passing around behind the roundhouse, and down the return track, thus eliminating the need for reverse loop wiring.

--> 2.) Run behind the water, coal and sand buildings to enter the small 3-track yard, enter the turntable, or continue on to the return track, once again, eliminating the need for reverse loop wiring.

The return track will be hidden but accessable from below.

 

[Lighthorseman]

Then...

Next, we have the reverse-loop option. In the following picture, the two turnouts have been circled. This way, a train could either continue along the return track (top right) for unimpeded continuous running, or go through the reverse loop, allowing access to the small yard, and heading back out the way it came, if so desired.

At the other end of the layout, another reverse loop would allow the trains to be turned back again.

Sorry about the not-so great pictures, but this was a hurried sort of affair so that I could get your valuble input.

Comments?

 

[Lighthorseman]

By The Way...

I just thought I'd mention...the lime green circled track is the branchline joining at the loco facility. The pinkish-red circled track is the return track. I'm not sure if this really matters.

 

[Ralph]

I say keep it simple make it fun; no reverse loop.
Ralph

 

[Urban]

I'd leave the loop out, unless you're modelling the kind of location which might really have had a reverse loop, perhaps for turning whole passenger trains around.

 

[Tyson Rayles]

You already have a turntable so the reverse loop is a little redundant. But then I'd also get rid of the turntable and roundhouse (incredable waste of space where good scenery good be going instead). Contray to popular thought turntables and roundhouse where not all that common, unless this town is supposed to be a division point or the only town of note on your entire railroad it's not likely to have had either. If it had anything it would most likey have been a wye (which I wouldn't model either as it wastes space also), but then these are some of the many hazards of steam which is why the real R.R.'s got rid on em'!

 

[Russ Bellinis]

Originally posted by Tyson Rayles
You already have a turntable so the reverse loop is a little redundant. But then I'd also get rid of the turntable and roundhouse (incredable waste of space where good scenery good be going instead). Contray to popular thought turntables and roundhouse where not all that common, unless this town is supposed to be a division point or the only town of note on your entire railroad it's not likely to have had either. If it had anything it would most likey have been a wye (which I wouldn't model either as it wastes space also), but then these are some of the many hazards of steam which is why the real R.R.'s got rid on em'!

A short line like the Sierra Railroad in Jamestown Cali, used a small turntable with a two or three stall engine house like the one that was introduced by Revell years ago and since available from just about all of the plastic kit manufacturers. I would leave out the reverse loop.

 

[CN1]

For me, I would say go for the reverse loop. But that's me. Do what you will like. It's your layout.

 

[Lighthorseman]

Thanks For The Advice!

Thanks to everyone for your input. I'm going to quash the reverse loop, mainly, as Tyson pointed out, there is already a way to turn trains about with the turntable. It just becomes more fun setting up a train for a trip facing the other way.

The turntable and roundhouse, however, will stay. For me, they're just "gotta-haves". Yes, they do waste space. However, I just love 'em. Why are the loco facilities located at the lesser end of the layout? Give me a while, and I'll invent some sort of quasi-plausible story.

 

[Russ Bellinis]

Re: Thanks For The Advice!

Originally posted by Lighthorseman
Thanks to everyone for your input. I'm going to quash the reverse loop, mainly, as Tyson pointed out, there is already a way to turn trains about with the turntable. It just becomes more fun setting up a train for a trip facing the other way.

The turntable and roundhouse, however, will stay. For me, they're just "gotta-haves". Yes, they do waste space. However, I just love 'em. Why are the loco facilities located at the lesser end of the layout? Give me a while, and I'll invent some sort of quasi-plausible story.

You don't really need to invent a story about why the engine facilities are where they are. Things have changed since the BN SF merger; but prior to the merger, Santa Fe's engine facility as well as their only hump yard in So. Ca. was in Barstow. I think it is also a division point. If you look at a map of So. Ca., Barstow is a small town in the desert about 100 miles Northeast of Los Angeles. Their main classification yard is still there and so are the engine shops, but most of the engine work has been transferred to BN shops in the Northwest I think. Much of the car repair that used to be done in Barstow is now done in Yakima, Wash. To my knowledge they never had a turn table there because the facility was built in the diesel era. I think their engine facility was at Redondo Jct. during the steam era, but am not sure.