Layout #06 - Trying Again - Opinions Welcome

[cidchase]

Hi Hoss,
It's a fine looking plan, especially with the elevation changes!
I have two observations; first, there is no way to reverse
a locomotive. A reverse loop could be created at either of
the places the spurs disappear into their tunnels by merging
back into the main track.
Second, possibly put a double crossover in place of the single crossover at the point closest to"N" on your compass rosette.
This would allow one train to cover all points on both tracks
of the mainline without having to throw any switches, just
in case you wanted to do continuous running.
Just my suggestion, I know everyone would not agree.

 

[Hoss]

Arlaghan, that was some great advice. Thanks. Most of it I had already thought about, but it's still good to hear as a reminder every once in a while.

Regarding the two "tunnel tracks", I was actually already planning to extend them all the way to the edge of the layout. That really had nothing to do with expansion, although it would certainly make expansion easy, but more to do with the fact that I know some wise cracker will shine a flashlight up into the tunnel just to see if the tracks stop right inside the portal. Imagine their surprise when it keep going. I figured every once in a while I could hook a few cars up to a couple of locos and back them into the tunnel and park it...giving the appearance that another train is coming in off of the interchange track and is waiting for a green light to proceed.

 

[Hoss]

Originally posted by cidchase
Hi Hoss,
It's a fine looking plan, especially with the elevation changes!
I have two observations; first, there is no way to reverse
a locomotive. A reverse loop could be created at either of
the places the spurs disappear into their tunnels by merging
back into the main track.
Second, possibly put a double crossover in place of the single crossover at the point closest to"N" on your compass rosette.
This would allow one train to cover all points on both tracks
of the mainline without having to throw any switches, just
in case you wanted to do continuous running.
Just my suggestion, I know everyone would not agree.

Cidcase, thanks for your input.

Regarding reversing loops, I originally had two reversing loops drawn into the layout so I could turn an entire train around no matter which direction it was going. In the interest of having less track and more scenery, I opted to delete them based on the fact that I will almost ALWAYS be running multi unit consists. If I place them tail to tail then I can easily run the engines around to the other end of the train should I decide I want it going the other direction.

Regarding the crossover you're referring to, if you follow the tracks east you'll notice there is another crossover just before the turnout to the industry. If you're talking about using a TRUE double crossover (looks like an X), well I was trying to avoid that because the ones available from Peco (I'll be using all Peco track and turnouts) are not the same track spacing I want to run.

 

[Russ Bellinis]

The BNSF branch disappearing and ending in the tunnel is fine, but it looks like it would not be too difficult to connect the U.P. interchange track to your hidden staging yard, and then you could actually interchange U.P. with your BNSF. I think i would incorporate more industries to switch if I was building it, but it definately looks good.

 

[Hoss]

Hmmmm...I might have to play around with that a little bit and see what I can do. The biggest problem I can see is the 3" difference in elevation between the UP interchange and the hidden staging.

 

[Arlaghan]

Originally posted by Hoss
Hmmmm...I might have to play around with that a little bit and see what I can do. The biggest problem I can see is the 3" difference in elevation between the UP interchange and the hidden staging.

Actually, it's only a 1" difference if you look at it this way:
At the one end of your interchange it's at 1" elevation and goes DOWN to 0" elevation... have it go UP to 2" instead. Then it's just a matter of spanning the final 1" elevation difference to your staging yard.

The only concern is that there will only be a 2" clearance under the double track at 4" elevation that crosses it. Though, another option you could do is have the staging yard entry(s) slope down to a 2" elevation instead of 3". This way, you can start your climb on the interchange further along and have more of a clearance. (3" clearance is plenty in N scale.)

 

[screwysquirrel]

clearance

Well, 2" is plenty in N-scale for most cars

a 2" clearance will handle double stacks and triple-deck autocarriers. 1-3/4" handles my autorack just fine