Yeah I have to agree all the switchbacks were frightening to me too. LOL I really like the new plan. the shorter run around on a curve looks better too.
Look at it this way it's just a whole bunch of extra work for nothing & that's not challenging at all! The Los Angeles Junction Ry has 65 miles of track in very close spaces & not one switchback. But there are alot of Xings to do the same thing as your switchbacks. Highly suggest you loosely tack your track down & try switching the switchbacks & see how long it takes you to see my point. See what you think of this revised plan.
I was looking at that picture and the second yard ladder looks to me like it will be overkill. Things always look good on paper and then you start laying track... I'd use a small engine to pul the cars off the back of the train myself. That's just me though. I really do like some of those suggestions on the new track arrangements. From my experience as you start switching your layout you are going to get tired of having to do endless run around moves. chances are you'll figure out what goes into trailing point spurs and switch those, then switch all the facing point spurs. This is a really fun thread by the way. I look forward, every time I visit, to see what's new in here.
uncoupling on a curve can be precarious, andy has a good point. Maybe you can widen the radius on that part. Everyone has their own designing style and taste in these matters. When I was deigning small layouts. Actually I still ponder them quite a bit. i had a rule of trying to design with the least amount of switches possible. Or I'd use the time saver as an example of massive amounts of switching with only five switches. My last N scale layout just used the small oval as a run around and had five spurs/switches. Not realistic but in reality you wouldn't have a tiny oval of track like that that goes nowhere so who cares. it saved me space on run arounds and money on switches and it was only 2.5 x 3 feet. It's easy to look at the track plan and think each area is isolated. For instance the yard area seems like a separate scene, at least on paper, that ends right where the yard switches make one track. But really, once you start running the layout that entire curve is going to become a yard switching lead. You'll probably end up pulling cars out at times in strings that put your engine into the run around track on the curve. I'm not sure if you plan to run three car trains or if you plan to run longer trains to be switched into the industries, but that yard ladder run around isn't going to be long enough for a full train to be turned, you'll have to cut the train in two. I'd just back the train to the long run around and use that. but maybe you like the idea of having to double your moves. The run around siding could have an industry on it, say a grain elevator and tiny station. that way you have cars that need to be moved to use it as a run around, and then replaced before you leave to return to the yard. I've heard this adds quite a bit to operations on a small switching layout. Andy's ideas for the industrial area look good to me visually, in fact I really like his first example. But there isn't enough space to fit all those switches into the main line. if they are #4 they are all 9 inches long. I would swap the switches around a bit. You might also consider using # 2 switches on the layout to save length. someone else mentioned laying the track down and running for a bit, I think that would be your best design tool of all. you can design on the computer and then use that design to see how it all fits together. If anything needs changing you can then alter the computer design. etc.
Mike,Don't forget the industries owns their track not the serving railroad and I don't think they would like to have their cars moved so you can switch another industry after all their unloading crew will be getting paid for standing around. Also it can take up to 30 minutes to switch one industry. Food for thought..The current trend for switching layouts is to use prototypical designs while avoiding a switching puzzle design.
Thanks for all the suggestions. Here is my first progress video on the new NYC Shelf Layout. [video=youtube;d0bxRVo8gKs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0bxRVo8gKs[/video] I got the ceiling painted this morning. Mike
hi fyfer, there is a difference between having a few switchbacks and only switchbacks. I found your response not really nice. You could have a rather nice layout even without. Even with some scenery dividing the two legs. I found the length of the run-around very short, changed it a bit. With "low" industries between the edge and the runaround, manual (un)coupling seems easily possible, also in curves. Have fun with building your plan, God Bless indeed Paul
Wow! I watched the pre repair video and thought, hmmm ok that's a space. Now it looks like a layout room. Amazing what some paint does for a space.
Nice looking plan. I like how the interchange is hidden behind trees. I also like the mainline being something that could go on beyond the dge of the layout behind a strcuutre. We'll see what Fifer thinks.
Thanks for the trouble geeky but I will stick with my plan. I just think yours does not look busy enough (maybe too modern) and I went to 18" radius as well. Thanks for the ideas and effort though. Mike
He he that wasn't my plan. I just quoted it in my response. Go for it with your plan. I can't wait to see it up and running.
