'The Yard' - A New Layout Commences

[bn-1000]

'The Yard' - A new switching layout commences

Last week I commenced construction of my framwork for the next layout (I'll start a new thread here on MRR soon), however the important part - the track plan - has gone through some pretty radical changes in the last few months.
I'll post more information on the construction and progress later but for the moment, I would like to put the track plan out there and welcome comments and suggestions.

Firstly, the brief to put you in the picture...

• L shape switching layout 3300mm x 2200mm (approx 11' x 7').
• Track level height at approximately 1200mm (approx 4').
• Main side will contain a small yard, loco shed and sidings.
• Yard will also serve as an Inglenook-style switching puzzle.
• The shorter side of the layout was originally going to contain all staging tracks to facilitate the main yard, but I have decided to utilize it for a small industry.
• I plan to use one or two MP15 switcher on a running session transferring cars from one to the other.
• Early 1990's BN theme on a small shortline.
• Designed for either one or two operators.

Track Plan:
I have designed a track plan using Mixy's Scarm software and enhanced it to attach here. From the jpg file...

(1). The yard storage tracks
(2). Extra yard storage tracks
(3). Mainline and run-around.
(4). A loco servicing track which will have a servicing building.
(5). Lead track for the loco serving track.
(6). A two-lane road overpass will visually break up the two sections.
(7). Yard lead for the small industry.
(8). Staging tracks (were going to be hidden, but thought they'd look okay exposed).
(9). Small industry.
(10). Lead track for small industry.
(11). The angled section is where the switch panel is mounted.

Some points...

• I have tried not to cram too much into the space. In fact I had three tracks in the top yard (2) but reduced it to only two tracks.
• I think I need a yard lead on the top yard (2)?
• Do I need a turnout at both (a) and (b)? I do like the idea of leaving the yard into a single track using a nice sweeping curved turnout.
• The overpass (6) will be the divider, breaking up the two locations. There will be some other scenery surrounding it (hills etc.).
• I was considering a two track between each location, rather than a single line. This would allow more flexibility for a two-operator session. Thoughts?

Operation...

• A switcher will commence in the main yard by sorting a cut of cars from the yards (1)(2) and assemble them on either the main track or run-around track (3).
• The same switcher (or another loco) will take the cut and leave the yard, under the bridge (6) and into the second location (8)(9)10).
• At the same time, a second operator can be assembling another cut with another switcher at the industry and staging yards (7)(8)(9)(10) ready to take back to the main yard.

Clear as mud?

I welcome any suggestions, comments, criticisms, opinions or any advice which will enable my to fine tune this beast.

Cheers,

 

[cajon]

Here's a crude variation of your plan w/o switchbacks. (Haven't learned to use a CAD program yet. LOL) If you really want one build a temp one to switch on & you'll soon see what's wrong w/ them, especially when there's cars parked on the lead. In fact lay all your track that way & switch it to see how if it operates to your liking before it's "cast in concrete" w/ glued down ballast. Also provided you w/ a choice of engine service tracks &/or a rip track closer to the yard. The engine service tracks at 4 & 5 can now be industry spots each w/ it's own spur. Your staging tracks at 8 could be hidden by a tall industry there on the closer spur set at an angle. Going to be modeling the Los Angeles Junction Ry a relatively large switching RR. There's plenty of Xings but not one switchback!

 

[steinjr]

Quick comment (the last one I tried to write must have been swallowed by the net somewhere):

1) Way too many meaningless switching leads. Unless you mean something else by "switching lead" than a place a locomotive can use while pulling cars.

Get rid of all those leads. And several of runarounds, too. On a layout this size you can make do with just one runaround.

2) Severe imbalance between staging (two very short tracks), yard capacity - quite a bit, and industry spots (one industry with several leads?)

If nothing else, drop one staging track and get one longer staging track instead of two short ones.

3) Let your yard tracks be between the main and the aisle on the right wing of the layout - allows you to add another railserved industry along the backdrop at upper right.

4) Not sure it makes a lot of sense to have an engine terminal in an area that just has a small local auxilliary yard/industry yard (i.e. a few tracks where cars can be left temporarily or sorted), this would not be the kind of place where you receives trains, resort the cars to build blocks for several destinations and send out those blocks on new trains, i.e. a classification yard - a huge sorting machine.

Smile,
Stein

 

[steinjr]

Btw - here is a small L-shaped track plan I have always admired - heavily based on Robert J. Beaty (aka Arjay1969 - RJ 1969, eh?) home layout plan:

It has some nifty features for a corner switching layout - like having the runaround around the corner (but with a radius large enough that it is 5 x the length of the longest pieces of rolling stock - with a 50" radius, you can get automatic coupling with rolling stock up to 10" long).

I also like the way the compound yard ladder gives you quite a bit of yard capacity, and the way industries are oriented so you can have room for some lawn and roads etc between the buildings.

If nothing else, it might serve as inspiration for some of the things that can be done - e.g. using the same piece of track as both part of a runaround and a yard lead (at different times).

Engines shown are GP40-2s - cars are 40' cars (so it is a bit of mix of eras - but gives an impression of how big things are). Turnouts are Peco code 75 medium turnouts, plus one Peco code 75 curved turnout - but the plan is loose enough that other turnouts could be substituted without trouble.


Smile,
Stein

 

[bn-1000]

Andy, thanks for the prompt reply and the time you’ve put into the revision. Setting out a temporary, operational track to test the operation is a good idea and I will certainly attempt this once the modules are complete. At the very least I will be photocopying track and turnout templates, cutting them out and pinning them onto the baseboard to replicate the plans.

I do have a small query about the amendment to the small industry on the side (10). There is now no run-around for any loco which arrives. How would that work operationally? Would a loco entering this single track be blocked and unable to get around it’s load?

I see what you’ve done with the main yard and ladder and that’s appears to be a better arrangement, however I might reduce the number of tracks on the yard as I’m a little concerned it might become too crowded and “busy”. I didn't want to turn it into a large formal classification yard, just a small rural siding with a few sidings.

The reason why I placed the loco servicing tracks on the top right (4)(5) was because it this facility was less an operational requirement, more scenic, so placing it over in the corner to fill a void.

Stein, thanks for your input also. I am sorry but you may need to clarify a few of your points (it's probably more due to my lack of knowledge of US operations as I think switching (shunting) is a very different beast here in Australia.)

1) Way too many meaningless switching leads. Unless you mean something else by "switching lead" than a place a locomotive can use while pulling cars.

I haven't used that term anywhere I can see, but if I'm misinterpreting the terminology I apologise. Do you mean my phrase "yard lead". That's where we are getting confused. I only have 2 yard leads (5) & (7).

2) Severe imbalance between staging (two very short tracks), yard capacity - quite a bit, and industry spots (one industry with several leads?)

Are you able to elaborate, I'm just not getting it (sorry)

3) Let your yard tracks be between the main and the aisle on the right wing of the layout - allows you to add another railserved industry along the backdrop at upper right.

So take the mainline and run-around to the back of the scene and have the yards at the front, closer to the operator? That sounds good!

I like the idea of a siding with an engine shed however - perhaps not a fully equipped facility but something which has seen busier days and not relegated to a secondary backup facility.

Stein, that track plan you've posted to great but how to the locos get around their cars after they deliver them to the industries? Do the locos also "push their cut from behind as well as "pull" them from the front?

Stephen

I will re-work this plan

 

[cajon]

Stephen my replies are preceded by **

Andy, thanks for the prompt reply and the time you’ve put into the revision.

I do have a small query about the amendment to the small industry on the side (10). There is now no run-around for any loco which arrives. How would that work operationally? Would a loco entering this single track be blocked and unable to get around it’s load?

**There's no need for a run around at the end of that spur. The cars will be shoved into it & the engine will just reverse to go back to the yard. But there is a runaround (siding) at the end of the spur in case you need to reposition any cars on that spur.

I see what you’ve done with the main yard and ladder and that’s appears to be a better arrangement, however I might reduce the number of tracks on the yard as I’m a little concerned it might become too crowded and “busy”. I didn't want to turn it into a large formal classification yard, just a small rural siding with a few sidings.

**If you're like most of us you'll soon be collecting more rolling stock so extra yard capacity will be good for you in the long run. You might want to look into a hidden staging yard also.

The reason why I placed the loco servicing tracks on the top right (4)(5) was because it this facility was less an operational requirement, more scenic, so placing it over in the corner to fill a void.

** Most RRs have their engine service facility right next to the yard not off somewhere to "fill a void". In my plan that void was filled w/ more industries. But if you still want to put it there use my idea of the tracks Xing each other vs a switchback.

Stephen

I will re-work this plan

 

[steinjr]

I haven't used that term anywhere I can see, but if I'm misinterpreting the terminology I apologise. Do you mean my phrase "yard lead". That's where we are getting confused. I only have 2 yard leads (5) & (7).

A "lead" is a piece of track you head into with your locomotive or train, before throwing a switch/turnout and backing up to shove cars into another track, or to pull cars from another track.

Leads come in several forms and shapes. You can use a part of the mainline as a lead for switching an industry, or for moving cars from one yard track to another, you can have a switchback lead for getting from the mainline into an industry, you can have a dedicated industry or switching lead to allow you to pull cars from or set out cars at an industry without using the main (allowing other trains to use the main in the meantime), or a dedicated yard lead to allow you do switch a yard while other trains pass the yard or arrive or depart from the yard.

A yard lead is a piece of track used to switch cars between tracks hanging off the main yard "ladder" (the turnouts the yard tracks branch off from). In your plan, the yard lead is the track from point b to the place where the turnout/switch from the main branches off up towards the "storage tracks" up in the upper right hand corner.

Illustration:

You are calling tracks 5, 7 and 10 "leads" in some way. Tracks 5 and 7 are not leads - you cannot pull forward into those track from one track and then shove back into another track - both of those tracks are tails - tracks you can back into. Track 10 you can head into, but it is so short that you cannot use it for pulling cars past the turnout and then shoving them back on another track.

If anything, I would have described the combination of track 9 and 10 as a switchback lead for track 7 - you can pull a train forward into 9/10, past the turnout for track 7, and then push backwards into 7 to pick up or deliver cars.

And you could describe track 4 as a switchback lead for track 5 - you can pull into track 4, and then throw the turnout to back into track 5 (or to get out towards the main).

Having too many switchback leads is a bad idea, for reasons explained pretty well (with illustrations) here by noted layout designer Byron Henderson: http://www.layoutvision.com/id16.html


As for whether you need a dedicated yard lead for your yard tracks - it is a good idea for a large yard where you will have several operators running lots of trains. For industry switching at a relaxed pace, it is not necessary, and it wastes space in a small layout.

Try to use the same piece of track serve multiple purposes (at different times). For instance, if you look at the variant of the Robert Beaty track plan I posted, the cuved piece of track from the yard ladder up towards the main at the top serves several purposes at different times:

As for the balance between staging capacity, yard capacity and industry capacity, the idea is that if you have room for e.g. a train of 5 or 8 cars to "arrive in your area" (i.e. to pull in from hidden staging), then it makes sense if there actually is somewhere to deliver thiose 8 cars on the layout, and sufficient work space to handle those 8 inbound cars and a number of outbound cars while switching.

Yard tracks are not usually used for storing cars, although they certainly can be used for long term storage of equipment there isn't a current need for, and there are specialized yards for storage-in-transit of some commodities (essentially warehouses for loaded railroad cars until someone buys their content - and then the car is pulled and delivered to the buyer).

But normally (and especially on a small switching model railroad layout) yards are work space - a place to sort cars, to temporary leave cars, and so on and so forth.

Stein, that track plan you've posted to great but how to the locos get around their cars after they deliver them to the industries? Do the locos also "push their cut from behind as well as "pull" them from the front?

Very much so. The basic move on a railroad is having a locomotive pull cars past a turnout, throw the turnout and then shove the cars back into a trailing track (i.e. one that branches off backwards).

When an industry spur is a facing spur (i.e. when it branches off forwards), you have to ensure in some way that your locomotive is behind the cars you want to shove forward into that track.

Can be done by using a local runaround to get the locomotive to the other end of the cut of cars, or - in a layout/area which does not have a runaround, by making sure the engine is placed on the opposite end of the cars somewhere else, and arrive in your area pushing all it's cars ahead of it.

Or having an engine arrive in your area (ie be staged) with some cars ahead of it, and some cars behind it.

Or having a train arrive with two engines - one at the front and one at the rear of the train, and cutting the train in two somewhere, using one engine for leading the train into the area and for switching industry tracks which would be trailing tracks for that locomotive, and the other engine to switch industry tracks that would be trailing tracks for that engine, and be the lead unit on the way back towards where the train came from in the first place.

Sorry that this got longwinded. A great book for learning about track planning for realistic operations is John Armstrong's book "Track Planning for Realistic Operations". Can be ordered e.g. on www.amazon.com.

Smile,
Stein

 

[bn-1000]

Stein, no worries about the long post. You and Andy have gone a long way to explain the more intricate workings of a US switching yard, and I do appreciate it. It seems that switching yard configurations are somewhat different here in Australia (and I think our yards and sidings are similar to British configurations, by way of history). I have scoured over dozens of track diagrams from our State over the years (all from archived but in public domain) and switchbacks are not common. Only in the major freight yards. In the smaller, more regional locations we tend to have the dual track and lead represented in my original plan at (9) & (10). Also I don't believe we have a big practice of switchers (shunters) "pushing" cars especially long distances, the always pull their load. Hence the need for the run-around, and our rail network has always been full with of run-around tracks!

Originally Posted by bn-1000

Stein, that track plan you've posted to great but how to the locos get around their cars after they deliver them to the industries? Do the locos also "push their cut from behind as well as "pull" them from the front?

Very much so. The basic move on a railroad is having a locomotive pull cars past a turnout, throw the turnout and then shove the cars back into a trailing track (i.e. one that branches off backwards).

When an industry spur is a facing spur (i.e. when it branches off forwards), you have to ensure in some way that your locomotive is behind the cars you want to shove forward into that track.

Can be done by using a local runaround to get the locomotive to the other end of the cut of cars, or - in a layout/area which does not have a runaround, by making sure the engine is placed on the opposite end of the cars somewhere else, and arrive in your area pushing all it's cars ahead of it.

Or having an engine arrive in your area (ie be staged) with some cars ahead of it, and some cars behind it.

Or having a train arrive with two engines - one at the front and one at the rear of the train, and cutting the train in two somewhere, using one engine for leading the train into the area and for switching industry tracks which would be trailing tracks for that locomotive, and the other engine to switch industry tracks that would be trailing tracks for that engine, and be the lead unit on the way back towards where the train came from in the first place.

Or, can I put another scenario to you? In a larger yard, I assume there would be second 'local' switcher splitting up the cut of car from the end first which has just arrived, while the arriving switcher sits idly at the front?

I am going to sit down this week and review the design with all the suggestions. One thing which has been in the back of my mind is operating my local locos and rolling stock on the same layout, on a separate running session. My local era is the Australian 1970's and would need little if any variation in scenery, structures etc. to look like a late-80's - early 90's shortline/small industry in most regional areas of the US. The trick will be to provide enough elements from both the US prototype and the Australian prototype to be convincing. I believe it's achievable.


Cheers

 

[Shortliner2001]

Stephen - take a look at http://oscalewcor.blogspot.com/ particularly the section headed "operations", where the loco both pulls and pushes cars to get them where they need to be. On US shortlines, particularly where there isn't a run-round A loco can push a train for several miles. It may have a "shoving platform" or transfer caboose on the head end with a brakeman in it to either "flag" , or drop fusees, at road crossings - and to align switches (points or turnouts) as needed.
Jack

 

[steinjr]

It seems that switching yard configurations are somewhat different here in Australia (and I think our yards and sidings are similar to British configurations, by way of history).

I have scoured over dozens of track diagrams from our State over the years (all from archived but in public domain) and switchbacks are not common.

Only in the major freight yards. In the smaller, more regional locations we tend to have the dual track and lead represented in my original plan at (9) & (10).

I am a little confused by the "switchbacks are not common" comment - I believe the point both Andy and I was making was that one wants as few as possible switchback leads - they are not all that common common in the US either. Or were you perhaps meaning to say that spurs going off the end of a siding is not uncommon in Australia?

Like in the example below:

In this case, the two spurs at the ends of the siding/loop are not really switching leads for an industry located at the middle of the siding- they are industry or storage tracks for cars, while the middle part of the siding/loop functions as the switching lead when switching cars between the spur at the end of the siding and the main.

Also I don't believe we have a big practice of switchers (shunters) "pushing" cars especially long distances, the always pull their load. Hence the need for the run-around, and our rail network has always been full with of run-around tracks!

One mile of track in real life is about 60 feet in H0 scale. Your layout having say 15 feet of mainline represents a distance of roughly 1/4 of a mile - call it 400 yards of so - within an industrial area. You probably would not have that many runarounds within a distance of 400 yards on an australian railroad either.

Or, can I put another scenario to you? In a larger yard, I assume there would be second 'local' switcher splitting up the cut of car from the end first which has just arrived, while the arriving switcher sits idly at the front?

You can of course operate your trains in any which way you like on your layout.

But I don't think I quite understood the question.

You can e.g. have a situation where a larger industry would have it's own switcher, taking over cars from a mainline train at some place.

Or you could have a situation where one train arrives with cars from somewhere and leave their cars in the yard before the engine is taken off to be serviced, and then another engine takes over sorting the cars into cuts for delivery.

I am going to sit down this week and review the design with all the suggestions. One thing which has been in the back of my mind is operating my local locos and rolling stock on the same layout, on a separate running session. My local era is the Australian 1970's and would need little if any variation in scenery, structures etc. to look like a late-80's - early 90's shortline/small industry in most regional areas of the US. The trick will be to provide enough elements from both the US prototype and the Australian prototype to be convincing. I believe it's achievable.

Quite possibly. Sadly I have very little, if any, experience with Australian railroading - only American and Norwegian railroading.

But I would be delighted to learn more about railroading in Australia. Where in Australia is your layout set?

Got an URL to the Australian track diagrams you mentioned? Would be interesting to have a look at Australian track diagrams.

Smile,
Stein

 

[steinjr]

Mmm - I found some Australian track diagrams at http://www.signaldiagramsandphotos.com/mywebpages/nsw/southern.html

It would seem that what an American would call a "yard lead" is called a "shunting neck" on Australian track diagrams. What americans call a "passing siding" you would call a "loop". And what you would call a a "road", an American would call a "spur". I am not totally sure what a "siding" is in Australian.

Reminds me of George Bernhard Shaw's old comments (originally applied to the US vs the UK): "two nations divided by a common tongue"

Smile,
Stein

 

[FoamersNW]

Hi Stephen-

As a fan or switching or terminal layouts, I am happy to see there are others out there that are looking at that as a modelling option.

On your original track plan it only shows a total of 3 industries - in contrast you have alot of yard trackage/storage for the layout. I hate to say that only 3 industries has very little flexibility for operations. I do like the idea of a staging track thats somewhat out of site - thats the location where you can have your train "arrive" from for the daily routine.

If your yard is so equipped with an engine escape track, your operation could be somewhat enhanced;

Sample Ops Plan:

Trian 1 - Brings in cars from off layout from hidden staging. Enters yard arrival track, cuts off engine, runs around train to yard lead, backs onto outbound cars (from previous session), and returns to the hidden staging track with the outbound train.

Train 2 - After job 1 leaves, takes cars from job 1 and classifies cars on yard tracks and then blocks train.

Train 3 - Switcher takes cars out to industrial area for work and returns to yard inbound track when complete and takes engine to engine facility.

Finally Train 2 - takes inbound cars from Train 3 and blocks for the next session outbound train.

It can be set up for more than one person where you are in the middle of constant traffic in and out where Train 1 and 2 runs while Train 3 is out switching which would then require a mid-session swap of cars on the staging track.

Also be sure to look at industries that take different types of cars so you have variety of rolling stock in and out of your layout;

For example on a larger layout a sawmill complex may take raw logs in (log bunks or cars), take cut dimensional lumber out (flats, A-frames or box cars), and woodchips out (chip cars), and a occasional flat or boxcar for equipment or supplies.

Also what is your plan for car-forwarding?

The location and era will dictate some of the industries.
Keep up the great planning and work!!

 

[bn-1000]

Thanks for the great discussions here.

Jack thanks for the link to Oscale blog. That is some O scale. I dabbled in O scale for a brief time (but soon established I'd never have enough room!) Yes I see what you mean in regards to the "pushing" of cars with a switcher. I've spoken to a couple of guys from my club and as I suspected it's not a practice seen here in Australia - In fact one guy said it's just unheard of. And that will be because of the layout of our infrastructure and industries (more on that later)

Stein, we do have a difference in terminology it appears. Sidings and passing loops are extremely common.

Quite possibly. Sadly I have very little, if any, experience with Australian railroading - only American and Norwegian railroading.

But I would be delighted to learn more about railroading in Australia. Where in Australia is your layout set?

Got an URL to the Australian track diagrams you mentioned? Would be interesting to have a look at Australian track diagrams.

Well can I indulge in a 5-minute history lesson?

We have 6 States and 2 Territories.

Since around the 1860's (for approx 120 years) every Australian State ran their own Government railways. In my State of Victoria we had the Victorian Railways (VR), New South Wales had New South Wales Govt. Railways (NSWGR) and so on. Around the 1980's the government owned railways in each State began to be 'corporatised' and then private rail operators joined in. So remember for 120 years it was almost all government operated!

In most of that time each railway also had the same livery and logos for the entire duration. VR is 'Blue and Gold' and here is an excellent website outlining our locomotives and rolling stock: http://victorianrailways.net/ This website is used by many as a reference to our railway history.

You'll also notice from the 'Motive Power' and 'Rollingstock' section that all the locos were blue and gold and the rolling stock was almost all the same 'red oxide' colour (almost the same as a Southern 50 Waffle) - pretty boring!

Our steam power, rolling stock and track infrastructure for near 100 years has been heavily influenced from our British heritage, Our diesel era has taken strong influence from the USA (check out the B Classes - like you F locos?, and our much-loved T classes all from EMD blueprints).

Now track. Interesting I was also having this discussion today with a mate about your plethora of crossovers - and I mean 90-degree, 45-degree etc. which enable your roads to criss-cross like a spider's web across the land They simply don't exist here.

In regards to single spur lines, yes they exist, but almost always in partner with a siding (loop) (runaround) - we have them everywhere.

I'm sorry if I've been a little vague and based on my ramblings. Here are some direct links to track/signal diagrams on the same website. Take a look at Beaufort, Bunyip, Clunes, Daylesford (my favorite as its an 'end of the line').

All these locations are country towns with similar characteristics: passenger platform, goods platform, spurs for sheep and livestock loading, perhaps a turntable. These are very popular to model - especially the country town you grew up in or lived nearby. Industries are popular also to model but I'd have to say not as much. Or modellers often make hybrids of two of three locations into one freelance layout.

Sometimes us Aussies need our minds adjusted to your track designs You have some amazing prototype locations to base your layouts on - goodness almost 90% of all your track plan books would have to be prototype based!

Robert, your 'Sample Ops Plan' is logical and makes perfect sense! Thanks for setting it out for me

Stein, George Bernhard Shaw's quote is very appropriate (aluminum/aluminium - don't get me started ).

Passing siding / loop - we call them both this!
Spur (US) / Siding (AU)- A single terminating track
Road / Track - we call them both this!
Yard lead (US) = Head Shunt (AU)

But it's not clean cut. The terminology gets a bit melded sometimes. Sorry if this has confused things even more

With the layout I want to try to separate the two lengths as much as possible both in scenery and location. I don't want them to appear "connected". I'm working on a revised track plan now and will post it soon. I will still keep a passing siding at end of the modules as they are 'the norm' for us, and it will allow me to have a local flavour. In regards to my planned industries - all I own are box cars - mostly Atlas and Exactrail, a couple of MP15's and a GP40. For me that's all I need for now, so the industries will be, say, a freight house and some loading docks at different points.

Look thanks guys, keep up the chat. It's made for interesting discussion in our local club (We have a couple of guys who model US!)

Cheers,

 

[cajon]

So we're talking apples & oranges here - Australian vs Us terminology. LOL Looking at Clunes there are 4 sidings & 3 spurs (stock yard, east end of No. 2 & No. 5) in US terms. Interesting there's a double slip switch on the right of No, 2 & No.3 tracks. Do you know why that would be used there?

 

[steinjr]

Thanks, Stephen --

Cool to look at your track diagram. I can't take credit for American railroads, though - I am from up in Norway, in Europe.

You can see a pile of Norwegian station track diagrams in this app:
http://www.comitato.com/V1/

Click on the small British flag for english, and then select "selected stations" at the bottom of the list.

For a sample of US track diagrams from earlier times, there is something known as Sanford Fire Insurance Maps which were drawn showing many towns and localities in fairly large scale. Some of these are available for free on the net - for others you have to be an inhabitant of an American town whose local library has decided to pay for the service.

Some free Sanborn maps from Texas in the 1920s, courtesy of the University of Texas' Perry-Castaneda map collection: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/sanborn/texas.html

You will find small towns having yards similar to what you are used to - i.e double ended sidings on both sides of the main.

Here is e.g. a track diagram for the town of Shiner, Texas in 1922:

Here is one for the town of Runge on the same railroad line:

Here is a track plan fragment I drew up a while ago inspired by Shiner:

But for small model railroad switching layouts, using double ended tracks in a yard tends to use a lot of space for the two yard ladders, and thus leaving a lot less yard capacity. So it is fairly common to just model just one end of a double ended yard.

Anyways - there are lots of ways one can model industries or yards.

Smile,
Stein

 

[FoamersNW]

Stein-

That a great incorporation of the town plat for a model railroad. It looks like a quintessential granger railroad line somewhere in the Plains.

I model SP 1958 in Portland, OR - attached is pretty much the layout as built with 3 distinct switching districts based around Lake Yard.

 

[steinjr]

Stein-

That a great incorporation of the town plat for a model railroad. It looks like a quintessential granger railroad line somewhere in the Plains.

I model SP 1958 in Portland, OR - attached is pretty much the layout as built with 3 distinct switching districts based around Lake Yard.

Looks beautiful! This one has character - it is not just a generic model railroad layout - it looks very much like a real place.

1958 - so probably mostly 40' and 50' cars - 20 cars on the longest yard track - call the total layout area about 20 x 10 feet or so, maybe a little bigger?

How does the upper left hand corner work for you - looks like it might be about 3 feet deep - magnetic uncouplers or just delayed coupling closer to the aisle and pushing cars in ? Or do you have access from the outside of the layout as well ?

Is there a lift up or swing gate or something like that for taking the staging tracks across the opening?

Smile,
Stein

 

[FoamersNW]

Looks beautiful! This one has character - it is not just a generic model railroad layout - it looks very much like a real place.
1958 - so probably mostly 40' and 50' cars - 20 cars on the longest yard track - call the total layout area about 20 x 10 feet or so, maybe a little bigger?

Smile,
Stein

Yes most everything is 40' box cars. The grain terminal takes only 40' box cars and has a total car capacity of 18 cars.

No access in the 3' corner area....
A coupler delay yes. Eventually there will be a uncoupler.

Is there a lift up or swing gate or something like that for taking the staging tracks across the opening?

As of now the main tracks that dissapear run down a ramp that will have a lift out section. It would continue to lower staging which represents points, north, south and east. I use a 4-cycle paper waybill to control traffic. Each industry has a 2-digit track code so anyone can grab a cut of cars and classify by numbers;

10-19 - East Portland
20-29 - Front Street
30-39 - 2nd Ave Fruit District

Then trains are classified and the industries are in numerical order on how to block the train for ease of switching - example;

10 - Portland Traction interchange
11 - Portland Freighthouse
12 - Rishberg Warehouse
13 - NW Oil and Heating
14 - Standard Oil
15 - Standard Oil Grease Dock
16 - Interstate Press
17 - Mesher Supply

Most of these industies are based on actual industies in the 1950s in East Portland.

Cuts of cars are classified and track 1 in the yard is the track for East Portland. When the cut is classified, then the switcher pulls the track and blocks in in numerical order from left to right so it puts the cars in the proper position for switching.

During the course of the ops session the following trains are filled;

Lake Yard Switcher
Holgate Hauler
Grain Transfer
NW Front Street Switcher
East Portland Peddler
Portland Dock Switcher
Fruit District Flyer

Each job may run in one in two sessions - an AM and a PM job. A crew assignment sheet outlines the descriptions of each job to perform.

The track is all code 83 with some 70 and 55 on some industrial leads. There is no ballast and I have foam core stand-ins for buildings. Still sort of the plywood pacific with no roads, scenery, etc. Size of the layout if 24x10.

Thanks for your comments and interest!

 

[PaulB]

Mmm - I found some Australian track diagrams at http://www.signaldiagramsandphotos.com/mywebpages/nsw/southern.html

It would seem that what an American would call a "yard lead" is called a "shunting neck" on Australian track diagrams. What americans call a "passing siding" you would call a "loop". And what you would call a a "road", an American would call a "spur". I am not totally sure what a "siding" is in Australian.

Reminds me of George Bernhard Shaw's old comments (originally applied to the US vs the UK): "two nations divided by a common tongue"

Smile,
Stein

I've also heard the term "head shunt" for yard lead, but maybe that is an English term.

A passing siding can be a "passing loop" or a "siding", depending on it's function. Sidings can be either of the passing loop configuration or a spur for an industry.

Goods = freight

Roads aren't spurs. Road just means route. Spurs are called sidings. So are passing loops for goods purposes or stock storage. Umm, is that confusing?

Oh yes, stock means farm animal transport in Australia and the US, but it means empty passanger coaches (cars in the US) in England. Except sometimes passenger cars, I mean coaches, are refered to as stock in Australia. Ok, now I'm getting confused.

These old English terms (from different English 19th century private lines, to add to the confusion) have given way in recent decades in favour of US practice.

 

[bn-1000]

- 'passenger car', 'pass', 'coach' or 'carriage' are all interchangeable here. I could write a cross-reference to assist with all this

Whenever I am on a US MRR forum such as this I am always in the minority so I always use the 'when in Rome' philosophy and use US rail terminology so as to not cause any initial confusion.

'The Yard' Update
Just an update regarding the track plan. I have broken the revision down into the basic needs/wants to allow a more easier way to reconstruct it again. I will look at both lengths of the 'L' shape as independent, isolated locations, and I have reassessed what I want to include on each side, remembering that this is a shelf layout with the depth of the baseboards are 430mm only so I do not want to overcrowd the layout and allow room for a bit of scenery/structures. I have proven the theory with my N scale layout that less is more.

Main module - 3.3m x 430mm
I want to incorporate 4 elements into this area: 2 industries, a run-around loop and a small 2-track yard with yard lead.

Side Module - 2.2m x 430mm
I want to incorporate 3 elements into it: 1 industry, a run-around loop and a small 2-track yard with yard lead.

* Industries include warehouse and general freight: anything which can utilise 50' box cars.
* No loco servicing facility.
* No separate mainline.

Back to the drawing board with the excellent suggestions posted in this thread, including a possible variation of the 'Lake Yard' center module posted by Stein.

Cheers,