Optimum Train Length

Train length

I designed my 400 sq ft HO layout  for two units and 25 car train lengths.  The layout era was 1954 so it was mostly 40 ft cars.  I had about a 250 ft mainline.

The philosophy behind this was not to be able to see the whole train without moving one's head.

Prototype train lengths were over 50 cars and 3 or more units.

Gathering the rolling stock and locomotives was a 20 year exercise.  A few here and a few there with lots of trips to swap meets,  The car numbers increased as more track was laid.

Terry

It's never gonna be proto I guess....

Thanks for the input guys. 

I guess part of my question comes from watching too many DVD's of Donner and Siskiyou to get a feel for a number of things like train composition, mixing and matching of units, weathering effect, ballast colours etc. 

In all the videos it is normal to see heavy trains being moved uphill with 4-8 head end units and helper sets somewhere spliced in. 
Beautiful as it is in real life, it is not something I could even get close to so I am looking for what looks right and what is still achievable without sinking literally tens of thousands in loco's decoders and cars or having this maintenance overhead that never gets me to running anything. 

I am after replicating a feel, not a direct copy of the real thing and I guess we are all trying to scale down the real thing to something that is managable and yet captures the feel. 

On my current benchwork I managed to hook two six axle units together pulling 21 cars plus caboose. It looked alright since there is a curve at one end of the layout and it takes your eyes of the front or back of the train.

That would be something that I could potentially manage on the new layout (should that ever happen). Going up to 23-25 cars would be the limit I guess in staging length and I would stick with 2 tunnelmotors or maybe 1 tunnelmotor combined with 2 SD9's. 

For the new layout, I have not picked location yet though I am attracted by the Siskiyou line and parts of the Shasta line. Mountain railroading is more suitable to play around with that false perspective as parts of the train can be in curves, tunnels and behind vegetation. Unlike my current poor rendition of the West Valley sub which is flat and always would let you see at least most of the train.

Anyways, just some random thoughts....

If you have more of those yourself that might help me, feel free!

And a very happy New Year as we are not far off here in the UK!

Henk

Train Length

Henk

Two controlling factors on train length on a model of railroad is the length of the second longest track in your arrival / departure yard and the second factor is the length of your spacing sidings, unless you are modeling section of the railroad which is double tracked.

The local N bender group normally runs four locos with eighty plus cars on their layout, which has not grades.

Doug W

SP in the mountains

The SP in the mountains ... now you're talking! I assume you have seen my layout website: SP Siskiyou Line (click the logo in my signature). It's HO.

As to train length, as you know the SP liked to run them long, so the longer you can make your model trains, the better they will look on an SP diesel era layout.

The trick is to make sure the train extends out of your field of view on both sides. That is how you define "long" in model railroading terms. It depends on how far away you expect to stand from the train, and on what scale you're modeling in. Walkaround shelf layouts work best because you will be up close to the train, and it's easier to have the train extend beyond your field of vision on both sides.

In any case, the best answer is for you to experiment and find out. Get some locos and cars, and mock them up by building long trains on a shelf and see how long they need to be. In my case, I found an 18 foot train was about right - it looked sufficiently long that it seemed to justify 3 locos on the head end and a double unit helper mid-train, per SP practice.

In HO, an 18-foot train is about 36 forty-foot cars long, or in the more modern era of fifty-foot standard cars, that's 29 cars. Now the three units on the head end will be at least 3 of those cars, the 2 units mid-train will be another 2, and then the caboose on the end is one more. That leaves 23 real fifty-foot cars in HO.

I would expect in N scale using fifty-foot cars, that's going to be 53 cars total (N scale is 184% of HO - ie. 160/87) and if you subtract 6 from this number for the locos and caboose, that leaves 47 car trains in N scale. Next, you will need to test if 6 N scale locos can pull 47 cars + caboose up your maximum layout grade - I find 2.5% to be about right.

Track length

As an addition--

Siding length was about 14 feet minimum, some were longer with at least twice that distance between sidings.  The yard was about 18 feet long and minimum storage track length would hold a full train with most longer.

Terry

Thanks gents and the best

Why second longest track

Henk

If you use the longest track in your Arrival / Departure Yard to determine train length, where are you going to put the arriving train, if the departing train is on the longest track.  Depending on the operations of your Arrival / Departure Yard you may have to use the length of third or fourth track to determine the maximum length of your trains.

Doug W

Gosh

Here I was always thought the length of the passing sidings was the primary factor as determiner of the length of your trains, especially when operating multiple trains.  Saw-bys can be interesting, but it usually really cramped the "fluidity" of the overall operations session.

Over-siding length trains in the Great White North

^{"Here I was always thought the length of the passing sidings was the primary factor as determiner of the length of your trains..."}

Over the past decade or so, Canadian Pacific certainly doesn't bother looking at passing siding lengths to determine train length. On their transcon route across Northern Ontario they're regularly operating 10,000 ft long monster stack trains with DPU units cut in. They just plan things to fleet-run their trains, and meets happen at division point yards that can handle the monster freights. Lower-class manifests are kept to 6,000 ft or so, and they all get stuck going in the hole for the longer intermodals.

Even in the 1970's, the decade our club is modelling, the CPR would run over-siding length trains at times. And there are tales of two opposing over-siding capacity trains having to meet somewhere due to poor planning on behalf of the dispatcher (there is a way they can meet, but it's not pretty).

On our layout, CP Rail would regularly operate trains 911/912 (Chicago-S.S.Marie-Montreal) at 100+ car lengths over the Webbwood and Thessalon Subs (between Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury Ont) even though this line features steam-era siding lengths (3000-3500 ft, not good for trains over 50 cars). They just planned 911 and 912 to never meet between these two cities, and all other trains stayed under the 50-car mark.

To simulate this, the WRMRC operates scaled-down 911/912 trains between 30-40 cars, with all the siding lengths on the Webbwood sub built only long enough to handle 20 car trains (including 2 locos plus the van). Works just fine so long as 911 and 912 don't run at the same time on this route.

By the way, totally agree with Mr Fugate about operating your model Espee freights as-long-as-possible.   If you can extend your freights out of your field of view on both sides, you really get the sense of 'railfanning' your layout. This is after all how we see real trains. Unless it's a local, it's rare to be able to see the head- and tail-ends in one view.

EDIT (added 13:03 EST 01Jan13)

Forgot, we have video! First two minutes showcases our track warrants / 2-way radio dispatching. After that it follows train 912 between McKerrow and Sudbury Ont.

Sixteen 50' cars + 2 first gen locos

I don't know if it is right or wrong but will find out.... my track plan is designed with all sidings and yard classification tracks just long enough to accommodate my standard train length - 16 cars and two locos. The distance between sidings (and towns) is roughly two train lengths. I can't remember where I read it but someone made a good case, and convinced me, for having lots of sidings to increase the number of simultaneous trains in operation on a single track main. The design passed muster of Byron Henderson so must not be too totally flawed. It would be nice to have a longer distance between sidings and towns but must live within my space constraints.

What is a long train?

To me, train length isn't measured by the # of cars or length. It's measured by how long it takes for the train to pass you.

If you're standing trackside, watching a train, when you start thinking "ain't this thing got an end" and it keeps coming for another 10% to 20% of the length, then you've done a good job of modeling "long".

So the speed at which it operates matters. A train passing at 60 mph has to be longer to achieve that than one at 20 mph.

FWIW I run up to 30 (1950's era mostly 40') cars in the trains on my HO scale BC&SJ. At the 20mph my trains typically operate, a 30 car train with a pair of locos on the point plus a caboose and sometimes a helper (when actually needed to climb the hills) are sort of longish.

Unfortunately YMMV considerably when it comes to "long".

Length also is constrained (especially on a model) by the length of the runs between sidings. If you want to avoid "hey my train is in 3 towns at the same time" syndrome, either train length needs to shrink or the distance between towns needs to expand.

Then there's the "how many cars can I afford to place in service" question. If you want to run 8 trains with an average 25 car length, you'll need (without allowing for some of the cars appearing in multiple trains) 200 cars.

At $10 per car (and even Accurail kits will run you more like $15 each if you replace plastic wheels with metal ones and use Kadee couplers) that's $2000. If you're buying RTR cars, and especially if you lust after the highly detailed ones, you could be dropping $25 per car (or more) for a total of $5000 in rolling stock.

You can save considerable $$ by using el-cheapo swap-meet purchased cars and detailing/painting/weathering them. You can get some great looking cars that way, but now you're investing lots of time into the rolling stock fleet.

If you want more and longer trains the cost(s) (time & money) go up.

So you might want to do some math to see if the size and style of layout plus number of cars and locos needed to support long trains will be feasible for you.

And you definitely ought to be visiting as many other layouts/clubs as possible, especially any that have similar goals to your own to get a personal feel for what you need.

Good luck in your quest!

Charlie

Spot on..

Charlie, 

Your point about the cost of buying 200 plus cars, tens of locos etc is absolutely valid. 
It is a concern to me too, not for the reason of not having the funds as I do but purely from a fairness point of view.
My hobby should not impede or limit funds to other parts of life, like going out and having a good time, giving money  to charities, helping friends out when they are caught short and the quarterly jewellery tax instated by my financial officer. 

Over the time I have used that auction site to my advantage and build up a decent roster with about 20% bought new from hobby shops.

Another great point you make is running speed. Right now I am operating my shelf as a very low speed switching layout and even shoving a cut of cars around can take a significant amount of time. For me that more relaxed pace and not working on a clock is the most enjoyable though it would be nice to just let a train run for more then a minute and follow it alone. 

I guess the fact that I operate alone also determines my design and inherent trainlengths. I need to throw all the switches and keep sight of the front of the train to line the route up which means lower speed meaning longer for a train to pass...

Lots to think about and we haven't even sold our house yet, let alone bought the new one!
So not sure why I am running ahead of business...

Thanks all, 

Henk

Re: Train Length

Henk,

Don't know if you've ever seen this link dealing with layout design analysis from Joe F., but it might help answer your questions on train length. I found the info it gave me about my layout very helpful, as well as extremely interesting. Here's the link:

http://siskiyou-railfan.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.32

I intentionally try to design scenes that the train runs through, so you seldom if ever see the whole train at once. IMO that helps keep operating interest high, because you never see the train quite as much as you want to. It also has the advantage of making our short model trains seem longer than they actually are. 

On my layout I've planned to run single headed local trains of 10-13 cars, which is about what my only depature/arrival track can handle. My through freights originate and end in staging, and only make partial drop offs at the yard, so are not limited by my arrival track, enabling me to run through freights of 35 cars, double or triple headed. Though no where near prototype length, the through freights seem prototypical to me. Visitors who see the trains run also comment on how "long" the trains are, so something must be going right here. 

Some of the train length issue will also be determined on how you plan to operate your layout. Of the three passing sidings on my mainline, I only have one passing siding that can handle a train of 35 cars. I don't see that as a problem though in terms of meets. Since my layout is not that big compared to others that I see on MRH (L shaped 13'x25') usually only one through freight will be on the mainline at any given time. So the only trains it will have to pass will be one of the shorter local freights,which again enables me to run a longer through freight than would otherwise be possible. If you plan on having a lot of opposite direction through freight meets, the length of your passing sidings are going to limit the length of train you will be able to run easily, no matter what length of train you might otherwise desire.

Hope this provides you a little food for thought. Best of luck on your future plans!  

Paul Krentz

N&W Pokey District, Sub 1 3/4