Timesaver-esque?

Dear Irish,

Feels kinda like a Timesaver, but should provide some interesting and head-twisting switching fun...

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Trying for a reasonable layout

I'm trying to put together something that would be a logical track plan.  The switchback for the private car is not a real operation problem; it's mainly a place that a nice model sits for looking pretty--and noting says prosperity like a private car.  I can accept fewer car spots if needed for a realistic plan, though I know that, sometimes, there are switchbacks.

There usually wouldn't be as many cars spotted as on the track plan; I just had it full so I could see what fits.

Any thoughts on making it more convincing?

Thanks all!

I like it

It should definitely be fun, especially if you treat it a bit like a switching puzzle.  Either make the inbound train as messed up as possible, or add things like re-spots and cars that cannot be moved (blue flags, or whatever was used in the '20s)

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

• If you can, try to leave room for 3 flats.  An especially long load like a mast might come in secured to a single flat with idlers on either end, or on two flats, secured to the center of each.  More room means more options, and that 3-car long load which cannot be broken up would make things interesting!
• Be wary of double slip switches.  If done right (with points in the frogs as well as the main points) they can work just fine, but many commercial double slips are maintenance and operations headaches.
• Make the runaround longer, if possible.  It looks like it's only long enough for one, maybe two cars.  That will make it a real challenge to handle the number of cars you have on the plan.  I would suggest transposing the right crossover with the flat car track and team track switches.  The tail on the runaround only has to be long enough for a single engine, although an experienced operator can make use of a longer one.
• With the number of cars on the plan, and the limited lead and runaround, it will be easy to switch yourself into a corner.  You may find that you would prefer something simpler.  Then again, you may not.  I think I would have a blast on it.

a logical track plan?

Which way does traffic come from? Is this the end of the line or a station along a thru line? How( where) will you place cars on the layout and remove them? The more we know about the operations the better the input. .DaveB

Combine some of the tracks

One thing which comes to mind is to combine the coal and oil tracks.  Either put them side by side (possibly off of the same switch off the main/siding), or use one long track dedicated to both.  If you put a switch in the middle of the runaround and bring the track down (forward?), the tank cars could fit closest to the main and the coal cars on a trestle at the end of the track.  It was not uncommon for a coal dealer to branch out into fuel oil as well, and thus to handle both types of cars on a single spur.

That would leave a space for the team track where the tank track is now, and a nice station of freight house beside the track.  I can definitely see there being a platform, depot, or freight house there.

If you have the room, I would suggest making some or all of the tracks parallel to the main line.  To break up the linear look, curve the entire plan like a banana.  Especially where cars (such as box cars) are spotted beside a building, the building is usually built in line with the track.  The angled tracks are more commonly those which are unloaded from both sides, and therefore have open space around them.  Nothing is definite, of course, but that's how I usually see things.

To conserve space, consider things like wyes and three-way turnouts.  In the plan as drawn, a wye would make the coal track diverge more quickly, leaving room for either a longer runaround or a longer coal track, or possibly both.

answers

Thanks for the feedback.  Traffic comes in from the left, and leaves the same way.  This is the end of a spur line to the yard, I think--though making the main (or is that Maine) line a through line for local traffic might be an option, since a larger layout is in the long range plans.  That's why I put all the boatyard specific traffic on the same side of the track

I LIKE the idea of room for three flats; I should have thought about that.  Masts are BIG, even for smaller boats.

Transposing the right crossover and the flat and team tracks sounds good.  I do need room for the boxcars and the flats to each run up to separate buildings.

Currently, the runaround can manage three cars--longer would be good.  But, the switching lead also only handles 3 cars--possibly I can extend it.  When it's incorporated into the larger layout, it will be extended.

The layout wouldn't have that many cars on it at once; I was looking at what would fit.  Combining the coal and oil track makes sense.

How often were 3-way turnouts used?  Were they a real life maintenance headache?  With double slips being a headache, I'll skip them--thought they are neat. 

I envision a typical session as follows: 

About half the car spots are empty, and some need to have empty cars removed.  A locomotive comes in with as many as 4 cars.  It needs to set them out at specific locations.  (Coal loads can go at any available coal unloading point, everything else needs to go to a particular spot.)  It then hauls away as many as 4 empties.

Of course, when I start, it won't be that busy--obtaining enough 1920's rolling stock will take time.  But--some Maine boatyards don't look TOO different today, it might be feasible to redress it for the late 1940's...change out the vehicles and a few details, and instant 1949...

It's late--I'll have more thoughtful replies tomorrow--thanks all!

Don't forget the caboose

Assuming that the train pulls in and is to pull out, you'll have to allow for running around the caboose at some point.  Other options would be to assume that there is a longer siding somewhere up the line, and the train is shoved into (or out of) town, or to make it really interesting and put a caboose on both ends of the train.  I've done that on one of the locals I used to work.

3-way turnouts are pretty simple, operationally.  They are just two regular turnouts which overlap each other.  There are two separate sets of points, and three frogs.

To make more room for the box cars and flats, consider making them one long track with a crossover in the middle.  Normally, the track could be switched like two separate tracks, but if there are too many cars to be spotted, it might require fouling the crossover switch.  Alternately, if you have enough room beside the main line, put the two tracks side by side.  The box cars ought to go up against a building or platform, but the flats can be out in the open.  If the box car track is "paved" with stones, dirt, gravel, etc. then a team of horses or a truck can easily run over it to get to an adjacent track.

Size

Are you trying to squeeze all of this on a particular footprint, like a 1 ft x 6 ft board or something like that?

It just doesn't seem organically designed where the industry has driven what goes where.  It seems more like you have just tried to get as many tracks as you could on given footprint and then assigned a different car type to each track.  You could just as easily swap around all the car types to different tracks and not impact the track plan.

I would suggest trying to arrange buildings next to the spurs and ask, "Does the track plan make sense?"

It is not as likely that a private coal spur would also be used by a commercial dealer.  How do you separate whose coal is whose when you dump it in a pile?  Plus if you are using coal to steam wood then you wouldn't be just dumping it at a trestle on the other end of town, you would be dumping it at a steam plant reasonable close to the wood shop.  For example swap the coal track and the passenger car spur around so the coal is being dumped on the same side as the boat yard and you don't have to spend the money to truck the coal to the steam boiler or build some long overhead steam line  to get the steam from the boiler to the woodwright shop.

My own preference is for spurs that are parallel because man likes things parallel.  I would change the boxcar and flat car tracks to two parallel tracks from the same switch off the main.  The boxcar track would be about 2 cars long and closest to the edge and the flat car track would be about 4-5 cars long and closest to the main.

I could spot 2 boxcars on the boxcar track and 2 flat cars on the flat car track.PLUS if I had another boxcar or two I could spot them on the flat car track next to the boxcars on the boxcar track and, using bridge plates, unload 4 boxcars.  That would let me lengthen the runaround which would be virtually useless if this is a terminating station for a train  If a train terminated with a caboose and two cars or a caboose and one passenger car, the ends of the train would foul the runaround and it couldn't be used.  Move the run around switch to where the flat car switch is on your plan and that give enough room for the team track switch to be between the switches of the runaround, allowing for a longer team track.  Put the passenger station under the S in "Switching lead" (since you have swapped around the coal and passenger car tracks).

Useful design, Irish

I like the basic plan, Irish. 

How much space do you plan on using ( as Dave asked above)?

Here's something that I literally threw together to give my grandson some experience with switching. Other than painting the foam a "dirt" color and adding the scrap yard spur, the layout was a good introduction for him. We'd spend about 45 minutes to an hour pulling cars from the "yard" and making the spots and pulls.

Lots of good info from the other posters. Just wanted to share my experience with a similar design.

Regards from Akron,

Tim

In defense of the coal track

Dave makes a valid point about designing the plan around the needs of the customers, rather than the other way around.  However, I would like to defend your chosen placement of the coal trestle as being prototypical.  In the not to distant past (recently enough that I can remember seeing coal cars spotted there) the Dan River Mills plant in Schoolfield (Danville) Virginia had a coal track which was on the opposite side of the main line from the rest of the plant.  Coal was dumped there and trucked underneath the main and across the street to the mill.  I can see the argument that your situation is similar - for some reason there is not room for a coal trestle directly adjacent to the boiler house, so it is located elsewhere.  I can also make up a justification for it serving the public as well.  Because of space restrictions, there is not room anywhere on the railroad for separate coal trestles.  Also, because the town is small and the boat yard is the major business in town, it does more coal business than the rest of town combined.  Either the boat yard owns the coal yard and sells to the public as well as serving their own needs, or they contract with the owner of the coal yard for whatever quantity they need.

In other words, it's a little bit of a stretch, but not implausible or unprototypical to have the coal trestle where you put it, and to serve the demands you've set on it.

"does more coal business than the rest of town ?"

Hopefully they didn't just burn wood and fuel oil down east?  I guess they would have needed some bagged coal for their blacksmith at least :> ) unless it came by sea on a coaster? .DaveB