Chicken or egg

I have always thought the best way is to lay mainline track first, including all the turnouts on the main.  Once that track is solid, then move on to sidings, yards, spurs and branch line tracks.

Either way, having a well thought out track plan for your space is a good idea, I think.

These two statements seem to me to be a bit of a contradiction.  If he is interested in yard operations won't he need a somewhat prototypical yard design to have satisfying yard operations?  Similarly, where the mainline enters the yard would need to follow prototypical designs to be functional, not?

I'm no expert!  Just joining in and hoping to learn from the discussion! [grin]

Blue, I remember one of my biggest disappointments with a

Model Railroader article was a feature they did on the Los Angeles Junction a few years ago.  I was subscribing to the mag at the time, and in one issue they were touting a switching layout on the LAJ next month.  I had decided to model the LAJ, and could hardly wait for that issue to arrive.  When the issue arrived, I skipped over everything to go to the LAJ article.  The switching layout consisted of a large circle of track with yards on two sides and a third yard on a peninsula, and one or two industrial spurs!

To call it a "switching layout" unless your idea of switching is limited to playing  yard master, was a total misnomer. 

I think laying out a major yard first might be a good way to design a layout.  For one thing, the yard is probably going to be the single biggest "real estate hog" on the layout, so locating it first tells you two things.  #1 How much space you will need for your yard.  #2 How much space you will have left over for the mainline and industries.  The answers to those two questions will go a long way in determining whether your yard is too big for the layout, or if the layout is too big for the yard.

LDE

I take the approach advocated by Tony Koester of using Layout Design Elements. These would be your areas of interest. The Yard. Towns which could include sidings and spurs. You work those out and figure out how to arrange them in your room. Once you got that done, the squiggly bits connecting them become the mainline..

So my succint answer would be to design your yard, figure out where it is going to go in your space.. then connect it with the rest of the layout with track that becomes the mainline..

Besides the usual books on the subject, the Model Railcast recently had an episode devoted to yard design:

http://www.modelrailcast.com/ShowNotes/Show104.asp

I would download this RIGHT NOW since they will archive the shows and they become unavailable after a few weeks of being up.

Chris

Egg or Chicken?

Hmm...I see what you mean guys but shouldn't the "well thought out track plan" tell you if your yard is going to fit the space?

In the past I have always wanted to get some track in place and run a train...even if it's just in a big circle or back and forth.  Maybe I've been doing things backwards.  No surprise there, LOL!

Downloading the railcast show you linked Chris.

Edit:  I listened to #104 and it's a hit.  I'll be listening to it again.

He, and the kids, were just

He, and the kids, were just happy to see a train running around the room. I asked him about trying to model a certain prototype (CSX) seeing how the kids like to watch the trains roll by here in Utica. His answer was short and sweet: "as long as it runs, it works for me" To be honest with you, it was quite easy to plan and was put together without many problems. The only "problem" we really encountered was the "more" factor. He wanted to keep on adding those #6 switches to the yard. He wanted "more" yard tracks. He had to "settle" for those #4's instead. Boy, putting an autorack through a #4 is a "cross your fingers experience" to say the least. Planning would have told us that.

For the most part, with the amount of track we had, it was one of the easier projects I've ever done. It was all done with the Atlas code 100 track The local hobby shop had a great supply of this stuff and gave him a good deal on the track. He still, though, can't get the hang of the flex track. "Why does one end always have to move" he asks? Does anyone remember the flex track that stayed after you flexed it? Anyway, we just started at the point where we thought the most amount of trouble would be (yard turnouts) and worked out to where we wanted the mains to exit and enter. We let the main lines "fall where they may" trying to judge the best radius for those auto racks. It was easier to adjust the curves as we went along. It worked! Some curves are tighter than others but we achieved the "flowing" appeal of the curve. It does not look as if the train is being thrown into the curves, like sectional track. It has a good appearance. We left some of the joints unsoldered at some locations in case he wants to add some sidings or industries at a later time. It short...it was fun to put together. He, nor his kids lost interest due to complicated wiring or tracklaying. It was up and running in a short amount of time. With it actually running, they all have ideas on how to add to the project. I guess it's easier to imagine looking at the real thing instead of looking at a drawing.

On a lighter note, one of his sons refers to the yard as "the parking lot". Kids, gotta lov'em.

Ahhhhh the simplicity of model railroading!

CP and StL&H

Hey Blue I have a question for you seeing you are a CP fan. I have been away from the railroad for over 5 yaers now. When I was working for NYS&W, we interchanged with the CP (formerly D&H) at Binghamton, NY. At one time CP also owned the St. Lawrence and Hudson. What ever happenend to the St.L&H? Are they around. I don't here much about that road anymore.

Layout design is iterative

I'm amazed at how confusing people can make layout design, getting all wrapped around the axle regarding what "comes first". Design the yard first or design the main first, it doesn't really matter - and then once you have them both in place, you will generally find you need to go back and adjust the design of the other part - maybe several times back and forth.

If they're referring to the yard as the "parking lot" then it's clear they don't know how a real yard is used. Every track has a purpose in a real rail yard, and unless the yard truly is just a storage yard, the goal of a real railroad yard is to resort the cars according to their destinatations and get them out of the yard and on their way as expeditiously as possible.

You can think of a real railroad yard a bit like the post office. Each car is like each letter - the goal is not storage - the goal is to get the letters on their way to their destination. Same with a rail yard, and each line on a railyard track plan has a purpose.

If you're trying to design a railroad yard and you can't tell me what each track's purpose is and you want to realistically operate your yard, then I maintain you don't have enough operating experience yet. If you want to design a railroad yard for more than just a place to store trains you're not running, then get yourself invited to a realistic op session and volunteer to help switch the yard.

Once you've switched a few railroad yards, you will become *very aware* of what every track in the yard is for - and you will also know the shortcomings of various yard designs - and they all have their trade-offs.

CP Fan

Steve wrote:

Hey Steve,

I'm not a CP "officianado" by any stretch of the imagination and my focus is more on Western Canada than Eastern.  I Google'd the ST. Lawrence & Hudson and found this information on wikipedia;

I can't vouch for the accuracy of the wiki info of course.

Joe,

Just listening to Craig using the Post Office analogy on the Railcast! [grin]

slow down Joe;

The "people" we are refering to here are newcomers to the hobby who dont want to be bothered with cumbersome details. They just want to get started in this hobby We were all beginners once. To get "wrapped up" in this debate is only showing how different all of us are. Being on the railroad for almost 20 years I CAN tell you what a yard track is for. Being a modeler for 40 years I can tell you my opionion of yard functions. There IS NO RIGHT OR WRONG WAY to do this. It's your way. Yours may be different than mine but we all end up with the same result...a model railroad that we built and are proud of.

As for the " letter in the post office" remark about the railcars....good one! I prefer the FedEx letter though, it will get there sooner!

thanks Blue

Thanks for the lead Blue...I'll look into it

I tend to think model

I tend to think model railroaders have just a big of a part in getting people wrapped up around the axle when it comes to these things.  The simple matter is, some people just want to have trains running on a track, and all these explosive expansive terms about model railroading and roadnames and proper operations is kin to a college physicist telling a mechanic how an engine works.  The mechanic really doesn't care about 95% of what the physisct says, he just wants the engine to run - what part goes where and what tool puts it on!

If they are calling the yard a parking lot and roadnames don't matter, you're back at the essence of what makes this hobby work.  It's not a matter of prototype or duplication of the prototype effort or the nerd aspect that completely drives us to the edge of anal-retentive tendencies; it's all about running trains around tracks - no matter how complicated you want to make that idea!

Unless, of course, you're the model builder type.  Then it's all about building something - but though it has the same nuances, that's a different story altogether!

Yes, I actually agree

I may not have done a good job conveying my point, but I actually agree - there's a "lightwieght" approach to doing layout design that's for newcomers who mostly just want to run trains. That's why I said up front in my last post that it doesn't really matter a lot where you start.

However, the "I just wanna run trains" approach often will wear thin in a few weeks or months and then all the time and resources spent doing a layout might seem to be something of a waste. Better is slow down just a bit and go into the hobby knowing up front layout #1 is probably a "chainsaw" and that some level of more realistic operation is the approach that generally makes for longevity in the hobby.

There's certainly a place for learning as you go - and some people just don't want to stop and ask directions first - they want to plunge in head-first. But in most cases, they'll eventually be back - this time asking directions before they start building.

I spent about 8 years in the

I spent about 8 years in the "running trains around tracks" sort of mode...granted, the tracks weren't always set up, but that was my way of running for a long time. I then moved over to the level of building a physical layout - and that was more building a physical location to drive trains through.  Traffic north, traffic south, but otherwise there wasn't any matter of what traffic it was.

But that's just me - I'm a model railroader hooked up to the railroad IV - and some days my dosage just doesn't seem high enough!  HA! [Good Trainshows!!!]

I don't think it matters how fast enthusiasts go in this hobby.  Those who go slow will become bored soon.  Meanwhile, those who go real fast - we've discussed them; they jump into the hobby both feet forward, eat up all the data they can, and then build what is an absolutley beautful layout.  And then they turn around and after five years junk the layout, sell the trains and never have an interest in the hobby again.

It's that line between the hobbyist and the enthusiast - and I don't think information will have any effect on their tendencies either, becasue it seems the enthusiasts are sometimes the most over informative type, a bit shocking becasue despite their short tenure in the hobby, they seem to expound upon informational data far further than most of us care to divulge.  They go from zero to expert and then back to zero faster than a candle burns down to the snub!

There are always those who don't ask for directions first; they just go and do.  I've known two types beyond the thrid [the one that comes back and asks for better directions].  There's the first, who goes out, tries it out, and gives up when it doesn't work, and then there is the second who goes out, tries it out and everything works.  In either case, once they are "done" with the hobby, interestwise, that is the end and then they move on because for them it was just a passing fancy that caught their eye.

I don't think you can "make" anybody be like us.  We were born this way.

Auto racks and tracks

Sounds like what they've built is a visible staging yard for fiddle operation connected to some mainline...  Proto yards are generally run to get the cars out of them as fast as possible. But a 'staging' yard is just a place to stash trains (that are supposedly off running elsewhere on the railroad's track).

As far as autoracks go, I'd suggest a 30" min radius and #6 turnouts.  You can get by with less (with fingers crossed). But reliable operation with 89' cars requires wider radii and, as was observed, less agressive turnouts. If you have the space 36" is better for those auto racks, 85' hi-cubes, etc.  Luckily such radii should be feasible in an around the walls 15x20 foot room.  With such long equipment distance between track centers on curves is also something deserving careful attention.

Yard design follows from what the rest of the layout will look like. Length of mainline isn't particularly important, but the length of the trains being run is - having shorter yard tracks than the length of the typical train is a problem. What is the operating scheme - meaning how many different trains are desired also makes a difference. If the answer is 1 train per kid and an additional one for dad, and if the yard is going to be flat switched, I'd suggest a minimum of 4 yard tracks, not counting the two mainlines. Since an implicit goal is that the kids can run trains to their hearts content while dad bangs cars in the yard, it would seem to be a good idea to create a yard lead (also called a drill track or switch lead) that is separate from the mainlines so yard switching can continue even when a through train is passing through town.

If the train bug takes hold in this family I expect the current layout will get torn apart and rebuilt several times as experience with running trains and desires change/mutate. It's not reasonable to expect one's first layout to be the perfect / life-time layout. The changes can be half the fun. Perhaps, at some point the prototype bug will bite and then the world will change. But in some respects proto operation is like the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden - the days of railroad innocence disappear and you are plunged into a world of track-plan, modeling, and ops 'sin' once you eat from that tree. Somehow, we think we know enough to do it 'right' but after we build something we find out that it wasn't right... Innocence is much easier.

Glad they're all having fun!

Charlie

design and the yard

Fedex1

Whatever you do enjoy yourself, thats the most important thing. If you don't want to get bogged down too much in all the complications of yard design, simple build a couple of sidings on one side of the main, that tie into the main on each end. The term for that is balloon or double ended sidings I think. Then be done with it. That way going east or west your train will have a siding to pull into and your switcher can come out for the dropped off cars and put them on the other siding if you or the kids want. As you advance in the hobby you can think about Arrival and departure tracks, lead tracks, caboose tracks, RIP tracks, locomotive service tracks, etc., etc., its just what some of the prototypes do and some of us - myself included - get excited about in a big way!  Have fun. 

Tom

Auburn, Ca

You need a chainsaw layout

Everyone deserves/needs a "chainsaw" layout, or two or ...  This is how one "grows" as well as finds one's niche or true interest, all subject to change.  Even my 1960s 5-by-10 donut framework had three different track plans built on it within 5 years.  However, thanks to father trackplanner John Armstrong (the first version followed his track plan), they all included staging and both continuous (mainline) and point-to-point (branchline) operations which I still favor, and the last version had two decks.

And as Charlie also previously pointed out, design the yard so it can be operated totally independent for whatever purpose while the kiddies run their mainline trains.

They are having fun!

Mainline #2 is now complete at their home. All trains and tracks are operating without any bugs. They are using the Bachman DCC unit with Dad and each brother with their own "cab". They seem to be having a good time and that's all that counts. My buddy at the hobby shop told me that their mom just purchased the boys 2 more loco's for their birthdays.....way to go mom!

The mainline curves are 35" radius around the walls...but it still looks ok.

I got the ball rolling for them and they have to take it from here. I'm just glad I was able to share this hobby with 3 more people. Where they go from here is up to them. But, I will keep asking to see their progress. At least sales are up at the hobby shop!

The "one way" railroad trap.

Here's a "snafu" that we encountered building the "Yard or Mailine First" railroad. It brings up another topic perfect for a debate. The topic is: proper planning vs. "let's see what happens".

As you have read above, my friend is building his 1st model railroad layout with some help from me. He jumped in feet first and very eager to get started, as we all have done. We built the yard first because he wanted that to be the focal point of his layout. He liked switching and wanted to "cram" as much action as he could into that space. After the yard built and was functioning, we "headed west" in search of a mainline, very eager to drive the "golden spike".

We laid plenty of flex track and soldered most, but not all of the joints. He wanted the option of adding sidings at a later time (planning?). It would be easier to add a switch here and there without unsoldering the joints. It made sense to me. We laid 2 mainlines and drove the golden spike. He (and his kids) were happy to be running trains "around the loops". After I taught him the basic elements of model railroading 101 (laying track, soldering, scenery etc..), he said he felt comfortable to go on by himself. He just wanted me to drop in every once in awhile to check on his progress.

The loops did not stay in intact very long. After yet another trip to the hobby shop, he got the urge to put in those sidings....by himself. He told me to stop by after work to "check it out". When I arrived, he was like a kid with perfect A's on a report card showing it to his parents. He was so proud.....until he saw the look on my face that said something was wrong.

Here is where "proper planning" could have saved him some trouble. Don't get me wrong, I am not a critic. He did a great job installing the 5 new sidings. But when he asked me what was wrong, I had to tell him the bad news. I asked him the following: but what if you want to run the train in the other direction? You won't be able to put or pull cars from those sidings. All the switches he put in were all facing point in 1 direction. The look on his face was priceless. He fell into "one way railroad" trap. Proper planning would have told him (us, I'm to blame too) that a runaround was needed at certain areas.

All was not lost and we corrected the mistake in about an hour. We turned a few switches around and added another to make a runaround so that "work" could be done in either direction. Good thing this was only done on the inside loop, and the ballast wasn't laid yet. He has since sketched out his layout on paper to plan future additions to avoid that mistake again.

How many of us have done that before? I am a true believer in planning first...although sometimes just "seeing what happens" yields some great ideas too.

One way traps

Steve,

This is definitely something that could have happened...well maybe even still could happen to me, though I would like to think I have learned something from all the great advice I've received here at MRH!

As a lad I was firmly rooted in the "lets see what happens" mentality.  Planning didn't even cross my mind.  I'd just start laying down sectional track, (it was all I used in those days) and see where it took me.  To say I didn't create many "operational" layouts back then, would be an understatement!

The important message I get from your story is that your friend is learning from the experience.  Even better, it sounds like a serious model railroad interest has been fostered!  Good on you!

Double-ended spurs are handy

Modelers should consider following the common prototype practice of double-ended spurs and not rely solely on single-ended ones.  Double-enders are handy for switching from either direction.  Take this example of the Southern Pacific tracks formerly at Walnut Creek, CA.  It had two double-ended spurs, one on each side of the main track.  The siding below the main track even had a cross-over in its midst.  To one side of the cross-over were warehouses, and the other side was the house/team track.  The siding above the main served an aggregate plant and I don't know what else.