Looks Great!

I think you have a great looking track plan, but I have 2 thoughts:

1. Don't go over 24" wide. It's not worth the trouble.

2. Do your 2 main lines intersect so you can interchange between them? I can't quite tell on the plan but I think they don't. Are you keeping the loops separate for a specific reason?

Separate Mains and older track plan

Bill, the mains are separate because there isn't a place on this track plan where the elevation is the same, that is the only reason I didn't add a way to switch between the two.  I bought a Walther Shinohara double crossover for that very purpose to use on a previous track plan. The left side town track plan was completely different with the two mains running side by side. But, I thought maybe it wouldn't look right if I had the Southern Pacific and the Santa Fe running right beside each other and also I thought if someone was operating the town, a second train running through the foreground would be a problem so I decided to run it behind the town to keep it out of the way.

Attached is an older version of the track plan.  The limitation of 750 pixels resolution really challenges pics with a lot of small detail. Joe, how about doubling the allowed photo size?

Attached is an older version of the track plan. It is a flat track plan with no elevation changes. It has some advantages, like crossing between mains, and I like the presumed destination of the dead end tracks heading into the backdrop. But, I didn't think running two trains side by side would look right.  Any thoughts on this older track plan?

 "But, I didn't think

There are places where the SP and Santa Fe run in sight of each other and some  places where they share the same tracks, so realistically having both on a layout is possible if you choose the right place to model. Some of the central valley of California towns like Reedly and Exeter  had the SP on one side and the ATSF on the other side of town. The line from Ducor to Bakersfield as well as some branch lines around Bakersfield were shared track, and of course the Tehachapi line from Bakersfield to Mojave, so there's lots to explore......DaveB

Anytown, Arizona

Dave, my layout is a fictional location somewhere in north-central Arizona in red rocks country. In AZ the SP and SF split the state in half, SP in the south and SF in the north.  I've watched a few Youtube videos showing the SP and SF in the same location and even sharing track in CA. I thought that was actually pretty cool.  I wish they would have merged into SPSF.  That being said, I'm not all that hung up on accurately depicting how the railroads ran in AZ. I thought for visually watching the trains run it wouldn't look right seeing the trains run side by side around the layout so I wanted to break them apart with one railroad being the focus of one town and the other railroad the other town and try to hide the opposite train from view when operating one of the towns, hence the layout at the top of this thread.  It's hard squeezing towns, operations and interesting scenery all into a small space. It seems you have to make compromises regardless of what you do.

in that case...

...it seems to me that your trackplan meets your interests quite well.

Thanks

Thanks, Bill. I think I will keep the current track plan and maybe try to improve the the town a bit. I'm looking at other buildings that may have a narrower footprint that would allow me some more freedom with the track.

Comments...

It looks like a very good track plan and it definitely meets all of your requirements. A few comments:

You probably do want a crossover or possibly an interchange between the two main lines. - For operation flexibility.

I would consider eliminating some of your industries and instead do one or two larger ones with multiple car spots. - This looks more realistic and provides just as much operational interest.

Go to #6 turnouts at minimum (optional) - I have an SD-9 and it looks a bit weird going through #4 turnouts. Just a visual preference.

Expand those curve radii if you can... 

I have always found the

I have always found the double cross overs to be something used too often. If it were me I would have a pair of cross overs at each end of the section at about the one and the six. The railroads could interchange cars at that point and that would give you a very nice industry with just track to model.

It was not uncommon to have two railroads in the same town or towns. In some cases it would even be a friendly set up in others competition could be quite fierce. The area I am modeling had several different railroads in town. In many of the eastern towns there could be several railroads in the same town. 

In the photo above you have the Pennsy at the lower left continuing to the left and the B&O just to the right and also on the bridge at the lower right. The two freight houses are across the street from each other. The lines also interchanged with one and other and connected to WLE which got into town via the wheeling terminal railway. So in this area in a space of 4 city blocks four different railroads had a presence and connected with each other either via their own rails or trackage rights. At one time prior to some early mergers there were more different lines, one of which was the Ohio River Railroad.

Crossover

sanchomurphy,

(I don't know how to quote your message so I did a cut and paste with your text and put it in italics)

You probably do want a crossover or possibly an interchange between the two main lines. - For operation flexibility.

I would consider eliminating some of your industries and instead do one or two larger ones with multiple car spots. - This looks more realistic and provides just as much operational interest.

I wanted to have an interchange but I couldn't figure out how to do it.  The two main lines run at different elevations.  The track servicing the left side town is approximately 3" higher than the track servicing the right side town. I wanted each town to be operated from inside the layout so I had to cross over the mainlines twice.  If you notice, the row of buildings in a line are shallow background buildings.  I planned to use a backdrop behind those buildings to hide the second mainline. The main behind the left town is 3" lower than the town, main behind the right side town is 3" higher than the town.

It is a bit busy and now even morso now that I added a coal fired power plant and a cement plant.  I have a thread in Locos and Rolling Stock asking what freight cars road names I can mix. Some short comings in my planning was exposed by many of the answers I got. I would like to use all the type of cars I have, box cars, tank cars, hoppers, etc., so I need industries that would require them, but at the same time I don't want my layout to look like crap and unrealistic.

Would multiple car spots be something like placing box cars in front of two different doors at a depot? I don't know what multiple spots means?

Thanks for your comments!

Multiple railroads in town

I have always found the double cross overs to be something used too often. If it were me I would have a pair of cross overs at each end of the section at about the one and the six. The railroads could interchange cars at that point and that would give you a very nice industry with just track to model.

It was not uncommon to have two railroads in the same town or towns. In some cases it would even be a friendly set up in others competition could be quite fierce. The area I am modeling had several different railroads in town. In many of the eastern towns there could be several railroads in the same town.

Rob,

I've seen some photos with SP and SF almost side by side in the same town.  I'm not totally opposed to that if it makes my layout better, I'm just concerned about having a sense of realism with a smaller layout and two railroads running side by side.  The track I'll post after this reply is a modified version of the track plan at the top of this thread. I've tried to separate the two railroads as much as I could by hiding one or the other behind back drops or scenery. With the two mainlines running at different elevations I couldn't figure out a way to create an interchange, although that would be nice where if operating the train you could end up servicing two towns instead of one.

Thanks for your input!

Updated plan

I've made some changes to the plan. I changed some industries and added some. I admit the latest version of the track plan is getting busy and maybe over done with buildings. A thread I posted in the Rolling Stock section I asked what road name freight cars I can mix. I got a lot of excellent response and in doing so I found some holes in my industry ideas. The track plan at the top of this thread didn't give me industries for my coal hoppers or my covered hoppers. I added the Power Plant (7) and Switch Yard (8) and Cement Plant (9).

If the layout is too busy I could delete the Grain Elevator (18) and the Grain Bins (17) from the right side town since I have plenty of box car industries? The left side town I could delete the Linen Mill (4) and the Freight Station (3) then move the Oil Dealer (5) to the area where the Freight Station (3) currently is? Cement Plants and Power Plants are generally located away from downtown areas, I think they would be OK where they are?

Any opinions on the industries would be welcome! Leave it as is, or delete some?

Thanks!

Most current track plan

Simplify and prioritize...

Steve,

It feels like your track plan tries to accomplish way too much in the space. You feel that the two main lines running next to each other is the most unrealistic aspect where I feel that the quantity and types of industries to be much more unrealistic, especially for a desert locale.

I think you may want to start looking at Google Earth for for towns in Arizona and get a feel for what track looks like and what kinds of industry are found there. Much of the industry found in the desert west revolves around mining, ranching, or supplying towns along the way. A concrete plant, oil refinery, power plant, or a mine would be an example of a large industry that would require multiple moves, spots "like serving different doors on a warehouse with different cargo, think grades of ore or different chemicals for facilities in the southwest", and tracks. Research industries and find one that fits your operational desires.

While I don't have a good prototype location example for where the ATSF and SP interchanged, it sounds like you want to freelance this aspect. Interchanges can take cars of any type and they offer a lot of interaction between your two railroads. I would pick a town in Arizona that exists and fictionalize an ATSF-SP interchange there. In the upper right corner of your track plan, you could consider a flyover junction interchange as well. I would recommend making one railroad the primary interest on your layout and the other as the secondary road that you can interchange with. Right now the routes seem to be duplicating each other which gives less focus to any highlight of your layout. 

Most of all, seek out a prototype for what you want to do. There is always one out there and if you don't know a whole lot about operations like me, emulating the real thing is the best way to go.

The Colorado Joint Line is a good prototype example of two railroads running together.

Pelle Soeberg's UP Daneville Sub is one of the best desert layouts I have seen and has a very similar track plan that you really should take a look at.

P.S. I challenge you to remove at least 3 turnouts from the layout, to try to get down to under 5 industries, and to keep getting critiques. You will have a better layout by getting advice on these forums and it will make you happier in the end!

From my area

Attached are some Google Earth photos no further than 15 miles east or west of where I live.  The SP had a very heavy presence in this area for well over 100 years. And the SP is my railroad of choice, but I also like the Santa Fe.

These photos show the industrial sector in far west Phoenix and Avondale to the smaller industries of Goodyear to Buckeye.  As you can see the industrial area has a very dense structural footprint with complex track.

 Buckeye Fertilizer Plant

 Buckeye Grain Bins

 Goodyear Grain Bins

 Goodyear Bridge

 Avondale Industry 01

 Avondale Industry 02

 Avondale Industry 03

 Avondale Industry 04

 West Phoenix Industry 01

 West Phoenix Industry 02

 West Phoenix Industry 03

 Phoenix Industry 01

 Phoenix Industry 02

Urban setting...

If you are looking for more urban setting like Phoenix, I would dive right in to historic research. Those industries look like they offer a lot of operation and interesting track without the mainline feel that your plan has. Just remember that if you compress many of those building to even half or a quarter size, they will be several feet long in 1:1. This is the way to go if you have the space though. They will impress on a viewer realism by showing accurate scale between structures and trains versus an industrial flat building that is no longer than a boxcar "not that they don't exist, they are just less common." 

Lance Mindheim has written awesome books on the subject of realistic urban operations.

http://lancemindheim.com/

Here is another industrial park plan that has a lot of opportunity, but I would enlarge the industries and lengthen the track.

http://mrr.trains.com/how-to/track-plan-database/2014/06/ho-scale-progressive-rail

Compromises and no regrets

If you are looking for more urban setting like Phoenix, I would dive right in to historic research. Those industries look like they offer a lot of operation and interesting track without the mainline feel that your plan has. Just remember that if you compress many of those building to even half or a quarter size, they will be several feet long in 1:1. This is the way to go if you have the space though. They will impress on a viewer realism by showing accurate scale between structures and trains versus an industrial flat building that is no longer than a boxcar "not that they don't exist, they are just less common." 

​Sanchomurphy,

My available space​ certainly limits my options. I don't necessarily want an urban dominated layout, I would like a balance of city and scenery so I can railfan the layout and enjoy just watching trains run as well as having potential for different types of photographs, city and scenic. The separate mains with each main disappearing from view I thought would add to the illusion of trains coming and going. The two separate towns I thought would allow two people to enjoy using the layout at the same time if they wanted to operate it.

I could scrap the plan and start over using most of the long straight length of the room for the city, but then it would be a one railroad SP dominated layout. I don't feel a need to duplicate the prototype, it would eat up too much space for what I would get in return and I would prefer to use different style buildings vs the steel buildings that dominate the west Phoenix industrial area. I tend to think of the big picture view of the layout as a functioning diorama where the models and scenery are the most important aspect with operation being secondary. I haven't started my benchwork yet so I can think things over. But, I'm getting closer to that time, my train room is almost finished I only need to get the floor tile put down.

larger than 750 pixels

This file is 1600 pixels wide.  You should be able to click on it and see it full sized.  I set the display size for the message to 400 pixels.  Once the picture was in the message, I highlighted it and clicked "image" again, but inserted a link to the file on the server.  The link actually takes you to an alternate version of the same plan.

Thoughts...

Long wall on top...shared SP SF industrial area predominantly SP with some SF. Short wall on left...truss bridges SP main with SF trackage rights. lift out area...scenery lower right city... keep the same with SF main disappearing behind city. Right wall with curves...keep as is, maybe  a track going down to a lower level holding yard.    

 "I would prefer to use

I'd try to find some photos of Phoenix in the 50's as the buildings were probably a lot different back then. Here in central Cali the industrial buildings were board and batten siding or corrugated tin with a few concrete or brick buildings in the city areas. They also tended to be smaller with many one of two car industries.This photo is the Maywood furniture factory that was served by the SP in the 50's, the road ended at the power pole back then and a spur went along side the guy wire to the loading door .The higher part of the building in the distance was added sometime later. The original part was wood framed with stucco siding. They shipped a couple of boxcars per week ....DaveB

Phoenix Warehouse district

Looking for intersting older industrial buildings in Phoenix?

chech out these links:

http://www.roguecolumnist.com/rogue_columnist/2016/01/the-warehouse-district.html

http://kjzz.org/content/248053/downtown-phoenix%E2%80%99s-warehouse-district-next-meatpacking-district

Lower level

Long wall on top...shared SP SF industrial area predominantly SP with some SF. Short wall on left...truss bridges SP main with SF trackage rights. lift out area...scenery lower right city... keep the same with SF main disappearing behind city. Right wall with curves...keep as is, maybe  a track going down to a lower level holding yard.   

​Tim,

​Having the city along the long wall has its good points. 20' of compressed warehouse district would have a lot of modeling appeal. Track in the streets, paved cross streets, lighting, etc. The rest of the layout would be dedicated to scenery.

I don't know how I would get down to a lower level without a helix?  My thought is to build the benchwork with the possibility of having a lower level. But, my thought was to have it separate. Watching JoeF's video on his helix experience with short radius curves I would have to build a helix that would eat up a lot of floor space.

Thank you, KnuT!

Looking for intersting older industrial buildings in Phoenix?

chech out these links

DaveB, I think, KnuT, has provided a great deal of insight into mid century Phoenix! KnuT, thanks for posting the links, that is a terrific story and great photos!!!

I already own quite a few Walthers building kits and one DPM kit. Most are brick construction. The photos in the links have many brick buildings, some natural brick, some painted. Amazing how much track ran through the streets! And, I didn't know the Santa Fe had a presence in Phoenix, how convenient!

KnuT, thanks again for posting those links!

One other thought which might

One other thought which might or might not be useful. This was an idea discussed by Jim six in one of his threads regarding one town.

If you were modeling one town you could have a single larger section of town with your tracks at the same level.

You could model a single cross over and have a twice around single track plan. By adding two turnouts on either side of the crossover you could connect each loop to itself that would give you a means of running two trains on two different loops. John Armstrong did this in one of his examples in track planning for realistic operation, the plan was called tailored for the way freight or something similar. The shape of the plan is very similar to yours.

You could also add some semi hidden staging to the layout just past your lift out and running to the right. Placing a backdrop and or city buildings between it and the rest of the layout would make it less obvious and likely allow for 3 or 4 trains to be stagged.

If you get more into operations you could use it as a working yard for the town and have trains made up and broken down to be switched there. It would also be possible to have a set of portable cassettes designed to plug into the layout to model interchange with the mainlines through the area.

The removable connection could be at the bottom on the left side just before your lift out section. When not running trains it could be stored in the interior of the layout, very easy if it is a table top style item on wheels that just connects while being used.

The stagging connection could be built after the rest of the layout has track completed allowing you to have some of the layout operating before adding to it.

The advantages to the one level approach are ease of construction, the ability to model a junction and possibly an interchange. A very good reason to have two railroads in town. The possibility of a third line, a terminal railroad jointly owned by the other two railroads, not all that uncommon. The ability to have either railroad on any of the tracks with a reasonable explanation for it.

It keeps most of the things about your layout that presently appeal to you already and adds some more options to the basic plan.

I will try and post an online web address for the plan below, hope it helps.

https://books.google.com/books?id=TyU6x08dqGkC&pg=PA139&lpg=PA139&dq=tailored+for+the+way+freight+by+john+armstrong&source=bl&ots=qYF4J-Mf8O&sig=fzUVK8Hq_wAXLXESNRVqti17Cow&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjFmMOs7PLNAhXHOiYKHae5BUEQ6AEILDAC#v=onepage&q=tailored%20for%20the%20way%20freight%20by%20john%20armstrong&f=false

That was in the address bar when I did a search for

Lot to think about

You could model a single cross over and have a twice around single track plan. By adding two turnouts on either side of the crossover you could connect each loop to itself that would give you a means of running two trains on two different loops. John Armstrong did this in one of his examples in track planning for realistic operation, the plan was called tailored for the way freight or something similar. The shape of the plan is very similar to yours.

You could also add some semi hidden staging to the layout just past your lift out and running to the right. Placing a backdrop and or city buildings between it and the rest of the layout would make it less obvious and likely allow for 3 or 4 trains to be stagged.

If you get more into operations you could use it as a working yard for the town and have trains made up and broken down to be switched there. It would also be possible to have a set of portable cassettes designed to plug into the layout to model interchange with the mainlines through the area.

​Rob, thanks for your input, you've given me a lot to think over.  I have the book you referenced, but some of the material just makes me put it down. It's a little overwhelming. I'm warming to the one large town idea. I could duck the Santa Fe back behind the town after servicing fewer industries to get it out of view and give it a smaller presence? To take your cassette idea in a slightly different direction, maybe a 6' x 8" detachable staging I could attach to the fascia parallel to the front of the town?

What is in that area lower

What is in that area lower right with numbers 9-19 in it? Could a 6' x18" staging yard be put on one of those walls?