Choices....

overkill or good?

  I'd say the numbers  are just about right. 32 inches is fine for pretty much everything anyone would run. If you have the room to expand to 54 inch in selected spots it can't hurt and might look better, but if not I wouldn't worry too much about it as you can always have the brakeman( you with a skewer) kick the coupler over a bit to align it in that rare case where it doesn't mate. Kadees are very forgiving of curves with their large gathering range so I'd expect troublesome couplings to be minimal on the 32 inch radius......DaveB

Test things out. Do you already have the rolling stock?

Do like the prototype

On the prototype long cars which are considered greater than 60’ have extended drawheads. These allow the couplers to have a greater swing arc so they track better in curves. For my Atlas centerbeams I take a Kadee 156 coupler with the medium shank and cut off the whiskers. To couple in a curve, one would have to do the exact same thing a real Conductor would do...manually slide the coupler to align it properly. 

To properly shift a coupler over first you need to make sure to obtain 3 step protection and that the equipment is separated by 50’.

Next with your back to the coupler use your hands and lift the coupler using your legs sliding it until it is lined correctly. After releasing 3-step protection instruct the engineer to slowly bring the train back stopping short if necessary to make sure couplers are aligned. 

Once coupling is made, stretch the slack out to ensure a good joint. 

Tim G.

Goals, Test

Thanks for the quick feedback! 

It is in a North American basement.  Seemed real to me when I was down there last night, but maybe I should double check this morning. 

The layout is going to be U shaped, with the left leg of the U being 14’ 10”, the middle leg is 12’ 5”, and the right leg is 17’ 5”.  If I bridge the bulkhead door I can add another 12 feet or so to the right leg, but at best that will be a future extension.

In that space I want to get 3 or 4 good sized (for a model) industries (or maybe 5 if I bridge a door and extend the right leg another 12 feet or so).  A small specialty plastics transload (2 tracks, total of 10 car capacity), a lumber company (2 centerbeam spots, 2 boxcars spots on a warehouse), a plain old warehouse (6 door spots, toying with the idea of putting a second track in to make it 12 spots but that might overwhelm the layout in terms of number of cars to handle), possibly Ken’s Foods (the real Ken’s Foods in Marlboro, MA has 2 tracks on which they get veg oil and corn syrup tanks, and the occasional plastics hopper), and a glass factory which will get 2 or 3 different types of covered hoppers including the shorty 2 bays.

I’m sure I can get 3 of those in and keep the Mindheim-esque spacious look I want, and easily 4 if I bridge the door.  Maybe all 5 if I arrange things carefully.  I don’t think the larger curve radii will be too limiting if relax my ME #6 turnout only rule (goal was to speed up construction) and build a custom curved turnout or two, something I’ve done in the past and enjoyed.

So I may in fact be indulging in a little overkill for the 54”.  I think what you’re getting at is the same thing as Avel... 

No.  I’ve got the 73’ centerbeams (and the plastics hoppers and some 60’ box cars), but I don’t have the shorty hoppers or corn syrup cars.  I bought only the minimum cars necessary to build the first to industries, and I choose the first two industries based on which I could find the minimal cars necessary for in a scouting pass at the last train show I went to.  Didn’t occurr to me to buy a couple shorty cars too.  Excellent point though, I’ll see if I can order a couple asap, and do some mockup testing (also recommended in Joe Fugate’s run like a dream book now that I think about it).

Good to know, I’ll keep an eye out for that. 

Coupling on curve

Interesting Tim, I didn’t know about the extended drawhead for> 60’ thing on the prototype.  Although now that you mention it thinking back to what I’ve seen railfanning I should have realized there was something like that.

On my O scale switching layout I had a runaround with a 48”/44” radius curve at one end.  The HO equivalents would be 26.5”/24.25”.  Operating by myself, lining couplers on the curve got a little annoying when doing a bit of sorting of inbound cars prior to spotting.  But when friends came over we used 2 man crews which turned things like that into more fun.  I can see where all the steps you list there would be neat with a 2 man crew.  Something is fundamentally different about actually having a 2 man crew vs. switching roles in your head operating by yourself.  At least for me.  Maybe I’ll grow to like doing that on my own too, but I’d rather not rely on that.

And anyway, I’m sure there will be times when it will be necessary to couple on a 32” curve - I can’t make them all 54”, just on the runaround if end up needing to wrap that around a corner.

I built a small L-shaped

I built a small L-shaped switching layout in my office, and I have the same mix of cars - from centerbeam flats and long propane cars down to two-bay hoppers. The curve between the two halves of the L is 18". In fact, it is soldered together Atlas code 100 snaptrack. No easements. The whole thing is Atlas #4 switches too. And I have zero issues running any combination of equipment on it. The trick is simple - it's a switching layout - go SLOW. Ease the train around that curve and through the switches. I would not try to run six axle diesels or big steam, but long cars are not a problem at all - all I run are small 4-axle switchers. Of course, you have to be very meticulous with your tracklaying. 

-Kevin

I haven't read Runs Like a Dream

I haven't read Joes book but I've a semi worn out copy of John Armstrong's book.  John's book was written when sharper curves were the norm and perhaps fewer modelers had the "luxury" of larger curves.  Armstrong refers to 18" as sharp, 24" as conventional and 30" as broad.  In today's world I would relabel 30" as conventional and something higher, say above 36 inches or 42 inches as broad - not sure what the consensus is on that.  Space is usually a limiting factor.

What you have listed looks like you should be good to me.

In my case, I have 89' TOFC flat cars and 85' passenger cars and I'm probably breaking the "Runs Like a Dream" best-practices, but like you, I am also going to use 32" minimum curves although where possible have drawn in radii higher in some places 34, 35 and as high as 42 inches.  Minimum turnouts will be #6 and where cross-overs exist, #8 and passing siding planning on #8 also.   Here is my basic draft for the space I am finishing presently:

Three Step Protection

Tim, 

I've seen Three Step Protection mentioned here and elsewhere, but I don't recall seeing a description of what it entails. I presume from the context that it is a safety procedure like Lock-out Tag-out? I expect so the conductor can work between the cars without the fear of being run over or sandwiched?

Modern NS requires the

Modern NS requires the engineer: 1) put the reverser in neutral 2) drop the field generator breaker 3) apply sufficient brakes to hold the equipment. 3 Steps to protect anyone working in or around equipment coupled to the train. Before anyone starts a debate, there are more reasons to request 3 Step protection. 

3-step

Dear Brock,

The specific wording/procedure varies a little between railroads,
bu the basic concept is that:
- the conductor/brakeman has to get in-between the cars or some equally-dangerous position
- the conductor/brakemen radios the engineer for "3-step" (protection)
- the engineer:
        - Apply the brakes
        - Sets the Reverser level to "centre" (neither Forward nor Backward)
        - Opens the Field switch (effectively isolating the traction motors from the generator)

- and answers of the radio "3-step applied"

...which then lets the Conductor/Brakeman know that, as far as the Engineer is concerned,
there is no way the loco is going to "spontaneously move" while he's working.
(The Engineer equally shoulders the understood responsibility that he's not "undoing the 3-step" until he's heard
"Conductor in the clear" from _exactly_ the same person who initially requested the "3-step").

...Of course, the watch-phrase for any person near/around/on railroad equipment is:

"..._any_ piece of equipment may move in _any_ direction at _any_ time
(conduct yourself accordingly)..."

References:
https://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?2,268835
/> http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=136&t=55189
/>

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

I presume from the context

Whoa, shades of my OSHA Hazwoper 40 Health & Safety training.

Back to layout track standards before we drift too far?

18” curves - wow

Thanks for the example Kevin.  It’s impressive that you can get the combination of long and short cars through that tight a curve with no easements.  The O scale equivalent of 18” is 32 5/8”, and I had a 36” radius curve with a short easement on my O scale switching layout that was a bit of an issue for long/short car combinations.

I’m in the process of setting up a little test to try 27”, 32”, and 54”.  I didn’t think it was worth trying anything smaller, but there’s plenty of space left on that 4x4 sheet of plywood for more experiments if it looks like the 27” is more than I need.  The camera has added a bit of distortion - the horizontal pt of tan line near the top is perfectly perpendicular to the 3 vertical tangent lines.  The 1x3 screwed to the ply is just an extension to have someplace to stick the far end of the trammel for the 54” radius curve.  My “bent stick” for the easement is a piece of 1/4” pex plumbing tube - stampled to a short square stick I clamped to the plywood lined up with the tangent, with 1/16” holes drilled in it  past the point where it should match the circular curve I can tap brads through to hold it in place to trace.  Worked pretty well.  I’m going to double sticky tape the track down for the temporary test, and that’s the point at which I got stuck - can’t find the double sticky tape I know I have, and I haven’t made it to a store to buy more yet.

Focus, 3-step

Appreciated.  But 3 step did come up and it is directly related to industrial switching which is what my layout is going to be all about, so I don’t mind the diversion.

Brock - if you watch videos of cars being switched on youtube, or if you’re lucky enough to catch some switching in person in the real world, you’ll see the conductor reach for his radio and say something, then wait briefly for a reply, before stepping between the cars after for example they’ve just coupled onto a car.  Some railroads use a fancy hand signal instead of the radio if they have line of sight to the engineer.  But 3-step is what’s being requested there. 

Model Railroad Switching like the Prototype

Here’s a link to a video of an operating session on my Seaboard Central which is considered a switching layout with a minimum radius curve of 24” in some places. I use Micro Engineering Code 83 exclusively with Number 6 turnouts. If I need to adjust the draw head on one of my centerbeam flats it’s pretty easy to do with an uncoupling pic. 

In the video the layout is being operated with an Engineer and Conductor and that is how my formal sessions are done. Occasionally though I will do a mini op just by myself when I need a break from modeling. I find it as a way to relax.

The others were right about 3-step protection. 1-apply the brakes, 2- Center the Reverser, and 3-drop the generator field switch on the control stand. With it open the locomotive will not load current to the traction motors.

Tim

I need to test smaller

I've watched some of your videos Tim, nice layout!  I haven't seen that one yet - I'll watch it at lunch today.  Good to know you made 24" work well - I know from your videos it does work well.  Sounds like I need to add a couple smaller curves to my test jig.  At least 24", and something a little smaller.  I think it would be good to know what radius various types of trouble start, so I know how much margin of error I have with whatever radius I end up going with.

On the 3-step subject, on the lead in to that video is a closeup view of the proto throttle.  Which has a reverser and brake, but no field switch!  Oh no!

Tight curves

I personally wouldn’t do anything tighter than 24” and even when you do that I would use easements. Some cars will climb the rail and derail on tighter radius curves.

My recommendation is the following:

Mainline min radius - 36”

Branchline min radius - 30”

Industrial lead min radius - 24”

And thanks for watching my Seaboard Central channel!

Tim

Standards

While better track standards are always better, industrial track is the lowest priority for maintenance, has the loosest standards for maintenance and the lowest speed.  Also, we model railroaders (myself included) tend to design stuff specifically to support the operation we are planning to model.  Real railroads more often than not have to use track and facilities that were designed for a different operation 20-50-100 years ago.  So while you are designing track for 70 foot centerbeams, the real railroad, unless its a brand new (built in the last 10-20 years) facility, might be operating on a facility designed to handle 40 ft cars.

There is a trade off then between the visual appearance of track that looks like the TGV operates over it and track that you wonder how the train makes it across.  Where that break occurs is up to the individual modeler.

Prototype standards

Good point Dave.  I want to have something good enough to avoid derailments at switching speeds and not look completely stupid.

The lumber company I'm cribbing from for my new layout is National Lumber in Mansfield, MA, on a short industrial spur called "The Chocolate" for reasons which if I remember right have to do with a chocolate factory that was once nearby.  A link to it on google maps:  https://goo.gl/maps/kJyULVykXKN2.  If I measure that correctly in the satellite view, the curve on that runaround is about a 400 foot radius, which works out to 55" in HO.

The Palmer Industrial Park seems to have curves of about 360 foot radius (~50" in HO), and for a while they were unloading center beams at the end.  I'm thinking of cribbing the warehouse for Maple Leaf Distribution from that industrial park.

So I'm almost certainly going to go tighter radius than the prototypes I'm looking at anyway.

Double check on switch and derail?

@TimGarland - Excellent video on operations.  Is the "double check on switch and derail" a new thing, or an NS thing?  It's been a few years since I had the time railfan long enough to catch switching.  And NS is not one of the railroads around here.

Ken, That there is a classic

Ken,

That there is a classic easement!  I've typically used springy Atlas flex track as a substitute for the bent stick method and it has worked pretty well for me and given similar results.

I don't know if you can see it but all the tracks in this staging yard (under construction photo) all have easements.

Depends on your goals

Like everything, it all depends on your goals.

For industrial track, if you want to mirror the prototype, you can push the standards. In other words, go with 3x curves and just know you will need to fiddle with the couplers to get them to align. The prototype does it, so why not us?

However, adding easements to these 3x curves will really help. If there's any one thing we can do to improve performance, it's to add easements to curves. Even 1.5x easements for industrial trackage will really help.

The reason for these guidelines in the book isn't that you must never break them, it's that you can break them at times knowing what you're giving up when you do -- such as the 5x coupling guideline. Go ahead, break it if needed to get things to fit, but KNOW that you will be fiddling with the couplers by hand to get them to align. The prototype does this too, so it's not THAT big a deal. Mainly, you now KNOW what compromises you're making.

For those who may not have seen this book, you can get the eBook version from the MRH Store for just $12

Make it run like a Dream: TRACKWORK

Easements

Jim, sure can see those easements.  Actually by their very nature it's hard to see an easement, but you sure can see the lack of one if it's not there!

Joe, that is an excellent book!  The rolling stock one looks good too but I've only read the coupler chapter so far.  I had a little trouble with short easements on my O scale switching layout, I'm going to try to stick with the 2x rule.  I think it's safe to say you are better off with a generous easement on a tighter curve than a skimpy or non-existent easement on a wider curve?  I may very well go with tighter curves though depending on how my experiments work out.

NS rule

Double checking the switch and derail is an NS operating rule where the engineer must ask the conductor to double check the switch alignment and the position of the derail if there is one involved. This of course is for obvious reasons. How many times have folks forgotten to line a switch, started the movement and made it into the wrong track before they had to back up and line the switch correctly. It happens to all of us. I even noticed Mike Confalone experiencing this problem on his White Mountain Switcher DVD. Well it even happens on the real thing too, however it can and does cause real consequences. Worst cases can lead to derailments after running thru an improperly lined switch and then splitting it when moving the opposite direction. As a young Conductor I failed to double check and put two 1:1 size GP38-2s on the ground! That move got me a 10 day vacation.

Tim