Diagrams

Is a diagram available? A picture is, of course, worth 999 words. Or something like that.

Typically, you'd want your mainline in the back of the layout; fewer derailments and stalls are likely to happen on the main than in a yard, and it's way easier to maneuver your hands in a close-up yard.

Stub-ended yards are typically only used in storage yards and industries; you'll want a double-ended yard if you can manage it. Just the ability to classify a train as another arrives or departs is of tremendous help.

Thoughts

Model railroad mainlines tend to be busier than their prototypes, so you want to avoid tying up the main for regular moves like light engines going to and from the engine facility.

Look up "pinwheel ladder" for ideas on how to make your yard tracks longer.  And don't forget to include a switch lead, aka tail track.  It should be as long as the longest classification track plus yard switcher or two.

You don't have to make all yard tracks double-ended, even though the vast majority of real yard tracks are.  But you do want the arrival and departure tracks to be double-ended, if for no other reason than it allows you to add and remove engines and cabooses without moving the body of the train.

23x12 is bigger than most model railroads, but still only qualifies as mid-sized.

Real customers don't like to share sidings with other customers.  It does happen, but it is definitely the exception to the rule.

Scott Chatfield

Yards

A lot of it depends on how busy the layout is, how many trains will be on the main track, and whether the yard is a terminating yard (end of a branch) or at a junction, or a through yard where trains arrive and depart from both directions.

My previous layouts were in the 12x23 range.

Having the main in the back means you won't be fouling the main working the yard and all the stuff in the yard will be 2-3" closer to the aisle.

You can add a 3-4" high clear plastic barrier along the front edge of the layout and that will keep elbows from hitting the main along the aisle, at the a slight scenic cost.

For most model yards having a mix of stub and double ended tracks works well.  About the only time you NEED all double ended tracks is if your yard is big enough to need two switch engines (classic arrangement is for one end to switch inbounds and the other to build outbounds).

On the prototype, having the engine terminal on the same side of the main is preferable because hostling moves can be made without needing main track authority or blocking/being blocked by main track movements.  Having said that, its also quite common in a major terminal to have multiple yards in the terminal, with only one shop/service track to service all the engines.  In that case, engine to or from one of the other yards have to use the main.  The question is how many moves are you going to have on the main and how much will the moves block or be blocked by the main track movements.

Another reason for the main being up front

I run trains so I can watch them.  With the main up front you can watch your train run by rather than having it obscured by a yard full of freight cars.

Fouling the main

Hi,

this is somewhat unrelated but may help you to come to a conclusion...

On my daily commute I have to change trains at a rather busy railway station. It is a terminal station (stub-ended) with 32 tracks above ground(!!!). There are some suburban and subway tracks also. The 32 main tracks are split into three wings (which used to be separate stations 100 years ago).

My train arrives on the northern wing of about 10 tracks in the morning (and leaves in the evening). Apparently there are only three tracks to access the northern wing. It was only one track left when there was some unrelated construction recently.

As a result, if there's a delay in train services, there will be a long queue of trains waiting to get into the station wing and out of there as well.

Add to that the fact that there is one train service that needs the loco to run around the train. Once the arriving passengers have gotten off the train, it will pull back into the approach tracks (there are only three!). The engine will cut off, wait for another track to be free to run around, re-attach to the train to do a brake check and finally reverse back into the platform. That train service is usually a few minutes late (disturbing the time table) and has about ten minutes to finish the eleven-minute procedure...

Don't forget that all services actually terminate there. Most trains are moved as "Rangierfahrt" (shunting move, at slow speed) to a ready yard that is ~8km (5mi) away and are recalled into the station an hour later. There are only three approach tracks to that wing, one is blocked by that train waiting for the loco to run around, one is usually used for inbound trains and one for outbound. Which results in my train running at slow speed for quite a while because it is following a train that is coming from (or going to) the ready yard (slowly). In the afternoon there is often delays mounting up because they cannot get the trains in and out quickly enough.

They started to re-build the station. New office spaces are built for generating more real estate revenue. There are no plans to improve train or passenger access to the station... (Actually there are plans to reduce the number of trains into the station but that is another story).

So much for blocking the main line due to accessing the loco shops/ready yard - on my *very busy* commuter service this is the rule, not the exception.

(To put "very busy" in relation, the wing of the station serves 3-5 directions with 2-3 trains per hour and direction, that is roughly a train every 3 minutes, not counting shunting moves).

In the end, you should decide how the traffic pattern on your main line and yard is supposed to look like. Is it an operational enhancement to create a tight spot with engines having to cross the main or is it an annoyance?

Have fun!

.

I wanted to put a sketch together to have a point of reference, thus a bit of a delay in replying.

I tried to colour code the sections to make it easier to discern between main, two A/D tracks, the drill track and the yard itself. Each key track is 12', long enough to fit any train on my railroad, although both A/D tracks are only 10' long.

It looks a bit of spaghetti to me though, as I tried to account for any possibility of accessing A/D tracks and the turntable without fouling the main. I think on the right side, the curved turnout needs to be further down the line, to allow an engine on the South A/D a bit of room before that turnout, not to foul the main.

The yard will be a through yard, with some foreign power stopping to exchange cars, while others might not.

I would like to limit the moves on the main, if possible (I think it's doable in my case).

As trains would be possibly coming from both directions, I have been thinking to double the main throughout that area. Basically have a main with one long siding, starting all the way at the helix and ending on the other side of the yard.

I am mulling an idea of two individual A/D tracks, or could that long siding mentioned above also act as another A/D track?

When it comes to key tracks, I'm kinda not clear how to organize them.

I envision my railroad being part of a larger network, having a variety of roadnames passing through.

Some layouts I've seen have each key track dedicated to an individual roadname (UP, BNSF, CP, etc).
Others (majority) have key tracks dedicated to specific industries (if they are big enough), or shared among a few industries if they are small (couple of cars each).

It seems to me if the former is in use, there would be double sorting needed: first exchange the cars with an UP train, for example; then get those cars from the UP key track cut and sorted into various local destinations, thus requiring more key tracks for those industries.

Maybe that's not a bad thing because it creates more operating work, but does it make sense? And there's only so much space on the benchwork to have that many key tracks.

Originally I thought to have a roundhouse on the layout (I even bought one) but now I'm thinking to ditch it and only have a turntable (and a diesel engine house instead).
Roundhouse seems to be a wasted space as it ends up being only a scenic detail, unless it is somehow operationally integrated e.g. crews are forced to take engines to the roundhouse for service, then get them back out after some time.

Road crews didn't do that

Moving steam engines in and out of a roundhouse was the job of the hostler and his helpers.  And engines went into the roundhouse for repairs, which generally meant their fires had to be dropped so the boiler could cool off.  So they were in the house for a day or two.

On some railroads the road crews got on their power at the engine facility.  On others the hostlers moved the power from the e/f to the departure track and tied onto the train.

Scott Chatfield

Yard design

A/D tracks are only in the larger yards.  In smaller yards, whatever track works is used.  However longer, double ended tracks are generally used as A/D tracks.

Here is a picture of the throat of my yard, looking north: 

The track with the light color ballast is the main track.  Then going left to right is the runner (caboose is on it) then yard tracks 1 thru 5.  Tracks 1 and 2 are double ended and tie into the runner.  Tracks 3-5 are stub ended.

All the tracks to the left of the main track are industry tracks.

Note I have a pair of crossovers at this end of the yard and there is another pair at the other end of the yard.  

Parallel to the switch lead is the caboose track and a scale track.  They tie into the tail track and #5. 

Back by the water tower, the tracks to the right are the main and the tail track of the switching lead.

With this arrangement I can yard a train on the main, runner, #1 or #2, but I can depart a train northward off any track. If a train terminates on the main track, the switcher can reach through the crossover right by the caboose and pull the train back onto the tail track to switch it.

I showed this to compare with your yard design, a very common model railroad design.  The ONLY way a car can get in or out of the yard is if the switch puts it over into the AD tracks.  A train can't set out or pick up directly from the yard (very common in smaller yards).  That can really hamstring your yard operation.

What you are calling a "key" is called a "classification" or "block".  Blocking can be anything the railroad wants it to be.  It can be another yard, another railroad, another city, a train, an industry, a status of car, a type of car, anything that helps the railroad route the cars in the best manner.

On my railroad I have blocks for Wilmington, Elsmere Jct, Coatesville, Birdsboro, Reading, St Clair and Philadelphia.  The last three are really the same block.  Elsmere Jct is an interchange with the B&O.  Wilmington and Coatesville have sub-blocks for the yard engines/industrial areas/locals/interchanges.  If a car has a block on the waybill of "Wilm-MD" then that mean the car is routed to Wilmington.  When it gets to Wilmington, the yardmaster there knows it goes the Maryland Ave area (MD) and switches it into the track with the rest of the industry job cars.

Here is a graphic of how my blocking is arranged :  Yellow = Wilmington, Blue = Elsmere, Orange = Coatesville, Pink= Birdsboro, Green = Reading, St Clair, Phillie.  White (no color ) is the road local.

This is a picture of some waybills at Coatesville.  Notice the "Via" line has the Coatesville block and its highlited orange.  My CC&WB look a bit different since they are meant to represent actual "car cards" that were used in my era (yes, real railroads used car cards).

On my layout the Wilmington yardmaster can put the cars wherever he wants (its his yard), but the suggestion is the Maryland Ave (Wilm-MD), H&H (Wilm-H&H) and 6th Ave (Wilm-6th) cars go to #1.  The Delaware River Extension (Wilm-DRE) and car float cars (Wilm-Float) go in #2.  The north cars and local cars (all the other classifications) can go in any of the other three tracks as the yardmaster sees fit, based on how many cars he has to deal with.

Since the tracks with the cars the Wilmington industry switcher will be handling, #1 and #2 are double ended, the industry job can sort out his cars for where he wants to switch on the other end of the yard.  That way the switcher classifying and building trains won't have to spend time building the industry job and the industry job can switch his stuff as he sees fit.

Short answer, if you aren't asleep by now, make your blocks whatever you need them to be and makes sense for your railroad.  It all depends on how you operate your trains.

This is what I came up with

After re-reading the above post from dave1905, looking at his website photos, plus more reading information off the web and a few books, this is my 7th iteration (previous 6 follow):

I don't know if these others are as good (in my humble opinion) as the above one, or have elements that I should implement/replace into the 7th one...

#6	#5
#4	#3
#2	#1

To be honest, somehow I don't fancy any of them - it all looks dead straight and "busy". I guess I lack skill (read: I don't know what I'm doing) to make it all flow organically.

I know I should try to modulate the benchwork depth but I don't believe I have space for that without sacrificing aisles.

I added an industrial park in the peninsula for the kicks, and tried to squeeze the engine facilities into the yard areas as much as I could.

Everyone's feedback is much appreciated.

Like your #7

Hi,

your #7 seems to be quite nice to me - the areas where the turnouts are concentrated are nice and open (no reaching over buildings). It looks complicated but the traffic flow is well thought out and is actually quite simple.

If anything, I'd think that you've been too careful in separating yard traffic from mainline traffic - see my comment above From what I read in your previous comment this is exactly what you want, so it seems to be very good.

Have fun!

.

Hey dark2star

Thanks for your reply. Yes you are right, it looks like I have over-engineered this yard for some kind of a "perfect" operation without any glitches. To be honest, I am not sure that is the way to go.

Your story about the station where you change trains is eye opening because it's a real-world example of what happens, and how railroads deal with it.

Having said that, it doesn't mean I'll go crazy and make the yard totally unusable. Instead I'm rethinking whether I need to have all the ancillary items in the yard (round house, turntable, car and engine shops, etc). Removing (some of) them would de-clutter the area so that a yard would be a focal point, and made simpler.

My one cent

Only one cent, worth less than most people's two cents.

If you're worried that it's unrealistically perfect and would present fewer operational challenges than the real world, then removing elements isn't the way to go. Instead, I'd pick something to add, and as an exercise in reality, do it without moving anything else - jam it in however best you can in whatever space is still open, just like you'd have to do in the real world if you had a perfect yard laid out and functioning and then five years later somebody at corporate HQ added a new requirement and told you to figure out how to fit it in. Fitting it in the best you can will compromise your perfection in a very realistic way, and leave you with the kind of real-world compromise that adds flavor and operational complication.

Moving things

Hi,

you have a good design, why make it less so? I'd just go for it as it is - a very nice yard that enhances your operations. Given your space and what you mentioned early on, I'd say your #7 design is as close to perfect as you can get.

Should you find traffic flow in the yard to be too perfect, you can always add something later on, like an excursion train that blocks the yard siding or a mishap with derailed cars. Staging scenes like that will enhance your operation more than crippling the yard now. I think.

As Eastwind mentioned, try to fit in something weird - a passenger depot, a facility for loading something, whatever.

Or - in the same line of thought - think about how the yard used to be and what changes might have been made recently (like the addition of the diesel shop). Consider making the roundhouse a steam museum - with steam locos being in service as museum trains - which will make it necessary to put in a museum access road, a passenger platform and such.

The example of how my commuter services are being run also implies a lot of history - that part of the station didn't have that kind of dense service until fairly recently and the track layout shows this. Interestingly there was a lady from Austria in the train yesterday and she was absolutely shocked by the fact that trains were "still" run with diesel power. Where she lives there is a rural secondary line which is electrified and services were running every quarter of an hour. Anything less in a bigger city was beyond her imagination...

You're on the right track, keep your #7 plan. It really is a good one.

Have fun!

...

7 will operate better if you move the main through track to the center of the yard to line up with the ready track area in your engine facility, versus the back most (longest) track.  One yard track will always be a throughfare.

Over engineered?

Why do you say its over engineered?

If it works and is flexible, its fine.  Go with #7.  Running the main between the AD tracks and class yard will complicate things and greatly increase delay on the main track and interference between the yard and the main.

The turntable is necessary if you are running steam or single engines that have to be pointed a certain way (F units).  You will need ready tracks to hold engines between runs.  The roundhouse isn't necessary, except as a storage track, and ready tracks have a smaller footprint.  Car shops or a RIP track aren't really necessary.   Most people add them as some sort of defacto "industry" and make them more complicated by making them single ended.  Most RIP's a double ended so bad orders go in one end and repaired cars come out the other.

In my new design...

.....  to extend my Maclau River in N scale, I'm in the way to design a big classification yard with 13 tracks along the main line.

I would share some of my planning about yard, because even if they are the "industry which build train" they need to be efficient to work well and well placed along the train run to deserve correctly the whole layout.

In my design, the idea is to have a big yard to process construction of all the trains; the ones going to the river line, the ones going to the mountain line.

These two lines are in fact my main but one part is going up in the mountain; the other is going down along the river; in fact this allow me to double the length of the main and to have big elevations between track without the use of a helix;both main line start at my town Corinnesburgh.

The big designed yard will desserve " both" mainline, this is a huge double  ended yard with at both side caboose tracks, a run around track and a small steam and diesel facilities on the right side; both end have a run track wich is a siding of the main to allow switching and construction of trains without disturbing the main; lenght is enough to contains a train of 20 40' boxcars.

This yard is designed to be placed in a corner and had curved track with a minimum radius of 18.5" going up with a spacing of 1.2"; main is running back of all these tracks but with N scale these are only from 22" from the edge and not out of reach.

The yard is an emphasis of a one published in MR years ago in an article of late Mister Sperandeo; the prototype existed in Texas.

By placing the yard in a corner, I safe some place because somewhere the yard is cut in two, one half part along one wall, the other part along the next perpendicular wall; this reduce the need to have a long wall which is just used for the yard, knowing the design is basicaly a walkaround the walls

But I have severals local small yard, one at my port with 5 track, allowing to dispatch and form train at port from all the industries; this a small double ended yard, with only one track for a 20 40' boxcars.train; the others track are shorter.

I have also designed a yard on the mountain run to form coal train; these trains are formed  with small train of hoppers coming from the surrounded mine; again the mountain main run is passing along and can switch any of the coal train or bring back empty hoppers from the coal dumper at port.

This  "passing yard" is inspired by the one which existed in Elkins, Virginia, with the same purpose.

It will be strategicaly placed along the mountain run; but somewhere in the middle of the line with a small town and small facilities for locomotives; access is a challenge in design because the river run is just under

I have also a small passenger yard at my biggest town on the system and a stub ended yard at "Cincinati the end of the line with an acces to a big staging.

My staging use  not simple ended track but looped one going under the river main and will come back along the river main such as an interchange around the middle of it.

The mountain run didn't have staging on the line, but ended at a small town in mountain with some siding; small industry  and a hidded return loop.

May be I will made some "looped staging" around the main loop but not sure until now.

So for my operations I have a huge yard and around four small ones to dispatch cars and small trains to specified local locations.

The run of the river side like the mountains one is around 180' - 200' following plan and use of the surface.

#7

I like the #7 the best.  I would recommend adding a set of turnouts to access the siding and AD tracks without fowling the switching lead.  That way classification can happen at the same time as arrivals / departures.  I would keep the switch from the main to the thoroughfare track, but maybe move it to the right of the caboose track.

Don  

2nd crossover

The second crossover is only needed if there are a large number of moves in and out of the yard.

One has to ask, with only 3 class tracks, how busy is the yard going to be?  If this was a yard with 15-20 class tracks that handled 10-12 trains in and out a session, the second crossover would be very useful.  If you are handling only 2-4 trains in and out a session, is it really that big a deal that the switch lead is blocked for a couple real minutes?

With only 3 class tracks, will the orange tracks eventually be used as class tracks?  I have virtually the same arrangement and the two orange tracks in my yard have become class tracks.  If that happens or the switch engine is going into the orange tracks frequently, the benefit of the second crossover lessens.

Putting in the second crossover won't hurt anything, its just a decision on is the extra cost and complexity worth the flexibility.  On my layout I have a crossover in that relative location, but facing the other way.  That way a train can stop on the main and a yard engine can suck cars off the main back onto the switching lead or double cuts from the yard out to the main.  I have a relatively low traffic density on my layout, so switching to or from the main isn't a problem.  If I had a much higher main track volume then I might not have designed it that way.

Tail Track Question

@ Dave Husman & @Scott Chatfield

I see where you both have used this word 'tail track'. I'm wondering exactly what is it?

I used it earlier today,..without knowing if it was correct??

#7 Fri, 2019-11-08 09:13

What Don 18 posted above is pretty similar to what I came up with only I had a 2 stall instead of 3 stall engine house.

"To be honest, somehow

  It probably could be simplified a bit. The old Santa Cruz SP yard was entered from a curve like you have on the left. All the yard tracks connected to the aisle side main however and the turntable and round house component had less tracks.  The SP used the aisle side track as the main, with a passenger depot on the near side of the tracks, then the far back track was the freight house track and the ones in between were for switching. IIRC the yard had about 7 or 8 tracks and was about 1/4 mile long, so quite similar in size to yours. .....DaveB

Balance

For a layout your size I believe you have to much track tied up in engine facility operations.  I suggest a balance between tracks and industries.
 

Since you are planning for 5-6 operators I would eliminate the round house and turntable and add industries which will add to your operations and create more interest than just viewing static engines in the roundhouse.  
 

Just my two cents.

Frank