Decision Point

Argh!  I'm calling this Decision Point 1, as I know I'll hit more.

All the planning, all the thoughtful consideration, right down the tubes faster than you can say "chimichanga with extra guacamole sauce".

So what am I talking about? Well, as the modules grow, I can actually run on them, which is great fun, but I haven't enjoyed the lack of a run-around. Now, with the third module in place, there is one, but it's way, way up in the back.

This is kind of hateful when you're running around the yard. Really.

So here's the old plan, and where it stands today

And the suggested "fix" - ripping out the caboose track, and somehow forcing in a turnout to make a run around right here.

Now to do this, I now need to do it all from above and below - a major problem as the GORM shelving doesn't allow a lot of room from below to to work. I'm also restricted from where to put it based on the module breaks (meaning I can't really slide it farther back, as than it will straddle the module break, but than again, if I lose it when I break it apart...so what?)

So do I wedge it in, and rig up a (from the top) switch control solution?  Or do I just ignore it, and continue on. I can always give the layout as designed a chance first, and than come back to it later.

I'm kind of unsure how I want to proceed, so for the moment, I've put the trains away and grabbed a beer.

Any thoughts out there?

Press on regardless

I say continue with your plans.  Making changes now will slow you down and disturb your carefully built track work.  You can run trains back and forth for a break from work and for checking out the track but don't get distracted with improvements until you have given the original plans some opportunity to be properly evaluated.  You can always make the changes later.

Art

Run-arround?

Scarpia,

I agree that you should try this for awhile to see whether there is any other areas that bothers you. You might be surprised. If after completing all of the track work, you still need a run-around near the front of the layout consider the following.

Dick

After a nights sleep, I am

After a nights sleep, I am leaning to agree with you, and let it ride for the moment. If I find I have to add it later, It will be pretty much the same amount of work as it is now.

Track Plan?

Do you have something that you could throw up that gives me a better idea of what I'm looking at in relation to the rest of the layout and how it will be operated.  If you can run test sessions pre-scenery and it isn't saving you time at this point to rip out track then what is to be gained by not trying what you have?  Sounds like nothing...

Is the layout laid directly to the GORM shelving?

I thought you had built layout sections that mounted on top of the shelving?  Another question, is this intended to be your final layout or another chainsaw?  I would keep a file and list any operational or track work problems as you discover them and just live with most of the problems while overseas.  When you take the layout apart for your return to the states, then you can decide what changes and corrections you want to make to the next iteration of your layout, and changes might be easier to make if you have a complete shop to work in rather than trying to do it in an apartment.

Welcome to the concept of the chainsaw

The biggest boo-boo new modelers make is not putting enough runaround tracks on their plan.

That's what a chainsaw layout is for - to try out things and learn the hard way on something you knew up front was your training wheels.

That's also why it's important to *run trains* for a while as much as possible before you get too serious developing your "dream layout".

Beginners put lines on a track plan because it looks like a cool track arrangement.

What you want to get to is knowing what each line on your track plan is for operationally. Once you have some good ops experience, you get so you *know* what those lines are for on your track plan.

You can tell you *have arrived* with track planning when you see trains running in your head as you are drawing the lines on the plan.

You've just made the great track planning ah-ha breakthrough - runarounds. You will kick yourself once you realize your track plan doesn't have enough of them.

What needs running around and when?

Rich, here's the track plan

Rich,

here's the track plan of the area under discussion. Now there are two modifications we're not seeing here, one is the short double ended siding between M5 and the back of the layout (this does provide me with a run around off the main), and the other is the turnout that leads into M1 was moved to the left to avoid being in the middle of a module joint.

Russ,

The layout is in sections. Each section is assembled on it's own, and than "plugged in". After it's plugged in, it's basically fixed - which these three bottom modules now are.

Your question on final or chainsaw is a good one, and I have to say I think we need a new term. This is not my final layout, but neither is it a chainsaw in the commonly used sense. To be honest, I enjoy the building enough to think I'll never have a "final" layout, but who knows.  Your suggestion on waiting for the return breakdown is a good one.

Joe,

I agree in essence with most of your points. However Ken has asked some more related questions that I need to comment on that also address your thoughts.

Ken,

Thanks for bringing that up. You're right, of course. The operational concept is

Two trains (one northbound, one south) stop here

Train comes in from staging, cars are pulled from and put into (sorted on M2, M3,), by switcher, train departs.

Switcher builds local branchline run, and takes it to the other city, switches there, builds return train, and comes back to this yard, breaks that down for the next northbound/southbound train.

So you're right - other than the caboose, and cars for the RIP track, I don't really need a lot of run arounds here. So what is it that's causing me to think I need one?

Part of the problem is the double crossover. That's in a spot where I can only use it for a loco escape - it's too small for a loco and single car, for instance. I think this is going to require me to build a hinged extension (hinged as the door to the room is right there) that would allow me to use it as a run around.

Ok, so I think I have a

Ok, so I think I have a solution. 

The easiest place to put in a runaround is a crossover from M3 to M2.  Now I understand this is your staging yard, but that's where it works best, construction wise.  Your train length might be a bit shorter on the runaround, but if you shunted the train into M10, and then dragged the one or two runaround cars along onto M3, and then backed out on M2, you'd have your move accomplished.

Before switching, your switcher would take the cars out of the staging area; and at the conclusion of switching chores, your switcher would then put back the cars into the staging area.  Of course, most of these cars in the staging area would be going into these industries, and most of the cars coming out would presumably be cars coming out of the industries, so the maneuver effectively works. 

Cars on M3 would be the cars coming out; the first move would be to take them out of the area and put them onto the awaiting train on M4-6 where the caboose would be waiting back on M4 if it's a right bound train.  If it's a left bound train, then you leave your caboose on the line from the 20" radius curve, couple up the outbounds on M4, and then pull them out until you are just clear of them on the 24" line.  You back up this line, catch the cars from behind, and tack them to your caboose.

Ideally, you'd take the inbound cars and deliver them right to the industries, cleaning out any cars in there by depositing them on M4 as you work.  M4 or M3 should ideally be empty before and after any session.  Either way, it's a tight space - your main issue is your ends can't be any longer, where you;d gain all the operational space you might ever need.

Leave it Alone

Scarp-

Looking at the plan (thanks for posting it, it makes this easier for me) the only thing I'm not clear on is what the runaround is needed for.  Let me know if any of my assumptions here are incorrect:

*A train arrives from the upper right stopping on the A/D track*

*Given the yard size I assume there is no dedicated switcher so the locomotive cuts off, running around on the main (if there is a switcher then this is even easier!)*

*Temporarily Set out the caboose on M1*

*Set out/pick up from the classification yard as necessary*

*Pick up Caboose from M1 and reattach to the train*

*Run around the train and continue on*

For trains terminating at the junction it would go as follows:

*Train arrives on A/D Track*

*Locomotive runs around train on Main Line*

*Caboose set out on M1*

*Freight Cars set out on classification tracks*

*Cars for M10 and Caboose put back on A/D Track*

*Run Around on Main, pick up/set out at M10*

*Set out Caboose on caboose track*

*If any, place pick ups from M10 on classification tracks*

*Tie up locomotive in Engine House*

If you have a dedicated Yard Switcher it will work even more smoothly.  The switcher will just break the train down first, clearing the A/D track before working M10 or and of the engine house tracks.  The only issue that would make me still consider the additional run around track would be getting a caboose on a train originating in the yard heading to the left.

The train would need to be built on the A/D track and the switcher would have to leave the caboose just in front of the crossover and the road engineer would need to back up to couple to it prior to departure. 

If you do decide you need a 2nd run around I would do as you proposed in your initial post and put it off the caboose track; you could extend the siding to parallel the switch lead, no?  That being said I don't know that the 2nd run around really buys you a ton if my understanding of how things will operate is correct.

~rb

Some solution...

Um, Benny, M2 and M3 are the only classification tracks available in his yard. Turning both of those tracks into a runround makes the whole thing completely useless.

Any thoughts out there? I have one for you

If I under stand what your attempting. I see that If you go with the top Track arrangement of the two photos that I have pasted the one I'm speaking of below.

First leave the turnout on the top far Left. Then add a Curved turnout on the lower track 10 inches left of where the Modules meet so that the top fork of the turn out is squared and in line with the lower of the two tracks shown in the photo of the yard throat on the left of this photo. The lower switch track will then be Two inches below that track and allow you a nice clean radius where three tracks will squarely cross the Border of the two Modules. You don't have to have Two turn outs right at the Modules Borders staggering the lower turnout will or should solve your problem and then not interfere with the track radius your trying to achieve and allow you to connect with the run around your trying to achieve,

With this track arrangement if you need to disconnect the modules you wouldn't have to worry about the turnout being too close to the joint and binding the track radius. This will make it much easier to Separate the Mods and move the Railroad in section without breaking a turnout. 

I hope this gives you an Idea that will help.

The whole use for his

The whole use for his classification yard, though, is for the industries on the front side of the layout.  So in those regards, M2 and M3 are essentially free space tracks anyways.  He could use M2 as inbound and M3 as outbound, or vice versa, and simply "clean out the yard" at the beginning or end of each session because the out bounds go with the switcher, and the inbounds will be at the industries.  This leaves at most one track occupied with any "empties" that re left with the industries, but for which there isn't proper capacity in the industries.

Yards should typically only be half full, anyways.  so that's not really a classification yard - it's two storage spurs and that's it. Hence, tying M2 to M3 makes a ton of sense.

Thanks for everyone's

Thanks for everyone's suggestions - At this time, I'm going to leave it alone, and try running the layout as it was designed before adding "more". 

This doesn't mean I haven't torn things up though.