Introduction - Track Plan for Input

[rlcross]

Magnus, thanks for your thoughtful input.  You raise some great questions and points for me to consider.

1.  Double Main - I think the reason I had a double mainline was to give opportunity for letting trains run without supervision, one on each.  I have been questioning myself as to the practicality of taking up so much room from scenery to have a double mainline, just for letting trains run.  The debate I have with myself is will I use the double mainline much, or, would a single main put more focus back on the scenery surrounding a single main.  Doubling up the main cuts what, 3-4 inches from 24 inch wide layout section?  I'm contemplating replacing the double mainline with 2-3 passing sidings and putting more focus back on scenery/trackside structures.

2.  Reversing Engines/Trains - An early iteration had reversing loop(s) but they tended towards creating a spaghetti look and feel.  I had envisioned using the roundhouse to reverse engines.  So I planned routes into the roundhouse from the yard and from the Arrival/Departure tracks to get engines turned and pick up a train to go the opposite way.  I see how I could plan a reversing loop underneath the roundhouse area so that entire trains could be reversed.  Outside of that area, I don't believe there are any spaces large enough to get a moderate curved loop to fit.  Without too much work, I could plan a loop running 3 inches below the yard/roundhouse that could reverse trains.  I'll think on it.

3.  Local Loop - I had envisioned the Local Loop to be 2 things...  A means to access the mainline when just running trains, and when focused on operations, a means to access the dock and sawmill while other trains could be running the mainline.  As far as direction, I would be using the roundhouse to get the engine ready to pick up cars going one way for the dock and the other way for the sawmill.

4.  Parking Track - I could use a track under the city to park trains.  I was nervous about having turnouts hidden under there as I won't be able to access them easily with the city above and backed onto the wall.  Either a third track passing siding to park trains or utilizing one of the double tracks if I abandon the double mainline concept.

5.  Labels - I haven't explored labels really.  I noticed one person used them but they were so small (inside the track) that I had great difficulty reading them.  I will have to look into them more to see how I can work with them.

6.  Point-to-Point - I am intrigued by your suggestions regarding point to point running.  While I envisioned the perfect lift-up that was quick, easy and convenient to open and close, what are the chances that it will be exactly that?  Perhaps planning for the eventuality that an open lift-up is the norm might be wise.  I'll look into thinking about moving the port, etc. to make it interesting to operate even if the lift-up is open/broken/troublesome.  I know a duck-under is not in the cards.  Getting down to get under it might take me a week to get back up on the other side.  During this planning phase I will be looking into many lift-up ideas that people have built to find the best one for effortless use as possible.

Thanks for all your ideas/concepts.  I will be thinking on them for quite awhile as they all get right to the heart of key issues that I have to think/work on.

Regards,

Richard

[rlcross]

Magnus, I worked on a reversing loop under the roundhouse.  This would reverse trains from clockwise to counter- clockwise.  Then I realized if I reversed trains to counter-clockwise, I would need another reversing loop for counter-clockwise access to go back to clockwise.  I was able to drop a reversing loop low enough to get under the river top left.  Both are accessed from the mainline.  One from the inner track, one from the outer track.  Both provide vertical clearance of 3+ inches to tracks above them.  They also avoid switch machines and the roundhouse well which would impinge on them from below the upper tracks.

Here's a version (Rev 6) that, so far, only incorporates reverse loops of the ideas you have me thinking about.

[magnus]

Yes that would allow turning in both directions, but as you point out, you also have the turntable. The layout would work, but, having a similar plan in my own layout that I eventually abandoned because it became too complex, and as we are not getting younger crawling under the benchwork to build and fix a layer below the layout, you could build it, but I would personally go for something simpler.

Looking closely at your new plan, and trying to avoid 2 track levels, I think you can run a track around the turntable/roundhouse to the right and come in at the bottom of the yard in the local loop. I understand you have some space to the right, and perhaps you need to extend a little bit there. Maybe some scenery to hide that loop? Skip the reverse loop to the left, and have only 3 tracks under the city, one being a long double-ended siding for staging and passing which preferably should be accessible from both of the mainline tracks. You want to be able to stage trains for both directions.

I agree you should have the turnouts under the city all accessible, but I would put the right ones closer to the city.

You would also have double main line around the entire layout so you could have trains meet - cool.

I also think you have some potential in the area below the roundhouse.That area will be a central viewing spot when you first see the layout, so I would do some more stuff there, maybe scenery, maybe another station.
I see you have a spur for a sawmill in that area. That would be a natural destination for you logging industry. But where does the mining industry go? You have 2 industrial spurs to the left of the city, one or both of those could be used. And what's the purpose of the barge?

Btw, I'm not sure I know what era you target and if you model a specific prototype/area?

[magnus]

5.  Labels - I haven't explored labels really.  I noticed one person used them but they were so small (inside the track) that I had great difficulty reading them.  I will have to look into them more to see how I can work with them.

Note that you can change the size of text under the File tab > Options > Texts > Small. Not sure you can make  them as large as you want, but that would be a feature request for the dev team.