Underpass, LA, 1976

[enginelane]

Good to see you back and progressing so quickly. 

[Robatron86]

I am totally enthusiastic about the project, hence the speed. 

[dave1905]

Any reason why you guys always make an inglenook with three tracks splayed out in a fan, as opposed to a couple of the tracks parallel?  N American practice generally has parallel tracks.

[Robatron86]

11 minutes ago, dave1905 said:

Any reason why you guys always make an inglenook with three tracks splayed out in a fan, as opposed to a couple of the tracks parallel?  N American practice generally has parallel tracks.

 

Due to the restricted space, having the 3 spurs fan out keeps them straight, maximising on car space. If you bend the track to have them run parallel, you reduce the usable space, something I discovered on my last layout where all 3 spurs were parallel. It also makes coupling and uncoupling easier. 

[Robatron86]

I have been thinking about Dave1905's post, and after looking at it, and looking at it again, the fanned tracks did start to bother me. So this evening, I modified the position of the longest spur so it is now parallel with the centre spur. After testing the ability to still couple up on the curve (it is a very gentle curve), it all still works as it should. So thank you Dave. 

[298]

I believe that as long as you can demonstrate why a spur is in a particular position, then it can look better than slavishly following a grid and having everything brutally parallel to the backscene (been there, made that mistake).

 

Hopefully this will make sense a week on Saturday when we see each others layouts, Rob!

[Robatron86]

Well, the longest spur will be serving a warehouse, and the centre spur is the team track for that facility, so it makes sense that they are parallel with each other, but not the baseboard edge. The other spur is still at an angle as that will serve a different industry. 

 

Yes, a week to go! And still so much to do! 

[Robatron86]

Not a lot of work lately. I've installed the uncoupling magnets (sorry Ray, I've chosen the Kadee 321's, comfortable and familiar). 

 

 

At the Midland Small Layout Showcase, I purchased a couple of coal hoppers. 

 

 

[298]

Why doesn't Ray like magnets....? 

[Robatron86]

No, he does. The reason I'm apologising to him is because I asked him all about how he got the neodymium magnets to work on his layout, and I was going to try them, but then I chickened out. 

[298]

3 hours ago, Robatron86 said:

No, he does. The reason I'm apologising to him is because I asked him all about how he got the neodymium magnets to work on his layout, and I was going to try them, but then I chickened out. 

 

I couldn't get them to work very well either. Mind you we started getting issues with the whiskers on Kadee 158s getting stuck in some pockets so I'll have to swap those for 58's. 

[dave1905]

I have bought Bachmann (same as the Kadee under the track magnets, but cheaper) and cut them in half.  The half magnet works just as well.

 

Full disclosure :  I used them on my former layout but don't use magnets on my current layout.

[Robatron86]

Sorry I've been quiet on here for the last year it seems, but I have been busy on the layout. 

 

 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Hi there - thanks for the pointer towards your layout on my thread - this looks great, and I’d echo the tribute to Jack Trollope.  Could I ask what length your spurs are?  I thought I had room for a 41” spur in one corner of a plan I’ve started work on, but it looks like I won’t get through the door (slight problem).  If I trim it to 31” I think I’ll still have room for three 50’ cars and can squeeze past.  At 21” I have a walk-in design and room for two cars.  Is this about right?
 

(I’m quoting total track lengths from Anyrail, not ‘capacity length’ and I have some off cuts of good plywood in 10” pieces, hence the equations).  
 

Could I also ask about the warehouse - is it a kit / kitbash or scratchbuilt?  I’ll be on the lookout for suitable buildings and, if I include an industrial   area, the proportions look about right for my space.

 

Thanks, Keith.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Robatron86]

Hi Keith, 

 

In calculating spur lengths, I tend to take the length of a boxcar, 8.5 inches, multiply that by how many I want in that spur, 3 in the case of my longest spur, then add 3 inches onto that. It seems to work. 

 

The main warehouse is a kitbash of the Walthers Trackside Post Office kit. I used both sides of the building to make one long side and scratchbuilt a new loading dock. 

 

I hope this helps. 

[Keith Addenbrooke]

3 hours ago, Robatron86 said:

Hi Keith, 

 

In calculating spur lengths, I tend to take the length of a boxcar, 8.5 inches, multiply that by how many I want in that spur, 3 in the case of my longest spur, then add 3 inches onto that. It seems to work. 

 

The main warehouse is a kitbash of the Walthers Trackside Post Office kit. I used both sides of the building to make one long side and scratchbuilt a new loading dock. 

 

I hope this helps. 

Thank you - good idea to use a 60’ car length for the calculations (my standard length is 50’).
 

It doesn’t quite work that 2 x 60’ cars = 3 x 40’ cars because of the couplers, but if I give myself a bit of slack I should be OK there too.  I still need to think about what I put on the spurs as car spot destinations, which is the other determinant.

 

Thanks for the help, Keith.

[Robatron86]

Happy to help. If you have any other questions, just send me a message. 

[Alcanman]

Good to see you posting on here again.

 

I particularly like your use of structures, makes the layout really interesting to look at.

[Robatron86]

I don't think I have ever built a Walthers kit as it was intended to be built! 

[Robatron86]

Full sized pictures of the track plan and how the layout will be viewed. 

[298]

11 hours ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Thank you - good idea to use a 60’ car length for the calculations (my standard length is 50’).
 

It doesn’t quite work that 2 x 60’ cars = 3 x 40’ cars because of the couplers, but if I give myself a bit of slack I should be OK there too.  I still need to think about what I put on the spurs as car spot destinations, which is the other determinant.

 

Thanks for the help, Keith.

 

I did find on a previous layout that 2x 57' reefers are the same length as 3x40' cars, but the problem with certain eras is there isn't a standard car length and I can create havoc by including a 60' Woodchip and 62' Centerbeam in the 5 car inglenook shuffle, because if neither is drawn to make the 3 car train you can't leave them on the same 2 car spur. 

[Robatron86]

A young railfan sneaks on to the tracks. 

[Prof Klyzlr]

Dear RMWebbers,

 

Quote

but the problem with certain eras is there isn't a standard car length and I can create havoc by including a 60' Woodchip and 62' Centerbeam in the 5 car inglenook shuffle, because if neither is drawn to make the 3 car train you can't leave them on the same 2 car spur. 

 

Gotta plead the "Iain Rice" defense on this one...

"...A spur which holds 2 1/2 cars is no better than one which holds 2 cars clear,
and considerably less-useful than a spur which holds 3 cars at a pinch..."

 

Recast and looked-at from the car-length perspective, 
as opposed to the spur length perspective,

 

"...a car which is 1.x times the "standard 'nook car/unit length" for a given layout
is no smaller than an exactly 2x-standard-'nook-unit-length car,
(and must be treated as such, at least mathematically, even if the artistic/visual suggests otherwise)

and considerably less flexible than a car which is the exact 1x "standard unit length" measure..."

 

I'm personally not above deliberately spicing dbl-length car in the mix,
(say, a 75' centrebeam into a "nominal 40' standard unit length" 'nook situation,
the centrebeam therefore calcs as = 2x "standard unit length"),
 

and as long as it's not drawn as "car #3" in the outbound train on a cannonical 5:3:3 'nook,
(figure "11 standard units" of linear length for trackplanning purposes),

we're all good... ;-)

 

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

 

[Regularity]

I have copies of some Maine Central track diagrams, and sidings and spurs are marked not only for length in feet (from the tips of the switches), but also for the nominal car capacity. A note at the beginning of the book says that 55’ is used to define a car length. This is from an era where most cars were 50’, but there were quite a few longer cars, and a fair number of 40’ cars, too.

 

Worth bearing in mind that need to add 10% to your “standard car length” when planning a layout.

[Robatron86]

A few details I've been adding to the layout lately.