Mike Kieran Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I'm posting 2 6x1 foot ISLs made with Atlas Code 83 Snap Switches and Track. I drew my inspiration from Jim Stanford's Dolton Industry Park http://www.jimsmodeltrains.ws/index.php and Jack Trollope's Ness Street Yard http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/55422-new-switching-layout/page-2: The first plan would require the use of 2 locomotives to shuffle the cars while the second plan uses 2 Peco Double Slip switches to make it happen. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prof Klyzlr Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) Dear Mike, Looks good, braincells are firing as we speak... :-) EDIT: Instead of the 2nd loco, I wonder if the R&D team from last week's (?) thread on car-pushers/forklifts/tractors could kick in and adapt the first plan? I'd also be tempted to cant either (or both) plans a few degrees to break the "track is parallel to the benchwork edge because it has to be" visual... Happy Modelling,Aim to Improve,Prof Klyzlr Edited October 19, 2015 by Prof Klyzlr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon A Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 The second plan looks a bit too crammed with the fifth short siding on the bottom. Gordon A Bristol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 I like the first one. Agree with Gordon that there's too much track on the second. I also doubt that you'd see multiple double slips very often in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 19, 2015 Author Share Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) Dear Mike, Looks good, braincells are firing as we speak... :-) EDIT: Instead of the 2nd loco, I wonder if the R&D team from last week's (?) thread on car-pushers/forklifts/tractors could kick in and adapt the first plan? I'd also be tempted to cant either (or both) plans a few degrees to break the "track is parallel to the benchwork edge because it has to be" visual... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr Hey Professor, I only design my plans like this to show the basic layout of the track plan. Please feel free to tailor the plan to your heart's content. We don't all have the same needs or wants in a plan. Edited October 19, 2015 by Mike Kieran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 19, 2015 Author Share Posted October 19, 2015 Hey Gordon and Zomboid, The reason for the fifth track is because the track above it is used for sorting, storage, drill track, and locomotive layover. Complex track work is used wherever it is felt to be necessary, so there is always a prototype for it. Just throwing out ideas for space starved modelers. I know that my designs are not everybody's cup of tea, and that's fine. Just sharing some possible ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted October 19, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 19, 2015 I hate TLAs (three letter acronyms). May I assume that this one stands for Industrial Shunting Layout? I know that space is always an issue for us modellers but it would all look so much better with a few curves and tracks not parallel to the baseboard edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 19, 2015 Author Share Posted October 19, 2015 I just have the tracks somewhat parallel to illustrate the track plan clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcanman Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 I hate TLAs (three letter acronyms). May I assume that this one stands for Industrial Shunting Layout? No. ISL is 'Industrial Short Line' . A common term used in the US, particularly by small layout designers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) I like the first one. Agree with Gordon that there's too much track on the second. I also doubt that you'd see multiple double slips very often in reality. A double slip would almost certainly not be used unless it was a high-traffic (and intensively maintained) area where there was an operational necessity. There are lots of them on the station approaches in Toronto, which sees a train movement every 2 minutes in rush hour, but that is an exception. An industrial spur would have manually-controlled plain switches. Edit: unless there was an operational need, like on the floatbridge of the Hoboken Shore Line/Manufacturers Railroad mentioned below. Adrian Edited October 20, 2015 by Adrian Wintle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted October 20, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 20, 2015 No. ISL is 'Industrial Short Line' . A common term used in the US, particularly by small layout designers. Just goes to show that it should not have been abbreviated in the first post without explanation. (I can find examples that contradict Simon even though he is right). And to me that is not a short line, it is just a yard. To make it a short line I would expect to see trains going somewhere along a length of plain track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
switcher 1 Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 And to me that is not a short line, it is just a yard. To make it a short line I would expect to see trains going somewhere along a length of plain track. ......about one foot long, maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zomboid Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 In 6 feet you'd do well to get that in n gauge. ISL for industrial switching layout is a fine abbreviation as far as I'm concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 20, 2015 Author Share Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) Wow, I wasn't expecting this kind of response. There are short lines that are nothing but switching operations. I've come to believe that ISLs are Industrial Switching Layouts, but it's not set in stone - like the spelling of harbor/harbour. The Hoboken Manufacturers Railroad and the Los Angeles Junction Railroad are two railroads that I can thing of off the top of my head with double switch switches. Maybe people don't like them, but they are no less prototypical that traversers. Once again, there are just brain droppings for people to mull over. If nobody likes the designs, I have the same amount of money in my pocket as I would if people like it. It's just an idea for somebody to consider if they are stuck on a track planning issue. Edited October 20, 2015 by Mike Kieran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
switcher 1 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Don't let it bother you Mike. There are a lot of 'nit pickers' - over here, we call them 'rivet counters'. We have been led to believe 'less is more' when considering layout planning for an American style layout. All layout plans have merit, even if used in a different context. Double slips are a great way of cramming more operating interest into a layout, even if it may not be prototypical, it's all about having fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted October 21, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) People do bang on about this and that not being prototypical...experience dictates that if you search long enough and hard enough there is a prototype for pretty much everything. Edited October 21, 2015 by PhilH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 21, 2015 Author Share Posted October 21, 2015 Thanks Switcher and Phil. I was just trying to point out that this isn't worth arguing - and then joining in the fray. I apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Don't let it bother you Mike. There are a lot of 'nit pickers' - over here, we call them 'rivet counters'. And whats wrong with Rivet counters...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 21, 2015 Author Share Posted October 21, 2015 The irony of your post is that when I read it, there was an ad below your post for Model Railroad Baseboards with rivets as the border for the ad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robatron86 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 I rather like the first plan. The only thing I would change is to widen the board to 18 inches to allow for some buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 Simon, your right. I mistook a spirited discussion for nitpicking. I am very sorry about that. Robatron, I would actually make this 84 inches by 18 inches with the ends being 21 inch long wings (21+42+21 inches) for storage and transport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Kieran Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) I flipped the first plan so that an extra industry could be added If you notice, I drew in 18 inch wings on the ends so that it's easier to transport. It will fold into an easy to store and carry 3x1 foot package. Edited October 22, 2015 by Mike Kieran 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allegheny1600 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) Useful plans, thank you, Mike. Edit: I rather fancy the second plan, mind if I have a play with it, please? Edited October 22, 2015 by Allegheny1600 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 I'm not familiar with Atlas snap track, but it might be possible to save a few inches here and there by shortening the ends of the turnouts. Not that I'm saying using such track is wrong, if you've got some in stock it is then possible to test the final plan for real before making it permanent, as what might work for someone else (on their layout or even the "prototype for everything") won't necessarily be as successful with your stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allegheny1600 Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 Done it! There may be too much track here, the last little kick back siding (top middle) was a last minute thing. As they say around here, "Wot dust think"? Cheers, John E. Drawn in Anyrail, Peco code 83 track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now