shortliner Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 http://modelrailroad...out-in-n-scale/ Probably the smallest intermodal layout you could build For a little more complexity you could add a RH turnout to the front track where it bends towards the sector plate, and another storage siding from the sector plate running behind the backscene. If you then fit a two position, one vehicle, traverser where the hole in the backscene is currently - it will allow swappong cars without the need to re-rail them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 Who can't leave a trackplan alone, eh..? :D I do like it though - especially the way the rear siding is hidden- quite hard to spot at first glance! As I read it I was wondering if a certain Mr Arendt had seen it. Question answered when I read the "comments" at the bottom... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortliner Posted January 16, 2011 Author Share Posted January 16, 2011 You know what they say about old dogs, Jordan - I'm afraid I'm stuck in my ways! - Bears a passing resemblance to Steve Granthams " Heavy Traffic" , another of my Favorite "Mini-space" layouts. One of the reasons that I posted it, is that Intermodal Yard modelling normally requires a lot of space, and this is a clever way of mini-mizing that requirement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted January 16, 2011 Share Posted January 16, 2011 An 'Inglenook' without the points (oops, switches) ! . It certainly sets the mind racing . Now, for a UK version, bring in a Cl.08, and use DC Kits FPA wagons, with say C-Rail 20'0" 'tanktainers' or Cawoods containers etc. Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortliner Posted January 16, 2011 Author Share Posted January 16, 2011 Steves (Now Craig Watsons) Heavy Traffic - some photos are here http://www.rmweb.co....hp?f=36&t=18652 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scaro Posted January 20, 2011 Share Posted January 20, 2011 you could always squeeze the intermodal wagons too, to create more space. a tasmanian example: http://www.westonlangford.com/images/photo/104165/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brisbane King Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 I'm pretty sure that the New South Wales railways modified a number of K wagons and they could just about squeeze a 20 foot ISO container on them, recoding them CKF. http://www.nswrollingstock.com/CKF.htm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1905 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Basing an inglenook on N American intermodal operations really requires a large suspension of disbelief. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Basing an inglenook on N American intermodal operations really requires a large suspension of disbelief. I was thinking that myself, the closest prototype that you could get away with that I can think of being a small Cawoods coal depot as previously mentioned or the still-born Minimodal project that could justify specialist handling away from the main container unloading areas...: http://www.railwatch.org.uk/backtrack/rw94/rw094p04.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortliner Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 Basing an inglenook on N American intermodal operations really requires a large suspension of disbelief. .......but put a Hiway flyover bridge across the tracks at the righthand end and you now have just a small end of a much larger/longer intermodal yard? Ok, so it needs to be high enough to clear a mijack, but if we are already suspending disbelief..... Us modellers with minimum spaces have to make that sort of decision Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1905 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 .......but put a Hiway flyover bridge across the tracks at the righthand end and you now have just a small end of a much larger/longer intermodal yard? Ok, so it needs to be high enough to clear a mijack, but if we are already suspending disbelief..... Us modellers with minimum spaces have to make that sort of decision I guess its just that I have worked around intermodal yards and it just escapes me why you would want to model one on an inglenook. The whole point of an inglenook is to shuffle cars back and forth among the tracks and the whole point of an intermodal yard is to NOT shuffle cars between the tracks. The cars are "switched" with the mijack crane, not a switch engine. The train drives in as one solid track, the containers are unloaded, new containers are loaded, a new train drives out. The only thing less suited to an inglenook is modeling a power plant or coal mine that loads/unloads rotary dump coal gons. The time when there was switching was back in the 1970's, 1980's right at the start of container traffic when pigs and containers were mixed, there was more intermodal moving on regular manifest trains and you had to switch out the pigs from the containers, spot the pigs at the ramp and the containers at an overhead crane. Downside is everything moved on 89 ft flatcars so you could only fit one, maybe two cars on a track. If you want to switch rotary coal gons DON'T model a power plant or a mine. Model a "spare yard". Railroads/utilities have yards or tracks in yards where spare coal cars are stored. When a coal car needs repairs and has to be cut out of a train, the train picks up a spare car to keep the train size the same. The spare has to be the same type of car (rotary or hopper) and if its a private set of cars can only fill with the same private owner cars or a railroad owned spare. If it fills with railroad spares, at some point it will set teh railroad spare out and pick back up a private owner car. So if its an SATX set of cars on the BNSF it would fill with an SATX or a BNSF car. If its a UECX set, then it would fill with a UECX or BNSF car. You would have a track with spares in it and a couple tracks with "trains" in them. The switcher would cut out the bad order or non-matching cars and fill with the proper cars. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMartin Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I guess its just that I have worked around intermodal yards and it just escapes me why you would want to model one on an inglenook. The whole point of an inglenook is to shuffle cars back and forth among the tracks and the whole point of an intermodal yard is to NOT shuffle cars between the tracks. The cars are "switched" with the mijack crane, not a switch engine. The train drives in as one solid track, the containers are unloaded, new containers are loaded, a new train drives out. The only thing less suited to an inglenook is modeling a power plant or coal mine that loads/unloads rotary dump coal gons. At the intermodal yard that I work at, we often need to load cuts of car to two different locations on the same track due to space constraints. Of course the yard crews love this as it means that they have to shuffle the cars to get the trains assembled for the different locations. Colin Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.