Railroad Line Forums - Time for a new NCNG
Railroad Line Forums
Username:
Password:
Save Password


Register
Forgot Password?
  Home   Forums   Events Calendar   Sponsors   Support the RRLine   Guestbook   FAQ     Register
Active Topics | Active Polls | Resources | Members | Online Users | Live Chat | Avatar Legend | Search | Statistics
Photo Album | File Lister | File Library
[ Active Members: 9 | Anonymous Members: 0 | Guests: 103 ]  [ Total: 112 ]  [ Newest Member: Deano ]
 All Forums
 Model Railroad Forums
 Layout Design / Operation Sig Forum
 Time for a new NCNG
Next Page
 New Topic |   New Poll New Poll |   Reply to Topic | 
Author Previous Topic: 23 x 13 Multi Deck Layout Plan Topic Next Topic: turnout radius
Page: of 3

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 12/18/2016 :  5:45:01 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
After spending the last year creating SwitchWithIt (Shipments Based Operations Program), it is now time to start planning to rebuild the NCNG. My current NCNG has been "almost finished" for about 15 years. If you would like to see what the current layout looks like, here is a link https://sites.google.com/site/empirita/home


Here is a big picture of my current layout:



I have operating sessions every month or two with around 7 operators. Everyone wants to run on the branchline (NCNG) so the mainline (SP) is usually empty. One of the problems with the mainline is that a lot of the track is hidden. There is a big mountain with a 5 level helix in it at one end and a pretzel of track at the other end, both of which end in staging (Roseville/Reno). I frequently hear, "Where is my train", even though I have display boards showing train locations and signal indications. The mainline is completely signaled.

So what do I want to do?

The room the layout is in is 24' x 40' with a 30" aisle around the outside making for a usable layout area of 19' x 35'. It is possible to enlarge the usable width space a little by eliminating some of the aisle around the outside but it cannot block access to 4 windows. There must be 30" clearance in front of the windows. There can't be any crawl or duck unders. The minimum aisle width is 30".

I want to reduce the mainline to the minimum required to get a train from staging through Colfax and back to staging. There could be 2 staging areas with reverse loops at each end.

I would like to keep most of Colfax and the Long Ravine Viaduct(see current plan) but they can be relocated. The Viaduct is the straight red and blue track just to the left of the A---E track on the diagram, far right side.

The track layout for most of Grass Valley and Nevada City must stay the same (prototype).

The Empire Mine (3' x 6") must remain but it can be relocated.

The towns/location on the branchline must be in order of the real Nevada County Narrow Gauge Railroad (now standard gauged ).

Locations that I would like to model in geographic order:

Colfax
Oilville (Abandoned turntable)
Bear River Bridge
Chicago Park
Peardale
Brunswick Mine (Replace with Empire Mine plus sawmill)
Grass Valley
Town Talk tunnel
Nevada City

A member of this site has provided me with maps of the actual line that I should be able to provide for reference.

Mainline trackage: Minimum radius 30", minimum turnout #8
Yards/Industries: Minimum turnout #6
NCNG trackage: Minimum radius 24", Minimum turnout #6

All track will be hand laid except for hidden track. Code 83 mainline and code 70 everywhere else.

It took me about a year to plan the last NCNG and I expect it to take at least that long to finish this plan.

So, I am looking for help. I don't know where to start. I have been thinking about it for a week and haven't done a thing.

Thanks for you input.

David Bond

Country: | Posts: 251

jbvb
Fireman

Premium Member


Posted - 12/18/2016 :  9:18:27 PM  Show Profile  Visit jbvb's Homepage  Reply with Quote
The labels 'A' and 'B' on the peninsula left of Colfax are local to that peninsula? The letters are used again to the right and below, near Truckee.


Country: USA | Posts: 5103 Go to Top of Page

rca2
Engine Wiper

Posted - 12/19/2016 :  01:57:35 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi David. I looked at your webpage. Very impressive. I like the idea of simplifying the mainline run and eliminating the helix.

On the above track plan the branch line siding lengths and yard storage capacity seem out of proportion to the capacity and track lengths of Colfax yard. I suspect it would help if you also provided a minimum length for branch line passing sidings.

I look forward to seeing what people suggest. Bob.


Modeling Arizona Eastern Railroad, Hayden Junction (1920), in On30

Country: USA | Posts: 409 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 12/19/2016 :  11:13:51 AM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Thanks for letting me know but I can't change it now. The drawing was used by an online magazine that used the drawing in an article about my layout.

quote:
Originally posted by jbvb

The labels 'A' and 'B' on the peninsula left of Colfax are local to that peninsula? The letters are used again to the right and below, near Truckee.




Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 12/19/2016 :  11:30:45 AM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rca2


On the above track plan the branch line siding lengths and yard storage capacity seem out of proportion to the capacity and track lengths of Colfax yard. I suspect it would help if you also provided a minimum length for branch line passing sidings.



The tracks in Colfax are oversized in relation to the NCNG/branchline track because it is a combination of the SP mainline between Roseville and Reno and an interchange with the NCNG. The mainline has 4 tracks, 1 east bound, 1 west bound, and 2 passing sidings. Trains of up to 10' in length exit staging, stopping in Colfax to interchange cars if required, and then return to staging.

The tracks on true world east side of the mainline include an interchange track (10'+), a 4 track sorting yard, and a 3 track storage yard. Parallel to the tail of the wye there are the Colfax fruit sheds.

The tracks on the true world west side of the mainline tracks are for the freight depot plus 3 smaller industries.

The NCNG/branchline can handle trains with a length of about 300' including a caboose and single locomotive.

Thanks for your input.

David



Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 01/09/2017 :  1:23:42 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote



The above image is my draft plan for simplifying and shrinking the area SP West of Colfax. The unreadable text along each of the tracks are elevations that I used to determine if I could obtain the desired track clearance of 4"+ for the single track going to staging. I used transition vertical curves with a maximum grade of 2%. The unreadable smaller text at the curves are the radii of the arc segments creating a simplified spiral easement.

This option meets several of my requirements: Reduce hidden track, reduce mainline trackage, and provide access to and from the staging area under Colfax. Just like with the prototype, the two tracks head west out of Colfax and then diverge in two different directions before coming back together outside of Auburn. A #8 turnout is provided for each direction so that trains can exit/enter staging. A hidden #8 turnout creates a wye for a shared single track to staging.

I am thinking of converting the staging yard that is currently under Colfax from a double ended yard into a stub yard. This yard currently is a combined Roseville/Reno staging yard and will become just the Roseville yard. I will add a tail track so that locomotives can be removed from inbound trains. I am planning to increase the current clearance in the yard from 6" to 8"+ so that it might be used to actually break-up and make-up trains. Not sure yet.

In Colfax itself, I have removed one of the mainline tracks (passing track). This eliminated two #8 turnouts. I also shrank the length of the four stub yard tracks by 12" and moved the tracks from 3.5" apart to 2.5" apart. All of these combined to reduce the length of Colfax by about 5'. This opens up the area between the Colfax Wye and the "Auburn Loop".

Suggestions/comments?

David



Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

jbvb
Fireman

Premium Member


Posted - 01/09/2017 :  1:57:14 PM  Show Profile  Visit jbvb's Homepage  Reply with Quote
You don't mention what you might gain from splitting/stubbing your staging - significantly more trains? Handling trains in
tight quarters, even just uncoupling locos, is not my favorite activity. Even 8" might not be enough for brake staffs and
caboose smoke jacks when wearing long sleeves.



Country: USA | Posts: 5103 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 01/09/2017 :  3:29:08 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
I will have to reevaluate the idea of using the staging as a switching yard unless I can gain more height. The yard will become a stub yard because I plan to eliminate the helix at the other end of the layout. There will be no where to exit to. I do plan to have another staging yard at the other end of the mainline (Reno end). Still a work in progress.

Thanks for the comment.

David



Edited by - ncng on 01/09/2017 3:30:33 PM

Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

rca2
Engine Wiper

Posted - 01/09/2017 :  4:40:39 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
David: Your draft is a very nice solution. If you want you also have room to add a junction and interchange or a small station and siding. Either could be treated as scenery or added to your operation.

Looking forward to seeing what you do on the other end. Bob.


Modeling Arizona Eastern Railroad, Hayden Junction (1920), in On30

Country: USA | Posts: 409 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 01/20/2017 :  12:30:08 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Here is where I am now in the plan.

The big picture shows the whole room. The area I have just finished working on is in the bottom right corner.




The current layout has a hidden multi-level helix. This new plan replaces it with a mostly visible reverse loop with a divergent route that descends down into an open staging yard. There is a crossover between the two mainline tracks so that trains traveling in either direction can access the staging yard or exit the staging yard to either track.

The reverse loop climbs at the minimum I could get away with and have the track down to staging pass under it. This required a 1.75% grade with a vertical transition at the mid point of the loop to level track. The divergent track transitions from an up grade of 1.75% to a down grade of 2%. Although I prefer to use #8 turnouts on the mainline track, I chose to go with #6 turnouts in staging. This provided a maximum track length of 12 feet to handle my City of San Francisco passenger train with full length cars. I also added turnouts at the end of the staging tracks to remove the locomotives and run them around to the other end.




Now I have to figure out how to fit all of the NCNG into the space that remains. I guess I need a bigger room or a smaller goal.

Comments, suggestions, questions always encouraged.

David


Download Attachment: Cape Horn_Small.jpg
86.26 KB



Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

robchant
Crew Chief

Posted - 02/04/2017 :  5:51:58 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi David,

It seems to me that you're devoting a lot more room to staging than you did in the original version. I would try to loop the SP mainline a quickly as possible into the original Roseville/Reno staging area if the SP mainline is not adding that much to an op-session.

BTW: I reviewed your website and it looks like an excellent layout, I would have a very hard time ripping any of it out.

Take care,
Rob.


Rob Chant
Glace Bay, NS
CANADA

WEBSITE: http://www.railwaysofns.com/SLCRyCo/index.php
TREAD: http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=42599

Edited by - robchant on 02/04/2017 7:18:47 PM

Country: Canada | Posts: 665 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 02/05/2017 :  7:28:21 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Thanks for the input and complement. I am trying to add more staging without taking anything away more real estate. I want to keep the 4 tracks I currently have as Roseville and try to add 4 more on the other end for Reno. For one thing, this will provide storage for excess rolling stock and excess locomotives. I could then bring trains 'on stage' only when I need to to support operations on the former NCNG.

David



Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

robchant
Crew Chief

Posted - 02/06/2017 :  1:38:42 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi David,

This would be my idea for adding more staging while giving you more floor space for the NCNG:



Take care,
Rob.


Rob Chant
Glace Bay, NS
CANADA

WEBSITE: http://www.railwaysofns.com/SLCRyCo/index.php
TREAD: http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=42599

Edited by - robchant on 02/06/2017 1:41:19 PM

Country: Canada | Posts: 665 Go to Top of Page

rca2
Engine Wiper

Posted - 02/06/2017 :  4:46:19 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
David: In looking at your and Rob's last sketches, I am thinking that going with stub yards in staging instead of double ended yards is giving up a lot of convenience for extra storage space in staging. I don't recall what your priorities were, but with double ended staging yards the staged trains can return directly to their starting locations and not have to be re-staged between sessions (if you keep a continuous run connection in staging).

I don't know how much that convenience is worth to you, but it is something to think about. If however you want trains to come from the opposite direction in the next session, then my point is not relevant. Bob.


Modeling Arizona Eastern Railroad, Hayden Junction (1920), in On30

Edited by - rca2 on 02/06/2017 4:49:44 PM

Country: USA | Posts: 409 Go to Top of Page

ncng
Engine Wiper

Posted - 02/06/2017 :  7:50:53 PM  Show Profile  Visit ncng's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Rob,

I will have to think about the loop on the left side but the right side isn't an option.

The Long Ravine viaducts are located on the right edge of the plan. The NCNG prototype went under these viaducts and I want to keep this scene.



I also intend to keep the Brunswick lumber company in the loop formed by the NCNG trackage that goes under the viaducts. You can just see the end of the viaduct in the top right corner of the following image.





I am thinking of retaining the connection between the under Colfax staging yard and the other side of the layout similar to what you are suggesting. When I get time, I will do a little more work and post the next version of my planning to see what I am thinking.

David



Country: | Posts: 251 Go to Top of Page

robchant
Crew Chief

Posted - 02/07/2017 :  08:57:16 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi David,

I will be watching for your next version.

I have been playing around with the space and I think your biggest obstacle for getting any more room for the NCNG is having 2 separate SP staging areas with reverse loops. No matter where they are placed in the room, they will eat up a great deal of real estate.

Since all your wanted addition to the NCNG are between Colfax and Grass Valley, that section of line has to expand. So where is the Long Ravine viaduct scene located on the NCNG line? Is is just outside Colfax as suggested?

Take care,
Rob.


Rob Chant
Glace Bay, NS
CANADA

WEBSITE: http://www.railwaysofns.com/SLCRyCo/index.php
TREAD: http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=42599

Country: Canada | Posts: 665 Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic: 23 x 13 Multi Deck Layout Plan Topic Next Topic: turnout radius  
 New Topic |   New Poll New Poll |   Reply to Topic | 
Next Page
Jump To:
Railroad Line Forums © 2000-17 Railroad Line Co. Go To Top Of Page
Steam was generated in 0.3 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000