Vancouver port layout ideas

[Scottl]

That orientation solves the reach issue.  When you mean an oval helix, are you suggesting an oval that extends into the area under the sulphur pile and then terminates in a smaller loop basically where I have the staging now?


This layout is starting to get my interest a lot. One aspect of the helix I don't like is the long transit time needed.  That is probably the price to be paid for trains going somewhere "else".  It is the first time I have contemplated significant offline staging.

[Cajonpassfan]

That orientation solves the reach issue.  When you mean an oval helix, are you suggesting an oval that extends into the area under the sulphur pile and then terminates in a smaller loop basically where I have the staging now?

Scott, yes, enter clockwise,  disappear behind the tanks on a 3/4 turn, run a tangent parallel to bottom edge, another half circle, another tangent etc. the last turn turn becomes a 3/4 turn to access your staging. It solves the yard turnout access issue, and has the advantage of greater separation between turns for better access and less total curvature.

As to the amount of time it takes to get through, that is the old helix dilemma: steeper grade or longer run? Personally, I hate running in anything longer than a turn or two; it takes away the joy and replaces it with boredom and anxiety.

The other tradeoff is the length of hidden run vs. lesser lower deck separation. I mentioned this before, if you are careful about how the upper deck is framed in key areas, the lower deck does need to be a foot lower, especially if you allow access to staging turnouts from front edge or above.

So in theory, the greater the grade (given your train length and era, could you do 2 1/2 or even 3%?) the shorter the run. At 2.5 in 96" or about 2.6%, 16' of run could yield a 5" drop, 24' 7.5" , 32' 10". But that's almost a scale mile just to get to the staging turnouts. Some tradeoff judgments need to be made and you're the only one to decide what compromises you can live with....maybe a mockup is in order?

Fun stuff, have fun with it!
Otto

[Scottl]

Thanks Otto.  I think I don't want to be minimalist with the level separation but I expect that I'll need to try some ideas out before committing to it.

It is lots of fun planning a layout, feels like I have some mojo again.

[Cajonpassfan]

Mojo is good

[OldEastRR]

The point of the phosphate ship slip isn't to crowd in more stuff (tho that seems to be the motif you're going for) but to provide easy access to the back corner. You don't have to put in a full deep slip; you need only have it extend 6-8" in from the edge of the layout -- actually a triangular notch representing a corner of the slip. Long reaches are hard on the scenery close to layout edge, as well as a literal pain in the back.

[Scottl]

I had a week away on a sunny beach to contemplate this a bit more and decided to try something a little less complex.  I am getting tired of not completing layouts and I always seem to go bigger than I can manage.  My work and travel commitments are growing and layout time is becoming less frequent.  I also have no expectations that I will be in our current house for more than 5 or so years, so building a multi-level layout for the space does not seem sensible either. 

I came up with a radical concept (for me, anyways):  a modular approach.  The goal here was smaller in scale, movable, and expandable if I find I have the interest and the time.  Gone are the unit trains but what remains are elements of operation that are typical of various Vancouver industrial settings.  Also gone is the continuous run.



Of the three I sketched out, this is the version I like the most.  It looks interesting to build and run, and allows me the opportunity to develop some new modeling challenges.

[OldEastRR]

Size?

[Scottl]

It is a 28 x 84" HCD

[pdx1955]

The new HCD plan looks really good. I would add at least a drop-leaf fiddle yard to the tracks going off the lower left-hand corner to give a longer lead space. Ideally, the staging would be balanced at both ends, so you could have run-through trains if desired and also gives a second set of "destinations" for freight movements.

[Scottl]

I was thinking about something like that- a four-track staging yard that would be detachable but add to the operational potential.  I have room for a second HCD that could make the layout an L shape if I desired.  It would be great to put an intermodal yard on that and some other elements.

[pdx1955]

I was thinking about something like that- a four-track staging yard that would be detachable but add to the operational potential.  I have room for a second HCD that could make the layout an L shape if I desired.  It would be great to put an intermodal yard on that and some other elements.

I have both hidden/off-line and visible staging on my east Portland point-to-point layout which works well. An intermodal yard works great for having things right out in the open prototypically . A couple tracks devoted to that plus a couple for a small "support" yard to help facilitate the switching needs in the area would be a good addition and keep the plan well-rounded.