Looking for opinions/suggestions on section of the new layout

[Ian MacMillan]

Well I have just about all of the new track plan complete, except for one section.  OK, well I have the track plan for that section, its just a matter of design suggestions.

The section of the layout in question is a 65' long area that runs through the White Mountains of New Hampshire. The road block I have reached is if this mountain pass should be double track or single track in the time period of the layout. The grade is 1.89% on both sides of the mountain pass, requiring helpers. The layouts "history" has that the line was at one time double tracked. The majority of the line however over time became single track with sidings...with the old roadbed and sometimes ties of the former 2nd main visible. I originally drew the track plan of the mountain pass as still having double track, basically one LONG passing siding, like seen on Conrail's Boston Line through the Berkshires. However, I also have the example of MEC's Mountain Division in New Hampshire, which had about the same grade profile as the layout, but was only single track due mostly because of the terrain.

While I think the double track mountain passing would be interesting in seeing trains passing, I believe that a single track could offer more operational interest. However, with the traffic that this line would see, I could see the possibility of a bottleneck at the bottom of the grade on each side.

Looking for suggestions, comments.

[John]

If you remember when you were at my house last, the long nolix run had some passing sidings, which allowed for meets. Your 65' is too long to not have at least one long siding (10-12') some where in the middle ..

[up1950s]

'sides , if you don't have a siding , you can't shout " Put 'er in the hole , here comes a hot shot " !

[oakcreekco]

I'm with the single track main, with siding(s).

The "DRGW" influence is always in my track plans.

[Ian MacMillan]

If you remember when you were at my house last, the long nolix run had some passing sidings, which allowed for meets. Your 65' is too long to not have at least one long siding (10-12') some where in the middle ..

Thats what I was thinking, however, the MEC had 12 miles of uphill battle in Crawford Notch, with only 2 sidings on the grade. Both sidings were 20 car lengths....much smaller than the 60-80 car trains on the line in the '60's -'80's. Operational decision melt down!

[wm3798]

Will you be running 60-80 car trains?  If so, build your siding accordingly.  Sometimes how you use the track plan trumps the prototype layout.  If you plan to run a higher volume of shorter trains, then add two or three shorter sidings.

You're building a layout to operate, not a museum where there will be a quiz later...

Lee

[central.vermont]

I just want to know if he's sticking with N scale Now??   ;D ;D

Jon

[Dupesy]

He doesnt know, Jon.  Nobody knows. ;D

[Dave Schneider]

You're building a layout to operate, not a museum where there will be a quiz later...

Lee

Lee, This is a very insightful comment. One of the reasons I model in N scale is that I have a hard time with the concept of selective compression. I look a the prototype and think at times that I need every track and every building in its proper place. I have found this to be too rigid of an approach....yet I am still trying to figure out how to build (and hopefully operate) a small yard that was switched with a curving uphill push (see below). This may not be the best idea.  :

Dave

[tom mann]

switched with a curving uphill push

Roller coaster track!

[Dave Schneider]

switched with a curving uphill push

Roller coaster track!

Yes, Tom gets an "A" on his museum test! Doesn't this make you want to go "Weeeeeeee!" This is such a signature element of the Beer Line that I really want to include it, but I may need to deviate from the exact track arrangement to make it usable.

Dave

[John]

Yes, Tom gets an "A" on his museum test! Doesn't this make you want to go "Weeeeeeee!" This is such a signature element of the Beer Line that I really want to include it, but I may need to deviate from the exact track arrangement to make it usable.

Dave

I would go for it .. looks like a signature element of this yard .. just make sure the turnout is level

[Ian MacMillan]

I think I'm gonna go the single track rout with a siding here or there. I think the operational fun would be better. I think the thing to remember though is Im freelancing so selective compression is not my issue, but more of realistic trackplans that have a reason and work well.

[central.vermont]

Ian,
I would just be sure your sidings are longer than the longest trains you plan
on running. That should be fine for operational purposes.

Jon

Oh by the way, welcome back to the right scale! ;D

[Pomperaugrr]

Ian, you might be able to get the best of both worlds.  Double track that section, for railfanning fun, but put in a cross over or two, so you can take some track out of service for operating sessions, leaving a section in the middle as your siding for meets.

___________________________________________________________________
______________\_________________________________/__________________
 out of service                                                             out of service
 for operating                                                               for operating
   session                                                                       session

Since you are protolancing, this will give you the best of both.  For operating sessions, sprinkle some forest floor debris and ground foam over the ties on the out of service trackage, then vacuum it off for railfanning and photo ops.

Eric