New HCD layout, suggestions welcome

[crrcoal]

DKS's suggestions are spot-on! I would take it one step further and make the cement plant a truck dump tipple. You'll get rollingstock variety from the Team track to add interest. The main mine and truck tipple would be perfect for your coal hauler setting.  One can never have enough coal tipples!!! 

Merry Christmas!!!

[chuck geiger]

Open scenery is prototypical.

[Chris1274]

Thanks for all the great comments guys. Here's what I've come up with using your suggestions:



DKS: Extending the water like that is a great idea, it really breaks up the shape of the table top. After thinking about it, the cement plant isn't absolutely necessary. I'd rather have the layout make sense and the cement plant does seem out of place, so I went with crrcoal's suggestion of using that space for a second coal loader. That way it really gives the impression that we're in Appalachian coal country and should make for some fun ops for the mine shifters. I liked the 90 degree crossing arrangement you have in the upper left corner, but with the two spurs I had originally I can run trains onto and off of the layout without having to back them up or run the engines around the train, so I can have a kind of point-to-point operation. Here's the overall plan I have in mind:

[Kentuckian]

Looks good!  Really digging the two mines, and the riverbank running.

[Chris1274]

I made a slight modification to the plan, having a separate road access mine #1 instead of the same road going both through town and to the mine. I think it helps separate the two scenes a bit more:



I have a question about that bridge I've circled in red. Would it be unprototypical to have a bridge with non-parallel tracks like that?

[Philip H]

Nope. There's a bridge in harpers ferry, wv that does something similar to cross the Potomac.

[Chris1274]

But those are two separate bridges. Do you know of any instances of a single bridge crossed by non-parallel tracks?

[Specter3]

Chris

According to those more senior on this forum there is Ed's law which states that anything you can come up with has a ln example in the real world.    So far, anytime I have seen it quoted and someone disagreed they were quickly proven wrong with photo evidence.

[wcfn100]

But those are two separate bridges. Do you know of any instances of a single bridge crossed by non-parallel tracks?

Not quite the same because the turnout is more on the bridge than your drawing, but the Idaho overpass in Waterloo, IA has a ballast girder bridge that has one girder at an angle for the diverting track route.

https://goo.gl/maps/VTbGy

Jason

[Chris1274]

Not quite the same because the turnout is more on the bridge than your drawing, but the Idaho overpass in Waterloo, IA has a ballast girder bridge that has one girder at an angle for the diverting track route.

https://goo.gl/maps/VTbGy

Jason

That's good enough for me, thanks!

[davefoxx]

But those are two separate bridges. Do you know of any instances of a single bridge crossed by non-parallel tracks?

I bet they're all over the place.  I don't think there's a rule that you can't have a small bridge with non-parallel tracks on the span.

Here's an example from the Northeast Corridor at Perryville, Maryland, just east of the Susquehanna River bridge, where the line is going from two tracks up to four tracks plus the west end of the wye track that heads up the NS Port Road.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.5574429,-76.0753762,82m/data=!3m1!1e3

Hope this helps,
DFF

[Chris1274]

I bet they're all over the place.  I don't think there's a rule that you can't have a small bridge with non-parallel tracks on the span.

Here's an example from the Northeast Corridor at Perryville, Maryland, just east of the Susquehanna River bridge, where the line is going from two tracks up to four tracks plus the west end of the wye track that heads up the NS Port Road.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.5574429,-76.0753762,82m/data=!3m1!1e3

Hope this helps,
DFF

That's a great example, you guys are awesome 

[Bsklarski]

I have a question about that bridge I've circled in red. Would it be unprototypical to have a bridge with non-parallel tracks like that?
[/quote]

Yup. Even with a diamond on it lol.

[Chris333]

All sorts of "real" goofy stuff:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bethlehem,+PA/@40.6144643,-75.3845096,144m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c43e4acc94c115:0x4ec59c491c91b283

[Chris1274]

I've been thinking on a few different modifications of the basic design under discussion. Here's what I've got so far:







The first is the same one from previous posts, while the second and third are revisions. Here are the advantages I see in each one:

First: more scenic and less "busy".
Second: additional industry (cement plant) allows for more switching ops
Third: yard allows for on-layout staging without the need for an additional layout expansion

I'd appreciate if you guys could share some observations on which plan you think has the most potential.