San Luis and Rio Grande Track plan for Critiques

[taholmes160]

Hi Folks:

Attached is my new track plan for the San Luis and Rio Grande.  This is a very much freelanced railroad based on the SLRG in Southeast Colorado.  I'd really appreciate it if you folks could look it over and let me know what you think, and where it can be improved.  Its very much designed as an operations railroad, but does include provisions for loop running for when I feel like railfanning

Thanks

TIM

[CRL]

Admittedly, it’s a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but you have a lot of trackage that appears to parallel the front fascia of both of your levels. I would try and offset those tracks by an inch or two from one end to the other, or consider letting the front fascia have some curves to break up the linearity.

Also, you’ve used the same crossed sidings on both levels, one over the other which might be a little monotonous.

Otherwise, looks like a decent start.

[taholmes160]

Cool, I hadnt realized that i did that -- thank you

TIM

[Dave V]

Is your layout in receivership now like the prototype?  Sorry...that sad news is still raw in this neck of the woods.  They're selling off the excursion equipment (including their steam locomotive).

[prr7161]

Looks like switching the lower level yard will require the yard job to regularly back up into the helix - could the lower level be reworked to allow for enough of a lead there to keep everything visible while switching?

[taholmes160]

Dave

no, actually, its BOOMING - heres the story behind the layout;

Due to the destruction of a major bridge and tunnel complex from an earthquake, The BNSF southern transcon Route is currently closed between Gallup and Belen NM. As a result, BNSF had diverted as much of its traffic as possible to its trackage rights over the UP Rocky Mountain Division, however because of the closure of the UP sunset route from the same earthquake, the UP was forced to impose traffic quotas on forcing the imposition of traffic quotas on the central rout. This has forced the BNSF to find additional trackage and as a result traffic has dramatically expanded over the SLRG in the past 6 months. The BNSF is routing traffic into walsenburg, and then routing it south to dallas.  Likewise AMTRAK has diverted its Southwest Chief, and Sunset Limited service over the SLRG bringing an influx of passenger revenue.  Over the previous 20 years or so, climatalogical changes have increased the production of the barley, wheat, potatos, sugar beets and lumber.  The increase in productivity has caused several agricultural companies including Coors Brewing, Archer Daniels Midland, and Ore-Ida, as well as both the BNSF and the UP to invest heavily in the area and has allowed the SLRG to upgrade many of its facilities and physical plant. As well, since the catastrophic events of 9-11, and the subsequent drop in airline passengers, coupled with the development of highly efficient hyperloop systems, passenger rail has seen a resurgence to levels far exceeding its heyday in the 1950s and passenger rail service in the San Luis Valley is booming.

Tim

[taholmes160]

PRR7161:

I havent found a way yet, if you have ideas, I'd be really glad to look at it -- that is one of the bugaboos of this layout

Tim

[davefoxx]

The one thing that I would caution you about is that you essentially have two towns and one yard on each level.  Fine, but the switching areas of the two towns on the upper level are directly over the two switching areas of the two towns on the lower level.  And, the yards are stacked, too.  This will make it tough on your operators, unless you're a lone wolf operator.  I'd try to shift things around, so the operators aren't standing on top of each other.

Hope this helps,
DFF

[Hawghead]

Tim,

Do the blue areas distinguish an elevated area above the foreground gray areas?

Scott

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Tim, how many layouts have you built before?

How much time to do you have to work on this?

I think it's worth thinking about both of those things before embarking on a multi-decker.

The next thing I would throw out is that, when I see the area you're modeling, and I see the plan, I see a lot of different characteristics and everything feels very "packed in". I think you might be trying to accomplish too much in the given space.

But then again, I get my butt kicked when I talk about simple plans, so... YMMV

[taholmes160]

DaveFoxx -- As it turns out, I am a lone wolf operator, and the yards are stacked over my bed! -- the room is 10x10, so it will be pretty rare that I host any other operators, I'll end up running train after train as I work through the "Schedule"

Scott -- yes -- they are elevated about 3 inches above the others

Ed -- this is my second layout, I'll be building it in my free time, I'm 50 years old, I appreciate your idea about things being kinda packed in, I agree, but I am looking for a switching / operations centric layout to make up the interest that I lack in not being able to have long runs

TIM

[Ed Kapuscinski]

In that case... Can I recommend attacking the problem from a different angle?

Have you read Lance Mindheim's book on operating smaller layouts? It might change your perspective on what's needed to accomplish your goals.

[Hawghead]

Scott -- yes -- they are elevated about 3 inches above the others

The problem I see with that, is it forces a vertical wall between the lower industrial areas and the elevated mainline around the whole layout and on both your upper and lower levels.  A vertical retaining wall along the entire elevated main line is going to be quite the scenic challenge to pull off.

Scott

[taholmes160]

Ya, I realize that it is going to be a challenge, im not going for photo realistic, but rather for a more operational bent -- so I'll use rock walls or retaining walls to help it out but Im not super worried about it

TIM

[taholmes160]

Hi guys:

Realize its been a while since I posted an update here -- Ive reworked nearly all of the track plan and heres the updated plan