Point to Point vs Continuous

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by mcb.. » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 10:04:59



Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

1. What do most of you have? Why?
2. How many of you have a turntable?
3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

Thanks,
Matt

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by BOB SCHWART » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 11:05:38


Hi Matt,
Answers below---

Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?

Two intersecting continuous running capable railroads crossing at a central
point. I run one automatically and the other manually; the automatic one
keeps the operator on his toes and justifies some signals. The layout
emulates Waseca, MN where the C&NW and M&StL once had a junction and
interchange.

Why continuous running? - I'm a single operator and like to watch trains run
without having them stop at the ends and be reversed. The M&StL operates
automatically and I run the C&NW line.

Quote:
> 2. How many of you have a turntable?

I do.

Quote:
> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?

1 6 track staging yard - about 12 cars long each - straight - at the
entrance/exit of the East C&NW reversing loop - loop and staging are hidden
1 5 track staging yard - ditto - straight - at the entrance/exit of the West
C&NW reversing loop. - loop and staging are hidden
2 2 track staging yards - ditto - on the reversing loops of the M&StL which
are hidden on the lower level.
1 visible "terminal yard" (don't know what to call it) with engine service
facility (2 tracks), and 6 yard tracks each about 6 cars long.

Quote:
> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

One transformer powers the entire layout - 3 or 4 trains simultaneously -
using DCC

Quote:

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

Not so far. There are always things I could have done better and probably
will before I'm done.

Quote:

> Thanks,
> Matt

Regards, Bob Schwartz

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Train Ma » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 11:37:59


Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?

Can be run point to point (actually out and back) or continuous (almost).
The mainline is actually 2 reverse loops stacked on top of one another.
That forces me to pay attention to what is going on. The yard has a
seperate entrance and exit track so a train can leave the yard while
another enters.

Quote:

> 2. How many of you have a turntable?

That's Yes for me.

Quote:

> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?

Yard will hold about 125 40' cars with room left to operate. Pretty much
typical single ended ladder.

Quote:

> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

DCC, the only way to go, regardless of how many engines you have... How
many throttles can you hold and how many trains can you watch?

Quote:

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

NONE. You can visit via link above by my name.

Quote:

> Thanks,
> Matt

You are welcome.

Quote:

> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/

Jeff
 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Trainma » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 10:11:14


I have a continuous loop now,  BUT I have a crossover that allows me to run
it as an "out and back" (aka "point to loop"), using the continuous running
feature simply to run up "mileage" between stations.

My previous layout was a TRUE "Out and back" and was a lot of fun to run,
but on accasion one likes to just let trains roll without the "work" of
actually running them.

Don

--

http://www.geocities.com/don_dellmann


Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?
> 2. How many of you have a turntable?
> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

> Thanks,
> Matt

> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Trainma » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 10:14:10


Oops, to answer the other three questions, No I DON'T have a turntable this
layout, because I don't have as much room, and I don't run steam anymore.

My Yard is (in HO) a single ended, 2' wide by 12' long, 11 tracks, holds
about 125 cars leaving the inbound and outbound "make-up/breakup" tracks
clear.

The entire layout uses conventional "cab control", with 2 throttles, 2 more
planned (unless I convert to DCC).

Don

--

http://www.geocities.com/don_dellmann


Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?
> 2. How many of you have a turntable?
> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

> Thanks,
> Matt

> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Michael McIntyr » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 17:41:51


My layout is still in progress, but here's my take on this after quite
a bit of deliberation on this very subject...

Quote:
>1. What do most of you have? Why?

Continuous.  Running mainline trains unattended while working the yard
was a priority.  My layout is designed to be operated by 1-3 people,
and I wanted to have the "background noise" of mainline trains running
around while I work in one area or another.

I also have children who want to be able to run the trains in a big
circle without having to worry about anything.

OK, *I* want to run the trains in a big circle without having to worry
about anything too, which is why I chose double track.

Quote:
>2. How many of you have a turntable?

I do, for the simple reason that there was no way to work any kind of
reversing arrangement into my layout.  It's the only way I can turn a
westbound loco into an eastbound loco without resorting to the Hand of
God approach.  (Turntable is too small for my 4-8-4 so I will still
have to use HOG to turn it...)

Quote:
>3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?

About 13', give or take a bit.  Six tracks, single-ended, straight.
Mainline is double track and there's an inner, parallel track about
18' long that serves as a combination switch lead and
arrival/departure track.  Engine facilities are reached via the lowest
body track by way of a switchback that shoots backwards off the
ladder.

Quote:
>4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

I haven't hashed out the details of power yet, but it will definitely
be powered by at least one separate transformer, and perhaps two.  My
overall plan is for three cabs, but I might go for four.  Two mainline
cabs and two yard/local cabs.

I still haven't really sat down and figured out how to block
everything out.  It's going to be a real chore, and I'm pretty much
putting all of that off until the last minute...  :)

Quote:
>Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

Even though I don't have it up yet, yes...  I wanted loop-to-loop
rather than a continuous circle.  That way I could have point-to-point
realism and continuous running all rolled into one.  Unfortunately, I
didn't have enough real estate for the loops, even stacked on top of
each other.  Also, this creates a reversing situation along the entire
mainline (double track), and I wasn't sure I wanted to deal with that.
Mostly it was just space though.  My maximum depth is 36" and it takes
at least 48" to do a loop.
---

Vote for America's National Tree: http://arborday.org

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Gavin Mille » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:20:12


Hi Matt,

I'm building NTRAK modular (with "return" tracks down the back of each
module behind the skyboard).

An "end", turning,  module at each end of a series of straight modules turns
trains around 180 degrees and heads them back in the opposite direction so
trains can be run continuously (HALF the time on the visible portion of the
"layout", HALF behind the skyboard.).

At this stage I have only built one straight and one "end" module, so it's
strictly "point-to-point" until another end module is built at least.

I have decided not to "bite off more than I can chew" with this project. My
concept is to model a "scene" from a railroad rather than an entire railroad
operation. A "diorama" if you like.

In real life, we can never observe an entire railroad all at once - just
"parts" of it, for example, a yard, a station, a freight terminal. We know
the railroad's operation is huge, possibly spanning the nation, but we
observe this huge operation at just one point. The railroad's assets are
constantly paraded before us in the form of locomotives and rolling stock as
trains come into view, travel past our "vantage" point and roll off into the
distance to points far and wide.

I wanted to model a modern-era Class 1 national railroad which would
obviously have a large locomotive roster and an equally large inventory of
rolling stock. I decided that, as I would probably never have the time or
resources to build a "ba***t empire", I would model just a "representative
part" of that empire. A "window" on a much bigger operation! A place where I
could watch long double-stack intermodel trains hauled by several lashed-up
diesels arrive from one direction, travel past and then disappear in the
other direction on their way to "points yonder". Much the same as I observe
them in real life!

I'm happy, for the time being, to focus on creating my "piece" of the
railroad in as much detail as I can rather than attempting to create a whole
railroad (a project which, no doubt, would always remain unfinished!).

You can see my efforts so far at:-
http://www.FoundCollection.com/~advance1/railroad_models_index.html

Gavin Miller
Perth
Western Australia

Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?
> 2. How many of you have a turntable?
> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

> Thanks,
> Matt

> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.FoundCollection.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by mcb.. » Sun, 28 Jan 2001 22:01:19




Quote:
> Oops, to answer the other three questions

Great stuff Don and Bob. Thanks for the photo tour, Don. It's always a
treat to see pictures of other's layouts. My wife and I loved the cat
pictures. We have cats also.

I have lots to consider before I make the plunge and begin laying track.
I am still weighing the pros and cons of the 8'x 8' table top I
presently have assembled with screws. It's easy to re-manipulate if I
choose to go to a 12'x 4' L-shape instead.

I like both options for different reasons.

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Jeff de La Beaujardier » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:11:58


Quote:

> I haven't hashed out the details of power yet, but it will definitely
> be powered by at least one separate transformer, and perhaps two.  My
> overall plan is for three cabs, but I might go for four.  Two mainline
> cabs and two yard/local cabs.

> I still haven't really sat down and figured out how to block
> everything out.  It's going to be a real chore, and I'm pretty much
> putting all of that off until the last minute...  :)

Sounds like a prime candidate for the DCC salesmen....

-Jeff DLB

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Dennis E. Golde » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 04:01:09


1) Both my standard gauge main line (still under construction) and my
narrow gauge branch line are set in the Upstate NY and are point to point
for most operating purposes. However both can be converted to continuous
for purposes of breaking in locomotives, running rail cleaning cars, and
just plain (OK, I admit it) watching the trains. This is accomplished put
putting in the drop in section past the garage entryway. There is also (or
will be) a shortened continuos connection by running through the Rutland
connection back to the North end of the RR at Riverside N.Y. I felt it
important to design in as much flexibility as possible.

2) Since my roster is 75% steam, a turntable was a necessity. In fact there
will eventually be three of them. A large (125 foot) one at the main yard
at Doyle's Rocks yard, a three foot gauge one at the narrow gauge terminus,
and a small dual gauge one at the standard / 3 ft. interchange. (That's the
proposed one I'm still getting up the courage to build.)

3&4) The Doyle's rocks yard when complete will be 16 foot long (not
including the drill track which parallels the main line) and will have 3
double ended tracks and 7 single ended. A mirror at the end of the single
ended tracks doubles the apparent size of the yard. (A trick I stole from
the great John Allen.) It is a flat yard with a slight curve built in.

The narrow gauge terminal yard at West Poland and the interchange yard at
Lake Labarge are both much smaller. All three yards can be independently
controlled.

The narrow gauge facility at West Poland appeared in an article in the
April 1997 issue of Model Railroader if you happen to have it.

Den

Quote:

> Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> 1. What do most of you have? Why?
> 2. How many of you have a turntable?
> 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
> 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

> Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

> Thanks,
> Matt

> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by mcb.. » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 04:58:51




Quote:
> 1) Both my standard gauge main line (still under construction) and my
> narrow gauge branch line are set in the Upstate NY

Those are some fabulous plans you have in motion. If you can eventually
add some images for all of us to see, that'd be wonderful!

Good luck with the projects ...

:Matt

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Michael McIntyr » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 05:15:42


Quote:
>Sounds like a prime candidate for the DCC salesmen....

Not unless I wait another year or two before beginning operations...
:(
---

Vote for America's National Tree: http://arborday.org

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Michael McIntyr » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 05:21:12


Quote:
>In real life, we can never observe an entire railroad all at once - just
>"parts" of it, for example, a yard, a station, a freight terminal. We know
>the railroad's operation is huge, possibly spanning the nation, but we
>observe this huge operation at just one point. The railroad's assets are
>constantly paraded before us in the form of locomotives and rolling stock as trains come into view, travel past our "vantage" point and roll off into the
>distance to points far and wide.

This is similar to my concept.  It's around-the-room, but it doesn't
attempt to model a whole railroad from here to there.  One wall will
be  hidden or at least unimportant from a scenic standpoint.  The idea
is to model stuff coming in from "out there" and getting sorted out in
a sort of division point yard, then some of the stuff stays and gets
delivered locally, while the rest of it just goes to "yonder."

The idea is when I feel like operating I can do that, and when I feel
like playing railfan I can do that too.  I have no idea where the
trains on the main came from or where they're going.  I just like to
watch them.  I figure the same will go for my model.  Some of the
trains will originate locally and be switched at local industries, but
the majority of my stuff will just run around on the mainline where I
can watch it go by from my favorite vantage point.

To that end I'm also dedicating one wall to pure rural scenery.  I
don't want a bunch of stuff to get in the way of just watching trains
run through the middle of nowhere.
---

Vote for America's National Tree: http://arborday.org

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by Dennis E. Golde » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:10:46


I forgot to mention staging tracks at both the North and South ends, as well as
on the Rutland interchange at roughly the halfway point.

Den

Quote:

> 1) Both my standard gauge main line (still under construction) and my
> narrow gauge branch line are set in the Upstate NY and are point to point
> for most operating purposes. However both can be converted to continuous
> for purposes of breaking in locomotives, running rail cleaning cars, and
> just plain (OK, I admit it) watching the trains. This is accomplished put
> putting in the drop in section past the garage entryway. There is also (or
> will be) a shortened continuos connection by running through the Rutland
> connection back to the North end of the RR at Riverside N.Y. I felt it
> important to design in as much flexibility as possible.

> 2) Since my roster is 75% steam, a turntable was a necessity. In fact there
> will eventually be three of them. A large (125 foot) one at the main yard
> at Doyle's Rocks yard, a three foot gauge one at the narrow gauge terminus,
> and a small dual gauge one at the standard / 3 ft. interchange. (That's the
> proposed one I'm still getting up the courage to build.)

> 3&4) The Doyle's rocks yard when complete will be 16 foot long (not
> including the drill track which parallels the main line) and will have 3
> double ended tracks and 7 single ended. A mirror at the end of the single
> ended tracks doubles the apparent size of the yard. (A trick I stole from
> the great John Allen.) It is a flat yard with a slight curve built in.

> The narrow gauge terminal yard at West Poland and the interchange yard at
> Lake Labarge are both much smaller. All three yards can be independently
> controlled.

> The narrow gauge facility at West Poland appeared in an article in the
> April 1997 issue of Model Railroader if you happen to have it.

> Den


> > Re: Point to Point   OR    Continuous    OR   Both

> > 1. What do most of you have? Why?
> > 2. How many of you have a turntable?
> > 3. How large is your train yard? General shape/style?
> > 4. Is your train yard powered by a separate transformer?

> > Any regrets concerning the decisions you made regarding the list above?

> > Thanks,
> > Matt

> > Sent via Deja.com
> > http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Point to Point vs Continuous

Post by John A. Zelins » Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:26:48


1.  Point to point switching operations.
2.  No.
3.  Four track staging area on one end (hidden) and a two track yard on
the other.
4.  No.

None.  Decisions made at the time of planning and initiation were valid
and haven't changed.  Switching operations are more interesting and
thought provoking than just running trains round and round.  Long trains
are boring to me.  Straight DC is what I prefer.  Each to his or her own
choosing.