Chapter 1 The Basics of Railroad Operation [p. 3 - 10]

• "We want our model railroads to simulate reality by moving traffic - goods and people - in a prototypical manner." [p. 3]
  • This is definitely one of the original ideas behind my efforts.
    
    
• "But to the railroad crews, it is the schedule, not the consist, that determines a train." [p. 4]
  • I need to remind myself of this as I begin to develop a timetable.

Chapter 2 Purpose and Layouts [p. 11 - 24]

• "The modeller's first consideration should simply be, 'What do I like?' " [p. 12]
  • I agree. I like Canadian National Railways for my locomotives and most of my rolling stock. I want to be able to run some form of continuous loop. I want a mix of diesel and steam locomotives. I want to exchange all of my cars to a modern operation using the latest diesel locomotives. I want to simply use existing Atlas track and quickly place it on the table.
    
    
• There is a description of three basic approaches: free lancing, prototype modeling, and combination modeling. [p.12 - 13]
  • My approach is definitely the last. I am not trying to model an exact prototype, but I do want to emphasize CNR features.
    
    
• "... it is the schematic plan of your railroad that determines what you can do in the way of running trains." [p. 17]
  • This is a key sentence. As I have tried to draw a schematic diagram I began to realize that my layout may be unnecessarily complex.
    
    
• There is a description of 5 fundamental types of track plans: point-to-point, point-to-loop, out-and-back, loop-to-loop, and simple oval. [p. 18 - 19]
  • With my original idea of using the double track "duck-under" bridges, my layout is essentially an oval with some enhancements.
  • But if I remove the bridges, then it is a simple matter to turn the layout into a point-to-loop design with a loop around Jasper. This is now beginning to appeal to me. At the same time I can remove the loop around Black Diamond without losing any functionality.
    
    
• "For more interesting operation, at least part of the main line should be single track with passing sidings." [p. 20]
  • Good. I have incorporated this idea.
    
    
• "If possible, your layout should have at least one optional route, such as a secondary main line or a branch line, for variety." [p. 20]
  • Good. The entire Queenston, Lone Pine section is such a secondary main line.
    
    
• "If you have a branch line or a choice of routes, try to fit in at least one short holding track at the junction to hold, for example, a coach set out by the branchline train, or a string of loaded hoppers from the coal mine ..." [p. 20]
  • I think that I have such a passing line at the Queenston station that would serve this purpose.
    
    
• "Keep the track plan simple. It should never be more complicated than it needs to be to perform the job for which it was created." [p. 21]
  • This is a key sentence. Certainly the idea of removing the bridges simplifies movement by the human operator. I now see that I can also remove a small section of track that makes the loop around Black Diamond and not change the overall functionality at all - it just increases the size of the loop at the end of the layout.
    
    
• "Moderation, however, is the key to achieving a layout that is of reasonable size, for it is far better to have a smaller layout that is well-designed and runs well than to have a larger layout that is a poor performer. Thus, select a design that emphasizes the most important features you want and compromise or eliminate features of lesser importance." [p. 21]
  • Oops! Removing the double track bridges also means that I no longer need the two high level bridges that I was planning to build at the west end of the Coaldale yard. And it eliminates the small spur of Lennox. Eliminating the spur is not an issue, but the removal of four bridges is worth thinking about. I would like to have the bridges as part of my layout but they may make the operation more complex.

Tags: design, operations