2x8 "time saver" switching layout plan and design concept

I like it,  years ago when I had an N-scale layout I included a couple of industrial areas using timesavers. The coupling/uncoupling using Kadee's worked great.  At that time my young son loved to challenge others in our operating group and over Christmas he spent a lot of time with his new son watching the trains and, he asked if these Lionel would work the same way.   

I've thought about doing it again in 3 rail but it sometimes takes a good thump to get cars to couple.   Have you tried setting up the track and testing everything?

@Mike in NC posted:

I like it,  years ago when I had an N-scale layout I included a couple of industrial areas using timesavers. The coupling/uncoupling using Kadee's worked great.  At that time my young son loved to challenge others in our operating group and over Christmas he spent a lot of time with his new son watching the trains and, he asked if these Lionel would work the same way.   

I've thought about doing it again in 3 rail but it sometimes takes a good thump to get cars to couple.   Have you tried setting up the track and testing everything?

Following this with interest, as I'm contemplating a Timesaver or Switchman's Nightmare (see MR's 101 track plans book).  I have similar concerns about coupling and uncoupling with 3-rail equipment, so I'm thinking of doing it in HO.  Also considering HO in order to save space.

John Coy (on the forum, but I can't recall his user name) has built a portable 3-rail Timesaver that he takes to public demonstrations.  He used Ross track and switches and runs with DCS.  Pretty sure that he's posted about it, and it might have been in the magazine in the past year or so.

Good luck, and please post some follow-ups as you move along.

Part of the "fun" or frustration with the Timesaver is the limited space for spotting cars.  It appears that you were not aware of it when you planned your layout.

Here's a link to an article on the Timesaver.

http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...saver-trackplan.html

http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...timesaver-rules.html

It will be a tight squeeze to get everything into 8 ft.

Jan

In OGR's Book, "21 Great Track Plans for Compact Layouts" by Ken Hoganson, he includes a chapter with the classsic Timesaver plan.

Here's the title page for the chapter:

Ken notes all the track and switches you will need to build this unique little layout.

Don't forget to couple and uncouple reliably you have to have locomotive and rolling stock on straight track.

Nice plan and concept. I will be following along. I agree with Clem regarding coupling on a curve. The standard lobster claw couplers do require some force to close but Kadees can work reliably in O scale.

I designed this small switching pike to fit on a 34" door I took out during a renovation. Haven't built it yet but it does work in the SCARM simulator. Not sure what industries I would model but probably along the lines of what you are planning.

@Jan posted:

Part of the "fun" or frustration with the Timesaver is the limited space for spotting cars.  It appears that you were not aware of it when you planned your layout.

Here's a link to an article on the Timesaver.

http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...saver-trackplan.html

http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...timesaver-rules.html

It will be a tight squeeze to get everything into 8 ft.

Jan

I should be clear that I'm not terribly interested in following all of the "rules" of the timesaver game. However, the layout is actually spot-on as far as track length and car capacity, if you are using any locomotive other than a 44 tonner, with the exception of the spur in the lower left.

I imagine a more relaxed operating session, where I start with the locomotive and two randomly chosen freight cars on the "mainline". Lets say I have a loaded covered hopper to go to the mill at upper right, and an empty flat  for the loading dock at lower left. I'll also need to pick up the empty car at the mill and a flat car loaded with crates from the loading dock. If I'm running with the 44 tonner, I have the ability to pull both cars off of the meat packing/mill spur and not have to make two switching moves just to pick up one car.

Anyway, something like that. If I have to use bumpers to get the cars to couple and manually uncouple in a few spots, whatever, I'm not too worried about it.

@RSJB18 posted:

Nice plan and concept. I will be following along. I agree with Clem regarding coupling on a curve. The standard lobster claw couplers do require some force to close but Kadees can work reliably in O scale.

I designed this small switching pike to fit on a 34" door I took out during a renovation. Haven't built it yet but it does work in the SCARM simulator. Not sure what industries I would model but probably along the lines of what you are planning.

Using a door is an excellent way to speed the process along.

Although this plan differs slightly from the Timesaver, it is a good illustration to show that the concept can be bent and twisted to allow for greater scenic interest.  In its classic configuration, the Timesaver requires the use of background flats or a lot of imagination regarding the industries which are being served.

Although the OP is restricted to building a shelf-style layout, the switching scheme and space restrictions can be incorporated into a larger layout - here's one example:  http://mrsvc.blogspot.com/2008...hmans-nightmare.html

One advantage of the classic Timesaver is that others have already created various games and scenarios for setting up and doing the switching.  (I'm lazy and get brain freeze trying to set up that kind of stuff.)

Ultimately, the "right" answer depends on the individual and what they are trying to accomplish.

You could convert to Kadee couplers.   It is a little work on each car, but probably not too many cars for a layout this size.    the Kadees' couple much easier.    They can be  uncouple with a pick, or Kadee does (or did) offer a 3-rail uncoupling magnet set.

A couple of time saver, go-around loops, pictured, this Fort Pitt Highrailer, yard area. Compliments to Matt Irwin, several years ago.

@Mallard4468 posted:

Using a door is an excellent way to speed the process along.

Although this plan differs slightly from the Timesaver, it is a good illustration to show that the concept can be bent and twisted to allow for greater scenic interest.  In its classic configuration, the Timesaver requires the use of background flats or a lot of imagination regarding the industries which are being served.

Although the OP is restricted to building a shelf-style layout, the switching scheme and space restrictions can be incorporated into a larger layout - here's one example:  http://mrsvc.blogspot.com/2008...hmans-nightmare.html

One advantage of the classic Timesaver is that others have already created various games and scenarios for setting up and doing the switching.  (I'm lazy and get brain freeze trying to set up that kind of stuff.)

Ultimately, the "right" answer depends on the individual and what they are trying to accomplish.

Same here- not looking to stress out "playing" with my trains. I just have limited space beyond my 4X8 layout so this seemed like a good alternative. My goal is to have removable structures that I can store separately and can store the layout above the garage door in the rafters when not in use. It would sit on a couple of saw horses.

Bob

I built my switching layout after the time saver. It’s a 2x17 (4x8 plywood ripped in half, then I added a foot.) I had to make sure the track and turnouts accommodated the length of the locomotives and rolling stock. It is still a work in progress. It’s super fun to model, because it gives you the opportunity to focus on smaller areas for the scenery. And you can really cram a lot of detail into it. You can make it a diorama of sorts. And as far as the operations of it. I find it to be a great way to unwind, and get lost in the greatest hobby of all time. Watching the locos and rolling stock creeping back and forth. I can kill hours switching on Saturday’s or after work in the evenings. My layout is also on the taller side 48”. It keeps the crumb snatcher’s little grubby hands off. And it puts you closer to the action. Therefore I just uncouple by hand.

Jesse,

How about a trackplan and industry identification plan for your 2x17 layout?  Looks like you are using Atlas track, but would also like to know what kind of equipment you run.  It looks interesting and might just fit in the space I have.

Chuck