Industrial Sidings???

Sure, Bob.  The siding that can be easily backed into is called a trailing point siding.  Without the run-around, though, the cars for that siding have to come from the same direction every time.  Thus, if the siding points east =>, the train delivering the cars has to be westbound.  Any eastbound train with cars for that industry would have to do the run around at the nearest location and then push those cars (slowly) to the industrial siding.

Chuck

I remember in our home town, a run-around track. It served many purposes including leaving boxcars in front of Freight Station, leaving boxcars which served 3 factories. A Venitian Blind, StrongHeart Dog Food, and Erickson Textile which made nets, from fishing to basketball nets. All 3 would fill pick-up trucks with finished products, and their shipping employees would drive to the siding and unload into their designated shipping boxcars.. This was directly off the NYC main line. During the summer I would walk down and make 5 or 10 Dollars helping load these boxcars.

In fact many large manufacturers in the areas didn't have any sidings running into their sites. Tuthill Spring, Carter Wallace, etc. drove to sidings to ship or receive raw products if it wasn't trucked in.

If I am not mistaken, a siding is technically double-ended while a single-ended track of that sort is a spur.

What I'm asking is...Do the railroad engineers plan when building a siding, spur, whatever, so that the train can back in, if at all possible, even if it requires relocating existing track?  Or does it even cross their minds that it costs more to install a run-around or have the crew make extra moves?

There was 2 sidings here in Portsmouth on the old SAL main (now CSX) that pointed west.  All inbound traffic was east to the "yards".  I wonder if they backed in as they were coming into town or if the train was broken down in the "yards" and another engine pushed cars back to where the sidings were?

I'm dreaming up a layout plan and, as always, have 1/2 my sidings/spurs going one way and 1/2 going the other.  With a Wye at the throat of the yard I can go in either direction to drop off cars, but today I asked myself why do I always do this?  If I had all the sidings going in the same direction I could eliminate one leg of the Wye and have the trains leaving the yard, go around the layout, then back into the yard.  It might not be as much fun but it would be simplistic and probably more realistic.

Of course, industries probably didn't take into consideration which way RR traffic would flow when they built their buildings (but maybe they did ).

I've seen quite a bit of industrial spurs and my suspicion is that the positioning is designed around what's easiest to implement. Other factors like existing streets (don't want to build an additional grade crossing if it an be avoided), building configuration, other industries on the switching lead, etc. In the example below (Google Maps) there is an incorporated run-around, but you can see a couple of spurs where orienting them from the other side would involve expanding the grade crossing. That particular area is in Montebello near the ATSF Commerce Yard and is approached from the south. What's really strange is that most of the spurs face northward even though the area is entered from the south. There are two run-arounds -- a long one at the southern end and a small one further north. There's another area nearby with very long spurs, again facing north and approached from the south. Go figure.

Bob Our train clubs prior location was housed in a building that had a trailing siding. To complicate matters an engine had to come from the west then cross over to the east bound track, then back its cars onto the siding. It would not be any ones original design but the tracks were there first and then the new occupant needed a RR siding so the LIRR did what it could to accommodate a customer and derive new revenue

Steve

If the train is arranged so that the spur is facing the "wrong" way, the Dutch Drop (sometimes called the "Flying Drop") was used. It involves getting the car to be set aside moving behind the locomotive, uncoupling (we used to say "unpinning") the car, speeding the loco past the switch, throwing the switch to the spur, and then slowing the cut-off car with the handbrake once it's in the spur.  When I worked as the new boy during the summer of 1966 on the NYC, we did it a few times, but the bosses didn't want us doing it unless absolutely necessary.  It sure was fun to watch, though, from a distance.

Before the SP "Santa Monica Air Line" tracks closed down (now Blue Line Expo Line extension), I actually saw one of those moves executed. Riding high on a moving box car (foward end to boot) and turning the brake wheel doesn't seem like the safest thing in the world to be doing. The guy pulled off the spot successfully.

There seems to be a modern day solution to the problem at least here in the metro NY area of using a switcher at each end of the cut of cars. Then they can go from the yard out and serve all the industries on one pass.

I often see the NS here with about 4-6 cars and two locos. Apparently deemed more efficient now.

Scotie

Thanks folks!  Matt, I tried to follow the old SAL line on Goggle Maps a while back, while imagining what industries must have been around back in the 40s-60s.

I guess the RRs have to do what's necessary to get the siding in.  I'm sure existing buildings, city codes, federal laws, etc make putting in a simple siding a chore.

I might take another look at the local area on Google Maps to see what's shakin!!!

The plan I'm playing with probably could use a 2-ended siding anyway, so I'll see if I can fit one in.

I don't know if flying switches are still allowed in North America, so let's go to China......

The camera missed the actual uncoupling, but you see the locomotive backing up on one track, after sending the train down the diverging track. Quick and dirty run-around.

I agree with what AGHR Matt said: in the real world, the location of the spur and whether it was trailing or leading was passed on the surroundings.

On a layout, however, you want to design your spurs so that you can have the most fun or challenge in switching your industries, or, like the real railroads, your track layout will be based on what you want in your industrial site. For example, at the D.A.R.E. Model Railroad Club, we designed our industrial park extension based on what we wanted in the space, which was challenging switching with at least one runaround track.

It gets better. Some buildings were shaped to accommodate the sidings. In the area I posted above, there are a couple of cut buildings with spurs curving around them. Gotta love it.

The deck I'm finalizing the design on has leading and trailing spurs with a short run-around. The idea is at some point (assuming I get the space) to make it a peninsula switch job on a larger layout. I may stretch the length a bit.

"Do real RRs install industrial sidings so the train can simply back into it with a cut of cars, instead of having to build a run-around track?  Are there any "rules" dictating how they lay in the sidings, other than it has to serve the customer?"

    As has been noted they do whatever is the cheapest and will still get the job done. A large volume customer will get a more expensive solution if it's necessary. Unless it's busy double track territory they don'y worry too much about points direction since most industrial switching areas have trains running both ways, or run as out and back turns. A lot of industrial track is older and the purpose has changed over the years so an arrangement might look puzzling or inefficient without knowing it's history.As always the best way to model it is to look at prototype photos of railroad,location,era,and type of industry similar to the layout one is building to get ideas for something that will look correct. What looks right for one layout will not look right for other layouts since the prototype situations vary so much  ......DaveB 

I can recall the flying switch maneuver many times in my small town on the old C&NW. No more though.

Matt, that's the kind of switching layout I want for my 2-rail RS3 (if I don't go whole hog and rebuild everything to 2-rail).

How many cars do you think it'll handle?

Firewood,

Just watched the video, looks like they could use some Weed-B-Gone!

The sounds of that engine kinda reminded me of a video our late Ed Reutling made, especially at the beginning when you hear only a clicking sound as the engine moves down the track (Ed didn't have any sound system in his engine in the video).  When asked Ed said the sounds on his video were coming from his oxygen machine (RIP Ed).

I recognise Ed's name. I think we were in touch about some loco drawings moons ago. Sorry to hear of his passing.

Yes, there's definitely some siderod clanking going on in that video.

Weeds and old junk, great for those industrial layout corners.