New Design - My Phoenix to Flagstaff Idea

Great looking layout plan Dave. The only suggestion I can think of is to transpose the Williams AZ scenic line in lieu of the Durango & Silverton.

Thanks Owen. My reference to the D&S was just to note it would be a scenic train, not a regular passenger train, etc. It is a good idea though to concentrate on the Williams/Sedona topography and scenery. Funny, I've only done the Polar Express run out of Williams, we always drive to the Grand Canyon.

Careful about getting stopped on the tracks getting to the motels in Flagstaff!  There is

a sporty crossing there over multiple tracks, and there was a steamer parked against

a building when I was last there.  Curous...was there a railroad historically, that connected Phoenix with Flagstaff?  Seems to once have been a RR just about everywhere. 

The (former) Southern Pacific route from Phoenix north connects with the former ATSF East/West line at Williams. It runs through Wickenburg and then follows the west side of the Bradshaws . I think all of the route is now BNSF.  It is known as "The Peavine" due to it's wavy route.

You beat me to it Owen. Following the route with Google Maps, it looks like it took quite a long time to get to Flagstaff. Given how few people ride trains these days, I can see why Amtrak quit running from Phoenix. A shuttle is a lot shorter/quicker, but there is the problem of syncing schedules. If I had more space, that might actually make a nice layout scheme.

No love for Tucson???

The first thing that strikes me is that you don't have any areas to turn a train around. Either the trains will have to back into or out of the loops on the bottom and top levels, or you will have to lift the engines and turn them by hand.

Once you have decided on all of the industries and where they will go, location of spurs will be easier to identify. Remember, a spur can serve two or more industries. Will there be a time period for your layout? This can help you narrow your choices.

There is nothing wrong with a scenic run. It happens on a real railroad, and you need a scenic break to define city limits. Plan to make your cities more populated. Look at photos of Phoenix city to get a feel for its skyline.

A last parting thought, have you considered adding an island to break up the circles?

I live in Phoenix.

I have thought about both an island and reversing loops. My intention at the moment with this design is to simply run trains in opposite directions on the dual main and to have 2 trains ready to run in opposite directions at different times on the single main upper level. Or, I could add a passing siding to add some challenge to the upper level. Given where the grades are though, I don't know where I could fit a reversing loop, though I'll keep looking. Maybe if I relented and tried a hidden loop with 31" curves I could get by with 1 loop and back through when necessary.

I thought about dual main dog-bone to simulate reversing. One design had 1 set of loops in the upper right corner around the wall to another set in the lower right. The 2 ends of the dog-bone would be separated by a diorama. I could maybe turn the upper level into a loop-to-loop with a pass-thru connection. I wonder too if I could do some sort of open "Y" into a 31" reversing loop on an island. I'll have to play with this tomorrow.

I have no time period in mind. I buy locomotives and rolling stock based on how they "look" to me, hence the Old West 4-4-0 General. If the coloring appeals to me, I don't care if that line never ran through Arizona, etc. Given what runs through Flagstaff, I can run just about any kind of consist, but I never worked for the railroad and I'm not a collector, so I don't see myself buying a fleet of oil tankers, coal cars, etc. I'm just a freelancer who wants to watch multiple trains run.

I just looked at a map and see that Williams is not that far west of Flagstaff, and that

a route up to it through Wickenburg zags west.  I have visited the railroad station in

Jerome, famous copper mining town (was lucky to get there before it was made a

park, and since), and remember that the railroad went from there to Clarksdale,

but do not know where it went from there...I am presuming west.  The railroad station in Jerome, now the museum,  seems to be pretty high up, so must have been a grade to reach it.  But Jerome is a really good excuse to have a mining operation, and a cliff-hanger town on a railroad modeled in that area.

Dave, Since you are in Arizona, doing an Arizona themed layout makes lots of sense.  There is a wealth of information and photos available for you to review during the time you have before finalizing your plans.  The Peavine (Santa Fe, Prescott and Phoenix) would make an excellent choice as it runs from the pine country down to the desert in Phoenix.  I do suggest you read a copy of David Myrick's excellent book on the railroad.  He does an excellent history of the line with wonderful photos.  It will really give you a feel for the area and history.

The Peavine is still quite active.  I live within sight of the line and we see 10 - 12 trains a day passing by.  You can also take a road trip and follow much of the line all the way to Williams where is rejoins the BNSF main line.  And if you do some field work and would like to visit me, just let me know and I can take you out to some of my favorite spots nearby.

If you do decide to try a dogbone design the turnaround "loops" get much easier to accomplish Dave. The following is a very old conceptual design for my layout, which is On30. The tables are shown correctly, but I have rearranged all of the sidings and industries. The basic dogbone is the same and is now all in place. If you look at the compressed part of the dogbone I have a third line that has turnouts going to both the outer and inner lines which allows me to accomplish turnarounds from any direction to any direction. In my case I am 2 rail of course so this design also makes it so that I have only 1 reversing leg. I considered a lot of different designs to fit this space and for me a dogbone fit what I wanted to do, which is to run trains and be able to turn around in both directions. And, with this design I can turn around at full speed which makes for interesting continuous running. My door into the trainroom is on the lower left of this drawing, and the gray area on the bottom is a closet space which I entered with that end of the dogbone. Window is on the top. I also considered doing a full loop with a duckunder or liftout piece, but in the end I decided I did not want to limbo or monkey with a bridge piece, so I ended up with a dogbone and am very happy with it. It sounds like you have a lot of time to contemplate this, so enjoy the design process, it is a lot of fun to daydream a bit and explore options.

P.S. I am in Cave Creek and I have spent a lot of time in and around the Bradshaws and along the Hassayampa gold prospecting, so I know that area pretty good.

I was thinking about that when I read this. I've been a little fixated on the Red Rocks of Sedona as a scenic element, but a turnout to a Jerome area mine in the lower left corner of the photo instead of Sedona would add a bit of "action" vs static rocks and I wouldn't have to model Jerome itself, I could use a backdrop along the wall for that. It would make a lot more sense to go where trains actually went vs Sedona and given the space, I couldn't hope to do justice to Sedona anyway. In fact, I could put a mine in the upper left and then add a station and rodeo arena in the lower left for Williams (they are close by in reality). Adding the mine is a great idea. Thanks.

Just so everyone knows, the hardest part for me when designing a layout is matching my desire for multiple train running with scenery. I can come up with all sorts of intricate "running" designs, but taking out parts to make room for scenic elements boggles my mind, especially when trying to use 72" curves. I see now how I could add a simple siding to make a small mine, but I have a hard time visualizing size requirements for such things. I have no idea yet how I'll model Flagstaff beyond a depot and maybe a Route 66 themed diner and gas station.

I think it might help if I go through the rest of the RR-Track tutorials and learn more about designing with FlexTrack. I don't like the look of rigid 54" curves, but I'm concerned about using FlexTrack and making part of the curves too tight, getting unwanted "S" curves, etc. Maybe as I play with things more, how to make a sweeping curve while maintaining a minimum 54" arc throughout will become more apparent.

Thanks, Peter. I think we talked a bit last year when I was looking into local clubs, etc., and you invited me to visit then. Unfortunately, my mother-in-law took ill and we spent most of the first half of the year caring for her until she passed away in July. We are just now getting back to normal, though my wife and her siblings are still cleaning out the house (she had an unbelievable amount of stuff packed away, including high school clothes from the 60's).

Anyway, this is the first chance I've gotten to purchase RR-Track v5 and move on with my bedroom plans. Right now I'm working on a Christmas layout and am close to purchasing more RealTrax for it. I thought about switching to ScaleTrax because that is what I'm going to use for the bedroom, but I already have half of what I need in RealTrax, so I might as well finish with it. We're heading to Wisconsin in a couple of weeks and I'll be visiting a couple of train shops while there, so I'll wait until we get back to purchase the additional track I need.

As soon as I get done reading the forum, I'm heading to the library to pick up that book. I already checked and it's sitting on the shelf waiting for me.

I have time, so I think I may try a dogbone again, this time from the left side of the entry door on the bottom around to the right side of the same door. In fact, I may try a combination of both. I could have a dual main around-the-wall on the main level and a dogbone on the upper level. With the reversing loop I have in mind, I would then only need a single grade connecting the 2 levels. I'd have a semi-complicated removable section with a trestle in front of the closet door and a simple removable section in front of the entry door.

Unfortunately, I don't think I can get away with anything larger than 54" curves for the loop and I still may end up with too much too close to the closet door for a manageable removable section. I may be able to use a combination of 31"/54", hiding the 31" behind faux buildings. I could also remove the entry door and have both a duck-under and a removable section for access. I could use the duck-under day to day and the section when we need to get the holiday stuff out of the closet. I can envision hiding the section in a tunnel or with a backdrop of some sort to give the illusion of total separation between Phoenix and Flagstaff.  

The entrance to the reversing loop in the lower right of your photo is kind of what I had in mind for adding a loop to my design. If I add a double-crossover type entrance I can technically get away with a single loop to turn any train. If I hide the dual main right, I could still have 3 trains running unattended at the same time, an option I'd really like.

I'm happy to see how many Arizonans who have responded, but then I suppose the title had something to do with that.

Dave,

I'm busy between work and packing for a move, so when I get a little free time, I'll doodle around a bit with some ideas I have.

On the subject of industries, have you given thought to a corral? I remember riding horses down at Fort Huachuca and then there were the cow ranches. Lionel has the corral set and Trainworx just released a laser cut kit that looks sharp!

What type of track do you plan to use?

Here is how I solved the closet door issue in my trainroom :

I mentioned a rodeo arena for Williams, but a ranch/barn/corral is something I had on my original plan last year and I think that will still be the route I take. There are plenty of corrals around Arizona out in the open with no buildings nearby, so it'd be very easy to add something like that wherever I can manage a semi-flat area. I could easily put a barn on the upper level with a corral below it on the main level, You see that kind of scene around Wickenburg and on the Navajo reservation up north.

Note: I used to ride horses (a strawberry Appaloosa) in South Mountain Park every Saturday morning at 7:00 sharp back in '68-'69. That was back when we could ride on our own and not be subjected to boring trail rides.

I have quickly become fond of MTH products, so I plan to use ScaleTrax throughout (in addition to RailKing locomotives/rolling stock) and DCS control. I expect to use a lot of FlexTrack, but will probably use standard curves for anything 54" and tighter. I'm not going to be big on roadbed other than laying custom-cut sound deadening board (SDB) beneath the tracks. I'm thinking plywood with 2" of foam covering the main level with the SDB under the tracks. I plan on hiding the grade down to the semi-hidden storage yard as well as the grade to the upper level. However, depending on how the design evolves, I may not need to hide the one to the upper level. 

Sorry, Owen, can't do that.

I have thought about putting a tunnel through the wall though (the closet is longer than wide) and hiding the yard there, but it is so full of holiday decorations that I just don't think that will work. I really don't even need a yard because the trains will pretty much stay on the layout wherever they are when I shut down and I simply don't plan to collect rolling stock.

I'll just have to see how this evolves, but I think I'm at least on the right track (pun )with a general design that will work and a theme I can be happy with. With only 24" benchwork so far, I could add another foot for a visible yard in the Phoenix area, maybe a bump-out. I could probably expand the benchwork to 36" all the way around, but I need to be sensitive to the location of the closet door. In fact, I need to measure the left side of the room again before I go much further with a design.

That is an excellent book. I've paged through it looking at the photos and would like to buy a copy. Unfortunately, it's $77 on Amazon and I'm not willing to pay that much. There are 2 copies in the Peoria Library (Vol 1 and Vol 5), so access should be fairly easy. Thanks for the suggestion to check it out.

I was able to concoct a small oval using 31" curves and turnouts on all 4 corners. I placed it on the right side of the layout and realigned the dual mains to connect to the turnouts from both directions. In effect, this gave me 2 reversing loops. Unfortunately, I HATED IT, even after I tried covering most of it with a removable building. And it still did nothing for the upper level.

So, I then tried my idea to switch to a loop-to-loop configuration on either side of the entry door and found that will not work without resorting to 31" curves around too much of the visible layout. There is simply not enough space in the lower left corner with the room cut off the way it is and the 2 doors where they are. I revisited my earlier design with the loops meeting each other on the right side, but I still don't like that . The 31" version is just too tight looking and the 54" version requires 2 access hatches.

But, I kept playing around and explored 2 other ideas. The first was to add a reversing loop to the hidden storage yard. I thought this would solve my problems, but it still left the upper level hanging. So, the second idea was to also add another loop to that level.

Adding a loop to the yard allowed me to eliminate the grade from the yard level to the main level. Granted, it subtracts a spur from the storage area, but I'm not a collector, so the number of spurs was up for debate anyway. If I really need more storage, I can always add a spur at the very top in the opposite direction and take it all the way around the right side of the room. I decided to go ahead and add one now so Ill remember to think about it, but it's not in the attached photo.

I'm not totally happy with the loop I added to the upper level, mostly because I haven't thought much about scenery, but I will certainly try to hide parts of it with trees and a tunnel. I tried one further along on the bottom, but I though that stuck out too much because that section is only 24" wide.

Going this route still lets me run 3 trains unattended, let's me move trains to any line, and forces me to take all trains to the upper and hidden levels to turn them around giving me really long runs and I think it adds some interest because the upper level is a single main.

So, let me know what you think. I'm still open to ideas, so don't hesitate to offer different ideas for the space.

Note: I see I forgot to change the Sedona label to Williams.

Dave, this track plan is very creative, particularly with your ability to hold grades between levels to a reasonable percentage.  My main question is what you want to see in the balance between scenery and track.  From your plans, the scenes will be mostly have to be focused on backdrops as the available table space will be taken up with track.  Not that this necessarily bad, it just gives you a challenge of finding a good backdrop - or taking photos yourself.  Since each of your three locations have a very distinct station, maybe you could build a flat of that station to put along the wall to define that scene.

I am surprised that were were able to shoe-horn those loops into that table design , Dave. In the past I had an HO layout and now I am running On30 and am not real familiar with what radii will work with O gauge/scale. Peter is right about your plan being very track heavy, but it all depends on what you want to do with your layout. For running trains I think you have a good design.

As an aside: When I got back into the hobby some months ago I first posted on MR and MRH, and that was a big mistake. The only "advice" I got on those two forums is that "your design isn't prototypical" and "you're not going to have fun with that layout. Literally. All that simply because I wanted to have a layout with a way to run continuously, and preferably be able to turn around as well. Those sites are dominated by "protoypical operations" guys who insist on having "switching layouts" with no way to run continuously. Up until my re-entry into the hobby after ~35 years it had never occurred to me that someone would build a layout with no way to run continuously (a loop). It makes no sense to me. To each his own I guess but listening to the stuck-up attitude of those guys that want to pretend they are working for a railroad got old real fast, I like the attitude on here and a couple other sites a heck of a lot better than the big two of MRRing.

Thanks for the comments, Peter, your question is very appropriate and I've been giving that very thing a lot of thought since I started this. I had to choose which is more important; running space or realistic scenes with buildings, etc. Since my interest is in running trains, the scenery is going to be secondary. I know that rubs a lot of people the wrong way, but I don't have the space for a railroad with full scenery and the running space/options I want. I'd rather have track on outdoor carpeting and 2D photos of buildings with stands like the cutouts we used to get on cereal boxes as kids than give up the capability to run 3 trains. To be totally honest, I may never move beyond the benchwork/track other than covering open parts with tunnels, etc. I could be happy simply painting the benchwork varying degrees of tan/green to simulate desert/grass as long as I can run the trains the way I want. I lived with open benchwork in my garage for 3-4 years in California before I had to tear it all down to move.

That said, I think I could easily eliminate the dual main, expand the benchwork to 36" and gain enough space to add a decent amount of scenery. However, right now, I "think" I want the dual mains more than those scenic elements. If I were to opt for the scenery, it'd just be purchased buildings set on the layout. I love looking at layouts with full scenery, but I just don't have the interest or skills in modeling that so many of you do. So, I'm settling for the capability to watch 3 trains run unattended or interject some interest by switching them between lines.

My ultimate plan is to rely pretty heavily on backdrops, such as photos or sketches of depots like you mentioned. I do plan to expand much of the benchwork to 36" and "relax" the track-work as I move forward to make room for some scenic elements at some point. I'm using 72" curves where possible now just as a template, but I'll probably end up closer to 60" curves when I actually start laying the FlexTrack, etc.

As an example of my scenic ideas, I'll be covering the dual mains in the lower left corner where Williams (Sedona) will be. I can then mount a photo of a depot on the walls to represent Williams and place a corral with horses in front of the track to give me some depth with a real scene. I could even attach faux buildings to the wall instead of photos if I want more depth. There isn't room for complete buildings, but I think just the fronts with 1" sides would work nicely. Similarly, the upper left corner will have the mine and I can either try to fit in a real spur to a mine opening or use a photo/faux mine to represent the mine with a turnout to a faux spur.

Phoenix will also be represented mostly with backdrop photos. I haven't decided yet if I'll use photos of Scottsdale or Rawhide to represent the Phoenix of old. If I do, I'll have to come up with a way to incorporate enough newer stuff to justify diesels. I'm not too up on railroad history, so I might be way off base there, but I guess I can always fall back on the old adage, it's my railroad, so I can do what I want.

I'll have to be a little careful with the removable section in front of the closet door, so I'm not exactly sure of specifics yet. My main goal right now is to settle on a theme and basic plan, so I'll have something to adjust over the next year or so. After Christmas, my holiday layout will revert to a test table. I'll buy enough ScaleTrax to play with various sections before I start building for real. I may find I can give up the dual mains in favor a more scenery, but none of my friends have any interest in model railroading, so it's just for my pleasure. We also travel, so I do have a life outside running trains and I'm not sure how much time I'll want to devote to this endeavor.

I should add that I get a kick out of running trains in the RR-Track simulation mode and really wish I could run multiple trains. Add some realistic sounds and I could be happy with that.   Just kidding..........

I, too, tried MR (and Bachmann) forums and got the same attitude, that's how I ended up here. I welcome criticism and suggestions, but I usually try to include my goals to avoid the "ain't prototypical" argument. I understand those who desire to have a model railroad and run it like a railroad. There's nothing wrong with that, but those purists need to allow for others, like me, who just want to "play" with our trains.

I know my design is not prototypical, but I would like to make it the best it can be given my goals. I want folks to point out "S" curves I missed and other things that will impact smooth running. I know I mentioned unattended running, so one of my concerns is having to run through so many turnouts on the dual mains. I'm particularly concerned about the crossovers at the top being so close to each other and wonder if I shouldn't move one set to the bottom section. I'd still get the same capability, but maybe it would reduce the cluttered look. My only reason for locating them together is that is where I plan to put a backdrop of the Phoenix skyline or something to represent Phoenix. There is a major yard downtown on Jefferson Ave and I need to take a look at how the city there looks as a backdrop.

I do plan to add some spurs as I move along, but they'll mostly just be for looks. I don't get off dropping a car at a grain elevator or lumber mill, or even a mine for that matter. Such operations usually involve picking up full cars and dropping off empties. That generally means you have to include a place to do the reverse, drop off the empties and pick up the full cars. I don't mind having those things on a layout for looks, but I just don't see myself ever using them in a prototypical manner. And, space is a big problem unless I just model those 2 locations and I'm not willing to do that. One also has to consider cost. Today's turnouts are not inexpensive, they add to the build complexity and they can introduce operational problems.

As I said in my reply to Peter, as I move along I may find I lose some enthusiasm for the dual mains and decide to forego the 3rd train for more scenic elements. The good thing is I've got a lot of time and I will have my 6x8 test table to model various sections to see how they look, I may find they are too busy in reality. I know I could be happy with just 2 trains running, but I added the 2nd main to run in opposite directions and pass each other. Then, too, I could save a lot of money cutting out the 2nd main. That will be the next iteration of this design that I'm going to work on over  the weekend.

Thanks for continuing the conversation.

Okay, here's the latest iteration. I had to make a few changes to avoid locating turnouts across the removable sections. I also added some sidings, roads and sample buildings, and I expanded the reversing loop to allow space for a depot, etc.

The buildings along the top will be on a removable shelf to provide access to the storage yard underneath.

The buildings along the right side will act as a tunnel to hide the upper level tracks in that section and will also be removable.

The buildings and road in the lower right will be on a removable platform to provide access to the tracks beneath.

I want to add 2 more bridges below the bridge by the entry door. That section will have a river/lake underneath, but I'm not sure how I'll cope with the curves on the left side. I'll probably move the bridge on the upper level more to the right and then use 2 smaller bridges on the dual mains below.

I also don't know exactly now I'll construct the removable sections in front of the closet door. I suspect the edge of the yard loop will be a fold-down and the others will be a 1 or 2 lift-outs, though I might make it a fold-down and roll-out.

The removable section in front of the entry door will be a hinged roll-away to the right. However, both will allow duck-under access too because we don't need to access the closet that often.

This may be a race to see who gets theirs done first!  Either way, I like your layout, and it's making me reconsider mine, again.  I'm in Mesa in a new (to me) house.  I still have to finish my train room, as in paint and flooring, after emptying the boxes out (I just moved in).  I'm also in the I like running trains camp, so scenery will be the last thing I do on mine.  I do have a questions for you, what is the spacing between levels on your layout?

Dave,

Are you able to separate the layers? I think I have a good idea of what is going on, but being able to view the layout on each level will help de-clutter the track plan.

I love that you have added buildings to the layout. That is a great way to help visualize the layout. If I were to make a change to the buildings, it would be in the Phoenix area. I would move the buildings onto the shelf and have the tracks swing out onto the removable section. I think the removable area would be easier to handle if it were just tracks instead of a city area which could possibly be heavier and more details could be damaged when moved about. A backdrop could be hung behind the buildings which could also hide part of the upper loop for a visual break. Ultimately, you are the boss!

Here's an idea I came up with for the yard/storage area. I moved the yard area to the opposite corner of the layout where you have more shelf space. This will keep it away from the door areas. It consists of two reverse loops with yards inside of the loop. There are also two escape turnouts which can be connected around the room and/or used to connect to the second level. The turnouts can be repositioned on the reverse loops so they run closer to the edge of the shelf if you want to connect them to form a complete loop. The yards aren't correct as they don't have yard leads for switching while a train is running the loop, so they would be for storage or you could stop the train while you fowl the main. Scenic on this level would be minimal.

The picture below was drawn with AtlasO O-36 curves, so they are not labeled. It only represents what can be done. Since you will be using flex track, you can make the curves smaller.

Right now the yard is at 0", the dual mains are at 6" and the upper is at 12". At first I was just going to do the yard on plywood, but because it's now a reversing loop, I plan on doing it the same as the other layers; 1 layer of 1/2" plywood and 2 layers of 1" foam. I will then add 1 layer of 1/2" sound deadening board as roadbed under the tracks. The grade tracks will not have the 2 layers of foam. I haven't quite worked all that out as far as grade percentages go, so I may have to make some adjustments to grade beginning points, etc. I will work on those adjustments once I settle on a plan and learn how to compensate for the 3" of foam/roadbed in RR-Track. With the 3", my 6" separation may not be enough and I'm surprised someone hasn't mentioned that. However, I may not need the foam on the upper level at all, so I'll just have to see what affect all that has on the grades.

I attached views of all the track layers. I hope that helps.

I never thought of locating the yard under the other part. I like that you got 2 reversing loops in and they are both hidden. I will definitely give that some further thought.

I totally understand that your posts will just be to show what I might be able to do and that I'll have to incorporate the ideas into RR-Track for exact specs. I really appreciate your time and ideas.

Dave,

This one was done solely for my entertainment, but I thought I'd share. I was doodling around trying to figure a way to work two reversing loops on the top level when this little beast appeared. I feel sorry for the crew in the switch tower that has to watch over this interchange!

A version of that is actually pretty easy to fit in where I added the single loop on the upper level.

BTW, the reason I added the buildings where I did on the removable shelf was to cover the entire yard while still providing easy access by simply removing the shelf. I totally agree that section would look better the other way and moving the yard like you suggest would let me do that.

I can relate to that. When I first built my own HO railroad 40 years ago, I got sucked into the "mainstream" thinking promoted by the hobby magazines, that you need loads of sidings and industries to switch "like the prototype". Also got sucked into the idea "switching layouts are great for limited space". I discovered I didn't particularly enjoy prolonged switching, especially without a continuous-run option. As a railfan, I liked to watch mainline trains highball through scenic settings, not observe switch engines working industries. So obviously, my model railroad should follow that cue!

Not to digress, but I want to tie this in with Dave's layout planning.

My main O gauge layout is basically a double-track mainline, a respectable 80-foot circuit but otherwise not too elaborate because of limited space. The way to get some variety with this situation is being able to run different trains alternately, and being able to reverse direction.

I also have an HO layout which is not huge, and I get variety by running different trains, alternately. That's a lot easier to do if you have a long double-ended yard for the trains to pull through. Way better than single-ended yard tracks if you can swing it. You can easily justify a double-ended yard with complete trains parked there by calling it a division point where trains change crews. And if your rivet-counter friends ask why trains are piling up there you can say there is a shortage of available crews, or there is a maintenance window on the railroad, temporary CTC blackout, labor strike, whatever.

Hidden layovers are also good, especially on a reverse loop that might otherwise be difficult to disguise scenically.

Ace, thanks for the comments. I totally agree with all 3 of your points, especially the through-yard idea. I was never happy with my dead-end yard, even after I added the reversing loop, but never thought about relocating it. No matter what I end up doing, I'm going to try to relocate the yard under the lower right corner section. I've been looking at Stewart's suggestion for 2 yards, each with a reversing loop. I'm looking to see if I can combine the 2 yards making them a through-yard while keeping the reversing loops. It would mean having curves in the middle around the corner, but it will be hidden, so we'll see what it would look like in RR-Track.

I've also been look at his circle double-loop even though it was just done for entertainment. I'd like to be able to hide that, but I don't like hiding turnouts. No matter what I do though, my grades will have to change, but that's okay. I've got a long time to develop this design and the more effort I put in now, the better it will turn out.