{"id":1183,"date":"2018-03-25T21:28:30","date_gmt":"2018-03-25T20:28:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/?p=1183"},"modified":"2019-09-30T18:43:21","modified_gmt":"2019-09-30T17:43:21","slug":"minimum-viable-design-part-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/minimum-viable-design-part-1\/","title":{"rendered":"MQR Minimum Viable Design &#8211; Part 1"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>There is a concept in the software development world called the &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Minimum_viable_product\">minimum viable product<\/a>&#8220;. From its Wikipedia entry, a&nbsp;Minimum Viable Product&nbsp;(MVP) is &#8220;one with just enough features to satisfy early customers, and to provide feedback for future&nbsp;<a title=\"New product development\" href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/New_product_development\">product development<\/a>.&#8221;<sup id=\"cite_ref-1\" class=\"reference\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Minimum_viable_product#cite_note-1\">[1]<\/a><\/sup><sup id=\"cite_ref-Ries.2C_Eric_2-0\" class=\"reference\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Minimum_viable_product#cite_note-Ries.2C_Eric-2\">[2]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I thought I would extend the concept to model railroad layout design to determine what would be the simplest design that met my goals for the MQR. A Minimum Viable Design is largely concerned about how trackage is connected to each other; concepts like the the geometry and length of the mainline, the minimum radius of curves, easements, siding length, etc will not be finalized until the final layout design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For my former garden railway (pictured above), I could argue that the minimum viable design was in fact a circle of track. At that time, I really wanted no more than a loop of track to run my one train. The layout had two switches on it but I hardly used them at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Givens for the MQR<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>The design must support continuous as well as point-to-point operation, representing both ends of the line (Coed-y-Parc and Port Penrhyn)<\/li><li>Steaming-up of engines must be done off of the mainline track.<\/li><li>For the point-to-point option, it must be possible to prepare the train for its return trip without having to physically pick up any rolling stock or locomotives. This requires a runaround track at every end of the line. Turning of locomotives either by a turntable or wye is not required; the prototype Penrhyn Quarry Railway did not turn their locomotives.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Minimum Viable Design for Single Train Operation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>It was reviewing Rob Bennett&#8217;s Weston Railway design that gave me the idea of the Minimum Viable Design concept: I liked the way Rob put the two &#8220;ends&#8221; of his railway beside and parallel to each other (lower right corner) but was concerned about the number of switches it took to implement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway.jpg\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"600\" height=\"369\" src=\"http:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway-600x369.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1167\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway-600x369.jpg 600w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway-150x92.jpg 150w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway-300x184.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway-768x472.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/Weston-Railway.jpg 1889w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 709px) 85vw, (max-width: 909px) 67vw, (max-width: 984px) 61vw, (max-width: 1362px) 45vw, 600px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Rob Bennett&#8217;s Weston Railway<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>Things clicked when I doodled out a design where the runaround trackage was shared by both ends of the line. To make this work, I felt it would be necessary to create some sort of visual separation between the two ends of the line. &nbsp;The prototype Penrhyn Quarry Railway helped out here with the long slate wall on the south side of Coed-y-Parc. &nbsp;Such a wall would not look out of place in Port Penrhyn either. This insight led to the MQR MVD #1a:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a.png\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"600\" height=\"213\" src=\"http:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a-600x213.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1203\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a-600x213.png 600w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a-150x53.png 150w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a-300x107.png 300w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a-768x273.png 768w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1a.png 1369w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 709px) 85vw, (max-width: 909px) 67vw, (max-width: 984px) 61vw, (max-width: 1362px) 45vw, 600px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Marchlyn Quarry Railway Minimum Viable Design #1a<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>This design requires just 5 switches to meet the givens listed above for single train operation; the trade-offs are that: 1) for the runaround move, a locomotive must make use of the track at the other end of the line; 2) physically the two ends of the line must lie together and some means of scenically separating them must be devised. On the advantage side, this arrangement creates a working wye so that locomotive direction could be reversed if desired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Typical operation would go like this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>A train can be steamed up on either side but let&#8217;s assume the train is built up and steamed up on track B.<\/li><li>It proceeds on track C towards the mainline.<\/li><li>Entering the mainline on track D, it can extend its run using track E.<\/li><li>To complete its run, the train enters track F and stops on track G. The locomotive is uncoupled from the rolling stock.<\/li><li>The locomotive moves to track A, then backs up through tracks B and H until it reaches track F.<\/li><li>The locomotive then pulls forward and recouples to the rolling stock on track G, ready to return.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>Adding one switch removes the need for sharing the runaround trackage between the two ends and allows Coed-y-Parc and Port Penrhyn to be physically separated. This represents the MQR MVD #1b design:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b.png\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"600\" height=\"213\" src=\"http:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b-600x213.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1204\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b-600x213.png 600w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b-150x53.png 150w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b-300x106.png 300w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b-768x272.png 768w, https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-content\/uploads\/MVD-1b.png 1370w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 709px) 85vw, (max-width: 909px) 67vw, (max-width: 984px) 61vw, (max-width: 1362px) 45vw, 600px\" \/><\/a><figcaption>Marchlyn Quarry Railway Minimum Viable Design #1b<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p>This fundamentally is Rob Bennett&#8217;s Weston Railway design stripped back to its basics.&nbsp;Typical operation would go like this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>The train is built up and steamed up on track B.<\/li><li>It proceeds on track C towards the mainline.<\/li><li>Entering the mainline on track D, it can extend its run using track E.<\/li><li>To complete its run, the train enters track F and stops on track G. The locomotive is uncoupled from the rolling stock.<\/li><li>The locomotive moves to track I, then backs up through track J until it reaches track F.<\/li><li>The locomotive then pulls forward and recouples to the rolling stock on track G, ready to return.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>Here I think the addition of one switch would substantially improve the overall operation of the layout, despite losing the wye. &nbsp;In addition, it will make it much easier to scenic as Coed-y-Parc and Port Penrhyn no longer need to be co-located. In the next post, I will review the design in the context of operating two trains.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>There is a concept in the software development world called the &#8220;minimum viable product&#8220;. From its Wikipedia entry, a&nbsp;Minimum Viable Product&nbsp;(MVP) is &#8220;one with just enough features to satisfy early customers, and to provide feedback for future&nbsp;product development.&#8221;[1][2] I thought I would extend the concept to model railroad layout design to determine what would be &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/minimum-viable-design-part-1\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;MQR Minimum Viable Design &#8211; Part 1&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1217,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1183","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-layout-design","category-marchlyn"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1183","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1183"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1183\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1217"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1183"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1183"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.stationstudios.ca\/trains\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1183"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}