Layout Ideas - Am I Asking Too much?

[ezmike]

I have no vision when it comes to "visualizing" and putting to paper what I want and knowing how to accomplish it. I know the things I want to do, the accessories I want to use and a very definite spacce for the layout. This is my very first permanent structure and i have my own room. I have RRTracks and I've been pouring over existing track plans to try and piece something together without much success. I'm going to continue but if push comes to shove I may throw it out there and see what the expert more creative minds come up with.

Here's what I have and want:

Layout is an inverted "U", demensions are 10'x10'6"x12 with basically 54" ends, 48" corners and 36" straight sections between the corners and ends. (does anyone know how I can paste the pdf of the benchtop here?)

Accessories are post war Lionel:

A 456 Coal Ramp and 397 Coal loader must operate on parallel tracks so I can work them together, a 497 Coaling station should have track running through it, either on the same passing siding as the 397 or on it's own siding. The coaling industry can be at one end of the layout.

Then I have a 362 Barrel loader and 3 Automatic Milk stands, they can go together on one siding or the 362 on one and the milk stands on another at the other end should work for these. That's it for the operating accessories for now.

I'd like at least 2 mainlines, an outer and inner with at least one reversing loop, a crossover, spurs or sidings to hold cars and or whole trains, at least one mountain with a tunnel and elevated track... I want to run at least 2 trains independently. I'm using tinplate track.

 Its a lot, I know, but I"m going to give it my best shot before I throw up my arms. Am I asking too much for the space I have?

 What do you think?

Mike

[Texas Zepher]

I haven't had time to read through and figure out what all these things are but for now --
1.  What is an "inverted" U?  Does that mean the center doesn't open into the room?
2.  The reversing loop.   A single reversing loop will allow the train to change directions once but to get it to go the other direction it must be backed through.   Do you really want 2 reversing loops.  One in each direction?
3.  Are you planing on using only standard O curves (31" as I recall) or do you also have O-27, O-72, and/or other curve sizes to use?

[ezmike]

Texas Zepher,

1. By "inverted U" I mean that when you walk into the room you walk into the "U" so, while standing in the doorway there's bench work against the wall to your left, straight ahead and to to your right but none against the wall with the doorway. I'm not sure I'm using the correct terminology calling it an "inverted U".

2. I'd like to be able to reverse the train again without backing it through the turnout go change directions.

3. I'm planning to use "O" gauge curves with 31", 42" & 54" radii as necessary.

Mike

 

[BRJN]

Disclaimer: I have never had any Lionel equipment so I have no real idea of its size.

You will want to get out your accessory sets and a few pieces of track and the cars you will use to serve those industries, set them up, and measure how long / wide / tall everything is.  This will help you figure out places where they will fit.

You could look into a helix (see Model Railroad Planning 2008) to get trains up / down between two levels.  This would allow you to build the mountains along the back wall of the room.  Maybe two helixes, one on the left and one on the right as you walk into the room.

If you have a double-track line in mind, why do you need reversing loops?  Run some of the trains going clockwise on one track, and some running counter-clockwise on the other track.

[Texas Zepher]

Then I have a 362 Barrel loader and 3 Automatic Milk stands,

I can't tell from my picture of the 362 if it loads from the end or the side?

Anyway

I'd like at least 2 mainlines, an outer and inner with at least one reversing loop, a crossover,

That is fairly easy.  Are you after a "double track" look or do you want the loops more separated.

spurs or sidings to hold cars and or whole trains, at least one mountain with a tunnel and elevated track.

harder

Its a lot, ..., am I asking too much for the space I have?

Well, below is my first shot at meeting some of your requirements.   And well, Yes, that might be too much for that space. 

In the plan, the coal ramp would be on the longer track angling from the far right toward the bottom.   The coal loader would be on the side track parallel to it.  One or two of the loaders could fit on the siding that runs through the center of the top.  I would of course add a couple more crossovers, but any more track than this and it would just be crowded.

 

[ezmike]

Guys, I've been away for a couple of days so pardon the delay in getting back to you. Thanks for your suggestions and help.

BRJN, that's an idea and then run something elevated to add another look.

Texas Zepher, thanks for your input, some of you guys are just amazing. I'v spent days on this not and haven't gotten nearly as far as your first shot. I noticed that your plan has the 12' section on the top. My top is 10'6" and the right leg is 12'. Can I shorten the top?  I'm sure I can lenghten the righ side track but I thought I'd let you know in case to have any other ideas or modifications to this.

The 362 loads/unloads from the side, so the cars pull up along side it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "double track look", but I'm really open to any suggestions. Do you mean 2 trains running side by side? What would you call what you put together?

I can live with modifications to the sidings, spurs, mountains and elevated track.

Which loader and which siding are you referring to that could run through the siding at the top?

Are you using RRTrack software? How can I tell the radii of the curves you used?

Can I run 2 trains indepently in this design? 

Thanks again,

Mike 

[Texas Zepher]

I noticed that your plan has the 12' section on the top. My top is 10'6" and the right leg is 12'.

Drat, I figured I would mis-understand some part of it, but that is a pretty major difference.  That is going to make the space between the two ends of the "U" really tight.

The 362 loads/unloads from the side, so the cars pull up along side it.

That is good it will fit in more spaces more easily that way.

I'm not sure what you mean by "double track look", ... Do you mean 2 trains running side by side? What would you call what you put together?

Yes and yes this is a double track mainline.  The two loops run parallel to each other over the whole layout.

Which loader and which siding are you referring to that could run through the siding at the top?

The none coal loaders umm I don't remember without going back and looking at the original post -- milk and barrel loaders.   I put all the coal on the right hand side.  I figured the coal ramp would be the hardest to fit so I put it in first.

Are you using RRTrack software?

It is Right Track software by Atlas.  The curves are 36" with 54".  Unfortunately it doesn't have a 31", but I figured it would be close enough at least to get an idea of a direction for the layout.  To get the larger curve at the left bottom, I mixed sections of 54" with 36" to get effective radii of something like 48"-50"

Can I run 2 trains indepently in this design? 

Yes.  One on the outside loop and one on the inside loop.   Assuming the trains are controlled with simple AC power, this would require the center rail to be insulated between the turnouts of the crossovers.   Lionel also has the new TMCC that will allow more than two to be run independently without the insulated joiners.

[ezmike]

Texas Zepher,

Thanks for your help. I'm impressed with what you came up with.

If there's anything else or another thought or layout possibility with the new dimensions pops into your head let me know.

I'm going to try using RRTrack to plot what you sent. Did you alternate the two different radii to get what you have or another formula?

I am using simple AC with a post war ZW and 2 KWs. I've insulated turnouts in a floor layout I had before the completion of the Train Room. It worked out pretty good, I never got to the point of using SPDT center off switches with it though I might try it here just to be safe.

Right now I run only post war, so my understanding is that I can only use the TMCC control to operate the engines on the line but not multiples on the same line. That's where the computerized electronics of the TMCC equipped engine comes in.

I have to tell you though, I looked at the actual "drawing of the bench top and I don't see how it fits. If I figure a way to send it to you I will. It must be the same way as what you posted. How did you do it? And, do you mind?

Mike

[HarryHotspur]

ezmike - If you're using Lionel track, I believe they demoninate their curves in inches of diameter and not radius. Perhaps that's why TZ's plan doesn't seem to fit. Just for what it's worth.

[Texas Zepher]

ezmike - If you're using Lionel track, I believe they demoninate their curves in inches of diameter and not radius. Perhaps that's why TZ's plan doesn't seem to fit. Just for what it's worth.

Oh drat again.  I kept saying radius because I am so used to using it.  The curves I used were O-36 and O-54 which I believe would be 18" radius, and 27" radius respectively.

[Texas Zepher]

I'm going to try using RRTrack to plot what you sent. Did you alternate the two different radii to get what you have or another formula?

No formula.  It was totally eye-balled.  I usually try to start and end with the larger radii.   I used lots of 1/2 and 1/4 sized pieces.

Once again it was just a first draft, on which I usually don't try to be real careful with things like that. 

[ezmike]

Harry,

You are correct, Lionel track is measured in their diameters, therefore O31 curves have a 31" diameter and so on.

Texas,

Thanks again, it is pretty darn good for an eye balled first draft. More than I've been able to come up with after many days of trying, although I am getting better at it. I just cannot "see" the results, if you know what I mean. For instance, putting those 2 accessories at an angle never occurred to me nor using crossovers on the way you did. If you don't mind I'll e-mail you a diagram of the dimensions?

Mike 

[Texas Zepher]

I just cannot "see" the results, if you know what I mean. For instance, putting those 2 accessories at an angle never occurred to me nor using crossovers on the way you did.

Comes from years and years (about 40 worth) of designing and analyzing layouts.

If you don't mind I'll e-mail you a diagram of the dimensions?

Sure, my e-mail is on my profile page.

[ezmike]

Texas Zepher,

 Okay, thanks, I'll do it when I get home from work this evening. I really do appreciate your suggestions.

Mike

[ezmike]

Texas Zephyr,

 Diagram sent by e-mail.

Mike 

[Texas Zepher]

Ok - nine months later and several private messages in between but.....

Here is a first simple mapping for a main line with the accurate space.  The outside loop uses 54" curves minimum on the outside loop.  Since you are using 52" curves yours should fit a bit better.  The inside loop uses a combination of 45" and 52" curves.  Just wanted to do this to get started and make certain I was using the right sized bench top now.

http://www.walkersquawker.net/images/mikemainline1.JPG

 

Here is the same concept (flat) except both tracks make loops using 45" and 54" curves.  I also added in approximately the same industrial track and coal loader track.

Here is the first attempt with the new specifications  The passenger station is in red.  It sits on a hill overlooking the rest of the layout.  The blue is a bridge overpass.  The black are tunnel portals.  I do not believe the coal loader will really work here unless the upper track can come straight on without having to go "up" the ramp.  Likewise I don't think the grades will allow the reversing loop on the left hand inter loop.  The industries will probably have have to just come from the more center track and "switch back".

 

[dmestan]

Texas - that looks real nice.  I've been trying to plan an O gauge layout myself.  What do you charge?

Don

[Texas Zepher]

 Here is another idea.  Instead of two separate loops, only one loop that goes twice around.  There are two hidden holding tracks under the passenger station (station in red).  The double loop on the right would have the outer larger loop all at level 0.   The inter circle is going down from the right edge around and to the center where it would reach level 0.  Has some interesting scenic possibilities.  The right inside loop is compromised as it uses some 36" curves.   If this is of interest, it could be done better and the industrial tracks worked in.  The best place is probably the center of the left had loops.

holding tracks

 

[Texas Zepher]

dmestan

that looks real nice.  I've been trying to plan an O gauge layout myself.

What are your design criteria?

[mobilman44]

Hi!

I have only read your original posting, and none of the previous "answers".......

As you are looking to build a Lionel layout, I strongly urge you to repeat your question to that Forum that deals with the "toy" trains.  I am NOT being derogative when I say "toy", for I have a pretty large collection of them myself.  But the fact is, most of the folks on this forum are scale modelers in HO or N gauge, and the Lionel is a whole different ballgame.

Hey, just make sure you build that layout - and ENJOY !!!!!

Mobilman44

[dmestan]

Texas, I was half kidding, but when the time comes that I have a rough plan I'd sure appreciate some feedback.

Mobileman, not sure about the OP, but I spend a lot of time on the Toy Trains forum.  However it's nice to get a different perspective from the scale operating guys.  Yes Lionel trains are a different animal but Texas did come up with a nice feasible plan.

don

[Texas Zepher]

Ok, starting to get serious.  Here is a slightly different concept where the two sides of the "U" are different.  One loops to the front and the other loops to the rear.  There is a long bridge over the track to the left.  To the upper right the station has its own separate track where passenger trains can get off the main to make their stop.  The coal loader tracks come off the high front tracks on the right making the loader be easily accessible and visible.  Likewise the industrial tracks on the left are all at the same level with the bridge as the backdrop.  Another tunnel could be added in the lower left without effecting anything.

One could curve the industrial tracks that I have dead ending into the hill around to be in front of the station.  This would look very much like Omaha NE, facing south from 5th & Jones or so. 

To get this the 54" curves were abandon to a large degree and the 45's and 36's are used more heavily. 

[dmestan]

Texas, grade may be a concern here.  On the left loop, what is the track distance from bottom to the bridge?

don

[Texas Zepher]

dmestan

Texas, grade may be a concern here.  On the left loop, what is the track distance from bottom to the bridge?

I calculated 171" run and assumed O-gauge would need 6" clearance which calculates to almost exactly 3.5% grade on the inside track.   This could probably be lessened a tiny bit by going with the 36" and 45" curves with straight tracks like I did on the right side.  As I recall my tinplate trains this not hard for them.

[Texas Zepher]

Texas Zepher

 

One big down side of this arrangement over the more symmetrical one is that the existing tunnel portals are not as exposed and therefore not as good looking.

[aflyer]

Texas Zepher,

I have just visited your website, very nice photos, and track plannig.  I have viewed the work you have done for Mike, because I am looking for a similar layout for my AF trains. I currently have a flat 5 X 10 layout with a double loop,small mountain,  a couple small sidings, and way too many accessories.  Thank you for the motivation, I have to sign off now and go get out the tape measure.

Thank you for sharing your efforts.

George