I've been using a great 30" x 54" N-scale layout for several years. I have the opportunity to updste to a new larger railroad.
desires for the new railroad:
36" x 80" door layout w/ extruded foam scenery and paper mache mountains.
11" minimum mainline radius (9-3/4 allowed in sidings)
LONG mainline run: multilevel, double folded dogbone is the plan.
Switching should be able to be run without disturbing the main line, and be interesting/challenging to use. Not a timesaver, which is frustrating, but should require fiddly moves to spot everything.
No particular prototype is being modelled. Should be a fantasy line where I can run 'heritage' steam one day, a long freight the next, and a shinkasen bullet train from the year 2100 the next day after that.
Below is a rough draft of the plan, though I'm not really satisfied with it. Its a bit 'spaghettu bowl, no passing sidings, and I'm sure I can do better in 4 feet by 6+ inches for switching. the listed 2% grade may need to be 2.5% to actually get 2 inches clearance.
When I hear the iron horse make the hills echo with his snort like thunder, shaking the earth with his feet, and breathing fire and smoke from his nostrils, it seems as if the earth had got a race now worthy to inhabit it.
-- Henry David Thoreau
Seems to me that a crossover at the base of the green grade and another just past the bridges at the top of the grade would give you the passing track you want. And if you want more switching, replace the fake tunnel with an industry appropriate to the mountain setting, like a mine or sawmill.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
If you put any crossovers between the mainlines, you will create a reverse loop. Make sure you wire it properly.
Dan
Welcome to the forums.
If you haven't purchased your door yet, check a Restore or other used "stuff" store. They often have them at very reasonable prices, and even if they are damaged your foam will cover most small holes and dings. Also, consider making your mountains from foam. You can build it hollow if you want to save materials, weight almost not a factor. I have gone to construction sites and asked for the scrap, they are usally glad to have me take it.
Good luck,
Richard
thanks for the responses!
I don't think I'd want to put in crossovers on the long straights for a passing siding, if only to avoid creating reverse loops --id ike to keep the wirig simple for DC control. perhaps having a passing siding on the mountain loop? or following my grade up, just of the straights? If so, I should probably shift the yard/storage tracks to the back end, or stretch the curves with an extra 5" straight to give more room for the switching area. I'd like at least 5 industries to switch, but for the switching to be essentially self contained.
I'm also thinking of trying to resdesign in Atlas code 55 instead of code 80.
Hey, I know it'll be hours before this gets seen, but I have a second draft with better switching:
i eliminated the useless yard lead, improved the industrial sidings (though I may stretch out the runaround a bit more to make an A/D track
davidmbedardLooking at your plans, I would say to really reconsider them. You want a steam excursion one day and 11" radii will not cut it. 11" will be pushing the lower limits for sure....not only for running, but for overhangs Nd other considerations. If you want long runs, can you do an along the walls layout? What is your room space? Cramming as much rail into a limited space will only frustrate you and is the farthest thing possible from a realistic layout! Not to mention that it'll hold your running attention for about 5 minutes. Consider buying some planning books. Consider going to train shows to see what you like. Consider joining a local group. Consider, consider, consider. Nothing worse than planning a layout, building it and then starting over....very expensive. Just my thoughts. David B
didn't you read my particular wants?
I want a long mainline run that is not a simple oval: I have a huge mainline run of over 2 scale miles! Its what I want
I want challenging, interest-retaining switching: I have it, but it undoubtably could be improved.
I have room for a door, not an around the room layout. not to mention I know my limitations on what I can effectively make into detailed scenery -- I don't WANT anything larger than a door-sized layout. You are are basically suggesting that because my wants and limits aren't what you want, that mine isn't a real railroad and I should start over. Not very constructive. I know from my old layout that the steam I have (a 4-6-4, 2-8-2 and a 4-6-0) will run successfully around 9-3/4 curves, 11" should be fine. My basic design fits my needs, I just know it can be improved.
ScrewySqrl davidmbedard Looking at your plans, I would say to really reconsider them. You want a steam excursion one day and 11" radii will not cut it. 11" will be pushing the lower limits for sure....not only for running, but for overhangs Nd other considerations. If you want long runs, can you do an along the walls layout? What is your room space? Cramming as much rail into a limited space will only frustrate you and is the farthest thing possible from a realistic layout! Not to mention that it'll hold your running attention for about 5 minutes. Consider buying some planning books. Consider going to train shows to see what you like. Consider joining a local group. Consider, consider, consider. Nothing worse than planning a layout, building it and then starting over....very expensive. Just my thoughts. David B didn't you read my particular wants? I want a long mainline run that is not a simple oval: I have a huge mainline run of over 2 scale miles! Its what I want [...] I know from my old layout that the steam I have (a 4-6-4, 2-8-2 and a 4-6-0) will run successfully around 9-3/4 curves, 11" should be fine.
davidmbedard Looking at your plans, I would say to really reconsider them. You want a steam excursion one day and 11" radii will not cut it. 11" will be pushing the lower limits for sure....not only for running, but for overhangs Nd other considerations. If you want long runs, can you do an along the walls layout? What is your room space? Cramming as much rail into a limited space will only frustrate you and is the farthest thing possible from a realistic layout! Not to mention that it'll hold your running attention for about 5 minutes. Consider buying some planning books. Consider going to train shows to see what you like. Consider joining a local group. Consider, consider, consider. Nothing worse than planning a layout, building it and then starting over....very expensive. Just my thoughts. David B
I want a long mainline run that is not a simple oval: I have a huge mainline run of over 2 scale miles! Its what I want [...] I know from my old layout that the steam I have (a 4-6-4, 2-8-2 and a 4-6-0) will run successfully around 9-3/4 curves, 11" should be fine.
I think the point David is making is that, in order to accomodate your wants (long mainline, etc.) onto your givens (36x80" table), you're making some potentially serious concessions in other areas
Because of that, if you can change your "givens" around (say 2x 18" deep x 80" long tables along a wall, or in an 'L' shape), you can better accomodate your current list of wants, and possible future wants as well (such as full-length passenger cars -- assuming a 1:2 ratio between N and HO ... passenger cars have a hard limit of 12" R curves, even with modification*)
*Note -- I'm remembering my Walther's heavyweights as 26" min (as shipped), or 24" min with modifications. They might be 24/22.
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
regardless, I only have the small bit of wall real estate to put the short end against a wall that will be shared with other things (mostly bookshelves), so I'll be sticking with the door.
here is another draft design, that stretches out the mainline a bit and removes the storage yard and puts an inglenook sidings yard in the switching area.
Pic doesn't look to be linked right .
LensCapOn - I am not sure, whether the OP is willing to accept any critique or advice on his layout design. From his answers, I gather he just wants to have a confirmation of how great it is. Well, it isn´t and DavidB was perfectly right in suggesting to reconsider it.
I am afraid the OP will sink quite a lot of $$$ and time into this layout, only to find out that he wanted too much in too little a space and that he won´t be able to incorporate even a trace of realistic looking scenery. Operation will remain at letting a train circle the loop, as the yard he designed is pretty much useless with its many unnecessary switchbacks and short leads. If the OP would be open for suggestions, I would recommend to look into some proven designs, like MR´s project layout "The Salt Lake Route" or an adaption of an HO scale layout I made some time ago:
I would also recommend to invest a little time and do some reading before indulging into a costly experiment which will definitively not lead to where he wants to go. There are some excellent books available from our host (and others), just to name a few:
Martin McGuirk´s "N Scale Railroading: Getting Started in the Hobby"
John Armstrong´s "Track Planning for Realistic Operation"
But who are we - with our background of 50+ years in the hobby - to dare to give this advice
Actually, I pretty much abandoned this site due to my inability to respond in a timely manner, and my posts simply vanishing.
after seeing that this post actually showed up instantly, Let me say I've greatly changed from those posts in october.
I'm working with two basic plans: a long double folded dogbone based on this:
that curretly looks ike this:
or a much less expensive track, whose industries were insired by the track shape:
that has two variants I'm looking at:
Either with a river:
or without:
Actual costruction starts in about a month
The last two ideas remind somehow on MR´s 2010 HO project layout "The Beer Line", which was a modular concept that could be assembled in a couple of different ways.
I found this layout quite fascinating and have adapted it for a N scale layout of my own (which, alas, never got built):
The layout is of similar size of what you can accomodate, but looks a little bit more "elegant"
anyone else?
I see the Beer Line similarity
Is it better with the river or without?
You could do it without the river.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
The river adds a touch of scenic interest, so I would keep it.
this is what I will probably be building:
red: mainline
orange: A/D track
Yellow: yard
dark blue: engine storage
Pink: caboose storage
light blue: industry tracks.
Purple: interchange and eventual storage yard.
back & right sides will be against the wall
I remember you posting that one Madog. You still kept the river the same though. Personally I never liked how the river just ended into a wall when in this configuration. The 'L' and 'F' layout configurations handled this better. I suppose one could model a large [brick or stone] culvert with the city built on top of it, I have seen that before but not with a building also there. I gravitate towards plausible more so than prototypical now.
I had stepped away from the hobby for a while, but seeing MR's new annual layout has peaked my interest again. I want to get the January issue and read the article first before I make a final decision though. I know share a house.. or rather some friends now share their house with wife and myself and I finally have some room build a small layout. We have a HCD that I maybe can use if it's the right size, and after cleaning out a back room there was a set of 18 inch folding closet hollow cores that maybe could be used as removable sections.
Either way we have a local 'rehab' store that is supplied by Habbitat For Humanity, so I know I can get lumber and such materials for fair prices.
Since you're buy lading on a door in N Scale, you should at least consider the new MR series that just started about building just such a railroad.
Lefty
Darn spell check! Of course that should have been "building on a door" not "buy lading." What does "buy lading" even mean?
I have looked into the project door layout. It's nice track plan, but a little too close to 'ordinary oval' to really appeal to me. I'll be watching/reading for any insights though.
Here's my primary plan right at the moment:
red: mainline.
Pink: caboose track
Purple: runaround and passenger station
Blue: Industry sidings
Orange: KATO Unitrack viaduct on piers as a curved bridge.
I plan to use this HO scale barge as the car float:
I'll just barely hold the track on it -- which is rather prototypical.
ScrewySqrl I have looked into the project door layout. It's nice track plan, but a little too close to 'ordinary oval' to really appeal to me. I'll be watching/reading for any insights though.
It's hardly on ordinary oval with it's staging at the back AND a branchline leading out of town!
Dean
30 years 1:1 Canadian Pacific.....now switching in HO
mactier_hogger ScrewySqrl I have looked into the project door layout. It's nice track plan, but a little too close to 'ordinary oval' to really appeal to me. I'll be watching/reading for any insights though. It's hardly on ordinary oval with it's staging at the back AND a branchline leading out of town!
Its still 4 left turns and keep the hammer down for the mainline
I like more meandering mainlines
you track plan is an oval squished a little in the middle. Just saying.
BerkshireSteam you track plan is an oval squished a little in the middle. Just saying.
and that makes a lot of difference