Hey everyone,
I think I final have the final plan. I did not post it directly to the forums because I currently do not have access to a computer. Yes I do know I misspelled access. For reference: green track is lower than orange. http://chessiephotosho.weebly.com/
Here is yours
Here is my HO 8X10 that I think you used as inspiration
Since it appears that you are building in a bit larger space, your version probably could work overall, but I find that I personally prefer my version because it allows a continuous run -- unless you specifically don't want that. I haven't checked elevations and grades on yours.
Best of luck with your layout.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Yes I do agree. That having a continuous loop should be added. Instead of having a reversing loop.
If possible could have both.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
I've decided to take out the intermodal facility and use only coal industry until I make a plan. Also a continuous loop might be able to incorporate but I would have to build a lift or swinging bridge. I would like that but seems sketchy. Ill have to spend more time on google.
AlexanderAlso a continuous loop might be able to incorporate but I would have to build a lift or swinging bridge.
We may have a failure to communicate. My version has a continuous run with no lift or swinging gate required. You have even more space.
Well I would like to keep the track plan I have, but have a track coming from the south east mine branch to the yard. To do this I would have to make a lift out bridge which is A-OK for me. Also, the industry that is on the far west side, do you have trouble reaching it?
AlexanderAlso, the industry that is on the far west side, do you have trouble reaching it?
I didn't build the layout personally, but for those who have, they can reach from the access space or the aisle. (assuming that you mean the left side of the track plan when you say "west")
Wouldn't it be a pain to crawl under the benchwork to the access port just to switch that small siding then crawl back under to get back?
AlexanderWouldn't it be a pain to crawl under the benchwork to the access port just to switch that small siding then crawl back under to get back?
One can reach the uncoupling point from the aisle on my version. And/or use a magnetic uncoupling ramp. No crawling required.
Of course, you could eliminate it, too.
I don't see a reach problem at all with Cuyama's plan. The switch point of the turnout is near the narrow part of the aisle. The uncoupling point is just beyond that at the north side of the covered dock. It looks like a 24 inch reach is the maximum needed.
If it were me, I would switch the industry only once in a while relative to the other industries, simply for operational variation.
- Douglas
AlexanderWell my concern mainly focuses on the yard you have to reach over. An arm could easily bump a car or two.
The uncoupling point is (purposely) pretty far from the yard body tracks where cars would be sitting. And at a higher elevation.
Again, it could be left out if you don't wish to include it.
AlexanderYeah I redid the layout plan and updated my website with it. I plan to have a coal route.
I don't understand the reason for the schematic you're attempting here. The moveable gate doesn't really give you anything that a walk-in loop-to-loop wouldn’t also provide (with less construction complexity). And you'd likely benefit from a passing siding/runaround at the yard (as on the original). It just seems (to me) to be a sub-optimal use of the space – but I certainly may not be in tune with what you want to accomplish.
I don’t seem to be adding much value to your process, so I’ll bow out of the thread. Good luck with your layout.
I egree with byron.
Get rid of the duckunder or eliminate one of the turnaround blobs for better use of your space. Having both is wasting space and inconvenience.
Steve
No offence intended, but I feel the need to be blunt.
Based on your posts in other threads, I see this is your first layout. You need to understand that layout planning requires advanced skills that you do not yet possess. A first layout is best built from a proven published plan done by a reputable designer. You have far too much you need to learn to build a layout to risk the success of the entire project by trying to design it yourself.
Byron's plan, while probably buildable by a determined first timer, is almost too complicated for a complete newbie. If it is modified by someone who doesn't understand the nuances of layout planning it is almost certain to fail.
My advice is to take Byron's plan, or one created by another professional that has been built successfully before, and build it as designed without messing with it.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
Hello all,
cuyamaI don’t seem to be adding much value to your process, so I’ll bow out of the thread. Good luck with your layout.
Said diplomatically and professionally!
Thank you!!!
Hope this helps...
Post Script: "A model railroad should probably start with a concept. Why? Because much knowledge about railraoding, experience in model railroading, and thought are required before a proper concept for a model railroad can be formed. These requirements are seldom possible on a first pike. Mine was no exception."- -John Allen; Gorre & Daphetid Railroad.
j.j.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
If you were to run a train around Cuyamas plan and your updated plan, you'd discover that Cuyama's is basically a figure 8 (with a long spur/branch) and yours is a reverse loop-to-reverse loop (water wings).
You have simply folded up your water wings plan to resemble Cuyama's folded up figure 8 into the same basic shape.
And since figure 8 and waterwings plans already offer continuous running, folding them up so they pass along a doorway that requires a duckunder is probably not the best use of space.
IMO, I would simply take Cuyama's plan and splice in extra track near the narrow north side where the "3 1/2s" are as to fit your space better. As a benefit, what ever grade challenges that exist in that upper loop will be lessened with more space. Not to mention, there would be more space to put a diagonal backdrop along the branch line which could hide the access hole and one of the tight radius loops, which would enhance visual appeal. You may also be able to sneak in another small industry along the coal branch for the times you want to run something other than a coal train. And finally, the 29 inch aisle could be widened a bit by slding the loop to the right.
*I wont be refrencing myself to most replies here as this will be my final track plan with only minor tweaks*
I think this suits all my needs. I took out the reversing loop, because- through turning on my brain- I realized I have no need nor desire to have one. It looks sloppy and the lighting is poor but I used Anyrail 6 to design it, then a pencil to trace it. I designed it in sections so I didn't have to buy a key to have more than 50 peaces (sorry, but I just don't think it's worth it for one bedroom layout). All of the names were formulated from people/animals/places in my personal life and are not based off real places along the Chessie System Western Maryland line.
Going back to Cuyama's plan- and why I didn't do a walk-in design- is that since the alcove I am putting it in has no door. As well as that, it makes the layout seen slightly larger. You might be working the Sullie's yard on the west side and you turn around and see that there is a whole other side, unlike Cuyama's waterwing design which has the layout more pr less in your field of view, with slight head turning of course. I guess I just want to leave you guys knowing that I am happy with my design.
I don't really care about most replies I receive since it is real late to make any drastic changes (I have already purchased some buildings and most of the track). .... I guess I just want to leave you guys knowing that I am happy with my design.
....
I guess I just want to leave you guys knowing that I am happy with my design.
Then why post at all? If you don't care about the replies then people won't care whether or not you post here. Why should we waste our time?
This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements
If you dont want to read it then don't. I just felt the need to clarify some things I said and clear up the rather disturbing trackplan I produced earlier. I haven't wasted anyone's time- you've wasted your own.
Just wanted to close the case (thread).