Track plan ideas

[SpaceMouse]

BTW,

My 88 year-old mother-in-law lives with me. She has Alzheimer's and has never seen my trains. She rarely goes in the basement and when she does she walks right by it without seeing it.

She knows I go to a train club and she sees me working on models, but she hasn't put it together that I have a train hobby.

[rrinker]

I started yet another variation which will put the staging underneath as has been suggested. Rather than repeat my comments on the plan as it stands, look at the trackplan section of my web site for the file and a description of what I was trying to accomplish. The file will be updated bit by bit over the next day or so as I get more time to work on it.

--Randy

[SpaceMouse]

Randy,

Tha is almost exactly how I had it envisioned. I would have put the blob a little closer to the wall like it was before and have a longer switching layout, but hey, I like switching and am not as fond as broad sweeping curves that don't have switching.

[rrinker]

You should see it now. I had enough time tonight to 'finalize' the changes. The big yard moved AGAIN (thank goodness for the GROUP option!). Now of course you can't see all the staging, since it's hidden below the main. I also color-coded everything.
Again - I want to try to finalize the main line and the 'big' features that are hard to place, then I will go back and add in additional switchign spots, and crossovers, and whatever. As in Track Planning for Realistic Operation - chapter 10 I think in the newest edition. First part was roughing in the main,next chapter is filling in the details.
It's great having a bunch of people to bounce ideas off of. Thanks everyone, and keep it coming!
Without further ado - track plan version 1,342,245! http://www.readingeastpenn.com/images/trackplan/newplan82405a.pdf

--Randy

[dgwinup]

Only 2 comments for you, Randy.
First, congratulations on a great trackplan! It looks fantastic! (Ithink I said that once before - worth repeating, though!)
Second, I'm still concerned about your aisle spaces. Just looking at your plan, it seems that the aisle to the left of the blue branch line is pretty narrow. My thought is to straighten out the first curve by the siding and move the curve farther down closer to the switching area. This will widen the aisle maybe only 6", but that will mean a lot to your operators.
Oops. I only have THREE comments.
Third, on the large yard, the drill track for the stub-end yard is a little short. You have plenty of room to work the stub-end, and you have a run-around next to the drill track, but the extension of the drill tract is too small. You would only be able to get one loco and maybe a car out of the stub-end at one time.
If you don't make ANY of these changes, you can still sleep peacefully every night while dreaming about operating on this wonderful layout!
Nice work!

Darrell, quiet...for now

[selector]

If you are talking about the upper one, Darrell, I agree.

[rrinker]

If you mean over by those cabinets (the square blocks), other than in front of the cabinets, it's 3' + a little all the way. That one siding right there may be cut out - or the cabinets shifter. I measured the cabinets again last night and I think I was a little generous in the drawing - better I made it bigger than it actually is rather than too small - pleasant suprises are good ones.
As for the yard lead - it's longer than the longest yard track. Oh wait - somehow there is a loose piece of track floating around inthe plan. Anyway, it WAS longer than the longest yard track. I might still flip the yard again and put the ladder to the bottom, that way the drill track and extend around the corner. I'm still not sure where to put the servicing area, roundhouse, and turntable.
The only problem I have with this plan is the bottom - there are two sets of tracks, one faling and one rising. The fallign ones are hidden behind the rising ones. So I have no idea how I would handle this scenically. Plus it's hard to put sidings off inclines, although it CAN be dne - otherwise it's a lot of linear space wasted.
One other comment to one of Chip's messages - I left the blob away from the wall for 2 reasons, one to have access to the electrical box, the other is if I put that side against the wall, I loose 20 feet of usable railroad - if someone can walk in there and operate trains, it gives additional workable space. I did a closer check last night and I can probably widen the blob about 6 inches without compromising the access, which allows more opportunities in the center of the blob.

--Randy

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrinker


One other comment to one of Chip's messages - I left the blob away from the wall for 2 reasons, one to have access to the electrical box, the other is if I put that side against the wall, I loose 20 feet of usable railroad - if someone can walk in there and operate trains, it gives additional workable space. I did a closer check last night and I can probably widen the blob about 6 inches without compromising the access, which allows more opportunities in the center of the blob.

--Randy

I was refering to moving the blob up to the top of the drawing like it was in an earlier evolution. I don't mind how it is now, it's just that the switching area down the center would be longer if the blob was shorter.

[dgwinup]

Yes, Crandell, I was talking about the upper one, but once again, Randy has pretty much beat us to the punch. By fudging on the size of his obstructions, he has given himself some leeway to move things without compromising.

Randy, I'm not looking at your track plan right now, so this is off the top of my head. If you flip the yard again, your yard and drill track can be extended around the curve. Then maybe an engine servicing facility can be added along the bottom wall. Not looking at the plan, I don't know if that would fit, but it's an idea that I had when I read your comment about flipping the yard.

The more you work on this, the jealous-er I get. What a great layout!

Darrell, quietly green...for now

[rrinker]

Yes, that was exactly my thought. I flipped the yard when it was on the bottom, and then just moved the thing as a group when I put it back on the right side. So yes, it probably should be flipped again.

--Randy

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrinker

Wouldn't you know it, I just put away my 50's issues of MR - I was reading all the old John Armstrong planning articles. Not sure if I have April 57 - is that the one with the McGinnis color scheme cover?

Murphy's Law, I've had it at hand for a year. As soon as I mention it. I can't find it. So I don't know what is on the cover. That is my birth month/year so I thought I should build the layout just to make the stars, oops I mean "cars in the rail yard" line up properly [:)]

[rrinker]

Yeah I pulled that year off my shelf and looked, it is indeed the McGinnis scheme cover. I think the article title is "The Case for the Non-Branching Branch" - a similar layout (if not the same one, I didn't look it up to check) is in 101 Track Plans - might be the same one because the one in 101 Track Plans IS credited to Armstrong.
I was once on amission to fill in a complete MR collection at least as back as far as I could go for a reasonable price - first year issues are quite rare and expensive - even the reissued set from later on, which are lacking some things. But then I finally got space for a layout, so I only casually check the old magazines when I go to shows. But I do now want to collect any issue with an Armstrong article in it, after reading the ones I have and finding that the individual articles usually elaborate on a concept that was reduced to a page or less in track Planning for Realistic Operation. Plus it's amazing how far ahead of his time John Armstrong was. Most other layout plans in MR of the 50's were spaghetti bowl types, but not Armstrong's. The man was a genius.

--Randy

[selector]

A bit off topic, Randy and readers, but I managed to borrow a 1971 edn of that book from a retired fellow who doesn't have time for trains these days. I gave it a healthy once-over and am amazed at the lengths he went to to explain himself. He sure knew his stuff, and it makes huge, huge sense.

I will read it again in the very near future, but this time, I will read it like a text and take notes!!!

[rrinker]

I'll bet that one is one of the last printings of the first edition. The two I have are a late printing of the second edition (revised in the 70's), and the newest version. Based on the changes from the second to third editions, I'll bet they cut a lot of stuff out.

--Randy

[selector]

Eleven chapters and 102 pages? Glad to see that he can still contribute, as in the latest Special Edn on Modeling the 50's. He must be in his mid-eighties!!

See, you can have trains and a long life; they go together. (Shhhh...! Don't let HER know.) [swg]

[rrinker]

Actually John Armstrong passed away last Summer or so. A huge loss for the Model Railroad community.