Hello everyone. I'm looking for some advice on what layout design software might be right for me. I'm pretty good at sitting down with pencil, paper and my track template to draw things out. But I'm always changing my mind, finding new ideas or inspiration. So i want to stop wasting 36" x 36" sheets of paper and just do it on my computer where making changes isn't such a bid deal. I've looked at trials of CADRAIL and a couple others I forget off the top of my head. Cadrail looks nice but trh online manual is a monster. I might like it better if i could print the whole thing easily and maybe read it on downtime at work. But from fooling around with it CADRAIL left me feeling like it was rocket science. People go to college to learn how do design on CAD systems for petes sake heh. The other programs I tried seemed either not well thought out or product line specific. I would like something that i could use to design a fairly large double deck layout that can give me all the versitility of pencil & paper. But yet not have a steep learning curve.
Any suggestions out there?
Brad B
It sounds like you are seeking MRR track planning software that incorporates the ease of a simple paint program with the features of a full blown CAD package. To my knowledge this doesn't exist.
I use XTRKCAD because it has nearly all the features of a retail MRR CAD program but is free to download and use. I was able to learn the program by following the tutorials included with it in the help section. Once through the tutorials, played with it for a week, then back through parts of the tutorials again to brush up on a few things. Overall it works pretty well for me and you can't beat the price. Opinions will vary however. Just my
Search Cad Software, etc. in the layouts forum and you will get plenty of past threads on the subject.
This comes up fairly regularly in the forums. You might want to try the search function to read other comments and thoughts.
I've used RTS (free from Atlas, http://www.atlasrr.com/righttrack.htm) and XtrkCad (open source, free from http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage). I'm not into spending the price of a locomotive on layout design software when I'm still faster with a pencil and graph paper, and my layout designs tend to be small.
RTS is easy to use. It's only drawback for my purposes is being limited to Atlas track, which means no curved turnouts. The flex track function is a little different, but it works fairly well for me. RTS has just been upgraded to 8.0, I used 7.0 and 5.0. Even though it's easier than the other packages, the tutorial was pretty necessary for me to use the package the first time.
XtrkCad is quite a step up from RTS. I could not even begin to use it without a couple of times through the tutorial with some experimenting in between. The Yahoo group for XtrkCad is also a big help. Libraries are available for almost every make of track, and are constantly being updated by a group of dedicated volunteers.
XtrkCad does not have 3D (neither does RTS), but both keep track of elevations. XtrkCad does allow you to run simulated trains. The only use I have for that feature is checking tail track lengths and spur clearances, and possibly guessing at uncoupler locations.
Both have the advantage of not letting me "cheat" as compared to drawing by hand, although I've gotten pretty good at not introducing jogs and kinks when hand drawing. And both let me easily share designs with others on-line for review and comment.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
I've not used CADRail, but I have used 3rd PlanIt, XtrkCAD and RTS. I now use RTS exclusively.
Mostly, I'll second Fred with two exceptions. Yes RTS is limited to Atlas track, but it is also limited in the way it lays tracks. With one exception, everyone who uses RTS wastes a lot of space. RTS creates too much space between tracks and creates what I call clunky layouts.
I had less trouble running XtrkCAD from the tutorials. I found it the most intuitive of the three programs.
I found 3rd PlanIt to be very counter intuitive. I'm a version behind and the 3rd PlanIt pundits say it is better now. But still, I cost me $110 and a year of use to figure out I like XtrkCAD better.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
I tried the demo version of planit and your right it did not make much sense. I will take a look at that Xcad.
Thanks alot guys. The MRR communitiy is the best :)
Make sure you get the latest, (4.02) version.
XTRKCad
Space Mouse:
I don't understand the "clunky" and "Spacing" problems you mentioned in RTS.
Please expand the thought.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Hi Brad,
It is really easy for one to get wrapped around the axel with Train Cad, regardless of the brand. I am on my 3rd layout in a couple of years, the first was a kit bashed complex Atlas published plan that turned out to be a nice bowl of spagetti. The second, completely designed by 3rdPlanIt was a much more complex plate of spagetti on two levels. My third, and hopefully last for the next few years began with a 3rdPlanIt design that I quickly abandonded when things were getting too complicated. I've not used Train Cad for over a year now, and my life and my railroad is much better for it.
I've discovered that scenery is more important to me than track density and that one level is prototypical for western railroads. Just examine Denver, both the BNSF and the UP have huge yards and both of them are on top of the benchwork!
More details on my Train Cad assessment of the products previously mentioned in this thread can be found by clicking HERE.
My
If you use the software to build a yard or passing siding, the spacing between the tracks is around 4". With XtrkCAD it is very easy to at spacing at 2-2 1/2" and threfore more yard tracks and more like the layouts we see in MR etc.
There are just a lot of missed opportunities for the people who design with RTS. The one exception to this rule is Phillip who seams to have figured out how to work the program to overcome this. I've not seen anyone else come close to what he can do with RTS. So RTS can do it, but XtrkCAD does it without thinking. Here are two HO 4 x 8's
RTS: Notice the runaround at the bottom. It is what you get with RTS.
XtrkCAD Notice the runaround at the top. Look how much more room.
Now look how at the RTS sidings. See how the designer has used all the space availible? Now look how much more is done with XtrkCAD.
Now try designing this 4 x 8 in RTS
Mouse:
Not disagreeing with you, just trying to understand.
The RTS layout example is all designed with snap track. When you put it together, the track determines the spacing. I don't understand how drawing it in a different program gives you more or less room.
The track in the other diagram doesn't even look like it is the same scale. Are you laying custom track? If that's the case, I agree that other than flex track, RTS can't do custom. But then, since it's distributed free by a track manufacturer...
I'm not saying you can't design a good layout with RTS. Phillip proves you can. But I am saying, that everyone else who has used RTS, even those who use it with flex, design layouts that waste a lot of space. The way the program works and the way it is taught, pushes people to design layouts like the first one above.
XtrkCAD, starts it tutorial by showing you lots of options.
The idea with design is to make a conception and run the track to meet the conception. With RTS, it's more about the track and getting the track to work. It takes focus off the end game.
All the plans shown are HO 4 x 8's. I got the examples from the 4 x 8 contest.
Chip,
IMHO, the end game is building the layout and running trains, not planning. Planning is the means to the end, not the end.
And from personal experiences, xtrackcad or how ever you spell it is by far the most difficult of the 10 or so cadd and drawing programs I've ever used. I consider it exactly worth what I paid for it.
Now, back to working on the railroad.
Joe
Well, i'm not done with the tutorials yet, but something I'm noticing is that the program doesn't seem to take the room into consideration. This isn't a problem on a 4x8 boring old sheet layout. But when i put in the rough 24.5' x 36' of my basement, it doesn't get into: are there any walls/rooms in this basement? Furnace, water heater, washer & dryer? Windows, stairs, sump pump? Is there a circuit box on the wall somewhere? usually is in a basement. When starting a drawing like this the first thing i get right on paper is the shape of the room and as much detail is i can get taking measurements. Then I can start to work on fitting the layout in here, getting as much as possible while maintaining accessability and comfortable room for operators.
I hope ya'll can understand where I'm coming from.
And our friend from Colorado, i totally agree it is the operation fo our trains that is the enjoyment. But some of us, like myself, get some strange pleasure in the drawing and planning part too. Maybe it's because I know i cannot afford to just jump into my construction and carefull and detailed planning makes me feel like i'm making some sort of real progress without spending much money. Part of that enjoyment is the problems you encounter to solve while you are drawing that didn't occur to you until you started getting it down on paper. Draw back there is i'm a bit fussy and don't like it if the drawing starts looking really messy from eraser marks because i change things a bunch of times as new ideas or better ways to do it occur to me. Hence the desire to draw it electonically so changes are "easy". Also it is quicker to sit down with a program and do a few minutes of work. When i draw I have to clean off the dinning room table, get out my large sheet of paper that i have affixed to wabbleboard, my rulers, template, pencils eraser, notebook, articles i refer to etc etc. So it can take me awhile just to get set up. Then there is the hassel of makeing sure my well intentioned 2 year old doesn't steal any of that stuff or start to "assist" daddy's drawing. Etc etc etc :)
SpaceMouse wrote:I'm not saying you can't design a good layout with RTS. Phillip proves you can. But I am saying, that everyone else who has used RTS, even those who use it with flex, design layouts that waste a lot of space. The way the program works and the way it is taught, pushes people to design layouts like the first one above. XtrkCAD, starts it tutorial by showing you lots of options. The idea with design is to make a conception and run the track to meet the conception. With RTS, it's more about the track and getting the track to work. It takes focus off the end game. All the plans shown are HO 4 x 8's. I got the examples from the 4 x 8 contest.
I downloaded RTS version 8 last night, and for grins and giggles spent about 2 hours to do a design in my head for the contest.
Improvements I noted right away: The program asks for the basic benchwork shape - island, L, U, doughnut are the options I noticed - up front. You select one, and it asks for the dimensions of each side. Very quick way to get started if you are using one of those shapes. There is also a convert-to-flex track feature I have not used yet, but will try in the next day or two.
I find the RTS flex track easier to use than the XtrkCad counterpart for joining track groupings. RTS will permit S curves which you adjust with sliders to get the final desired shape. There are readouts on the tightest radius as you move the sliders, so you can easily optimize the shape to your desired final appearance.
Spacing between parallel tracks is a function of turnouts selected. If you use True Track libraries (the default) the result will indeed be awkward. If you use the code 83 or code 100 library, you get both Snap Switches and Custom Line turnouts. I choose whichever suits my situation best, and will often try one and end up with the other. Custom Line turnouts are designed around a 2" separation between parallel tracks. There is also a good range of crossings. Really, the only thing lacking is a curved turnout, since Atlas doesn't make one.
The last bit of "clunkiness" comes from interspersing Snap Track curves and straights to get a curve to end up where I want it. If the new "convert to flex track" feature actually works well, those curves will be smoothed out, and there won't be any clunkiness left.
Based on personal experience, if RTS added the Walters/Shinohara and/or Peco track libraries, it would be my first choice of software, without a doubt.
Interesting Fred.
I always did like the adjustible feature of RTS's flex--XtrkCAD does the same but handles it very differently.
I hope I start seeing better quality layouts coming from RTS then.
And the debate rages on...
Joe Daddy,
I just finished reading your "train Cad" blog. Here's a quote from your write up regarding XTRKCad.
Another three weeks lost to the layout, and no discernible drawing output from the program, I just never got the hang of it.
I found it interesting that after spending three weeks working with XTRKCad you still did not get the hang of the program, YET you felt you were proficient enough with it to rate its capabilities...?
Then I looked at the marks you gave RTS and compared them to the marks you gave XTRKCad.
I can't say that I have tried 3DPlanIt but I have tried WinRail, CadRail and used RTS extensively before finding XTRKCad version 4.02. In a week I was up to speed with XTRKCad 4.02. I gave up on WinRail and CadRail. I switched from RTS and re-designed my sons 4X8 with XTRKCad. Based on my experiences with the various programs, in my opinion XTRKCad is fine and makes RTS look pretty sad.
Chip, I agree with your comments on RTS.
I too am aware, as I think we all are, that the hobby is about modeling not planning, but a little planning goes a long way...unless one likes ripping up ballasted track that is.
Edit: I see that Atlas has improved their offering a bit. That is good news. Now if only it wasn't limited to ONLY Atlas track libraries it might be very useful.
tormadel wrote:Well, i'm not done with the tutorials yet, but something I'm noticing is that the program doesn't seem to take the room into consideration.
Hey Brad,
XTRKCad doesn't have a function for determining your room size, shape, barriers, obstacles, etc. I used the line tool to "map out" my train area then I gave the lines a custom color and thickness to define them as "the room".
When I was learning XTRKCad I went through the tutorials in the help section once. Then I worked with the program for 4-5 days and went back through sections of the tutorials again. After that I was pretty well up to speed with it. It's easy to return to the tutorials to "refresh" at anytime.
I agree that planning can be fun. While we are building my sons 4X8 I am avidly planning the extension to his railroad...my future railroad. It will be some time before I even begin benchwork for my layout but I'm having a blast planning it with XTRKCad!
Have fun!
BlueHillsCPR wrote:And the debate rages on...
No debate from me Kevin, just opine. .
And thanks for visiting my website, I always appreciate visitors.
BlueHillsCPR wrote: When I was learning XTRKCad I went through the tutorials in the help section once. Then I worked with the program for 4-5 days and went back through sections of the tutorials again. After that I was pretty well up to speed with it. It's easy to return to the tutorials to "refresh" at anytime.
Every time I recommend XTrkCad that is what I recommend. You need to do the tutorial to get started, but it makes even more sense after a few days of use!
Jeff But it's a dry heat!
BlueHillsCPR wrote: tormadel wrote:Well, i'm not done with the tutorials yet, but something I'm noticing is that the program doesn't seem to take the room into consideration. Hey Brad,XTRKCad doesn't have a function for determining your room size, shape, barriers, obstacles, etc. I used the line tool to "map out" my train area then I gave the lines a custom color and thickness to define them as "the room".When I was learning XTRKCad I went through the tutorials in the help section once. Then I worked with the program for 4-5 days and went back through sections of the tutorials again. After that I was pretty well up to speed with it. It's easy to return to the tutorials to "refresh" at anytime.I agree that planning can be fun. While we are building my sons 4X8 I am avidly planning the extension to his railroad...my future railroad. It will be some time before I even begin benchwork for my layout but I'm having a blast planning it with XTRKCad! Have fun!
Yeah that is all I'm saying. These programs so far seem really good at designing 4x8's or something small where the whole thing is contained on a little table. I will try using the line feature to draw out the room features and the edges of the table and see how that goes.
tormadel wrote:I will try using the line feature to draw out the room features and the edges of the table and see how that goes.
This is typically how most, if not all CAD programs are. There aren't too many applets that do things for you. The asumption is I think that if you can design something with the CAD program, you can do things for yourself, and probably want to. At least that has always been my take on CAD software.
My little table, courtesy of XTrkCad:
tormadel wrote: BlueHillsCPR wrote: tormadel wrote:Well, i'm not done with the tutorials yet, but something I'm noticing is that the program doesn't seem to take the room into consideration. Hey Brad,XTRKCad doesn't have a function for determining your room size, shape, barriers, obstacles, etc. I used the line tool to "map out" my train area then I gave the lines a custom color and thickness to define them as "the room".When I was learning XTRKCad I went through the tutorials in the help section once. Then I worked with the program for 4-5 days and went back through sections of the tutorials again. After that I was pretty well up to speed with it. It's easy to return to the tutorials to "refresh" at anytime.I agree that planning can be fun. While we are building my sons 4X8 I am avidly planning the extension to his railroad...my future railroad. It will be some time before I even begin benchwork for my layout but I'm having a blast planning it with XTRKCad! Have fun! Yeah that is all I'm saying. These programs so far seem really good at designing 4x8's or something small where the whole thing is contained on a little table. I will try using the line feature to draw out the room features and the edges of the table and see how that goes.
I am not sure that I understand what your problem is. If you start with a piece of paper, you also have to decide whether to just draw your layout or whether to draw the whole room and then draw the layout inside the outline of the room.
No different with CAD software. Measure your room size. Enter that as "layout size" - it should really have been called "Size of area drawn".
Measure where you have obstacles (walls, heaters and what not). Mark on drawing where these things are.
There are several types of line drawing tools available. If you use the line drawing tool called "draw table edge", you can use that to outline where the edges of the layout need to be - ie where walls, aisles and other lines track cannot cross will be. Gets drawn in a heavier style.
You should also have a quick look at the layers functionality. Put stuff you want to see on the screen, but does not necessarily want print out, in a different layer from the one where you draw your track - that includes labels, placement of beams under the layout etc. Display of layers can be clicked on and off in the GUI.
Smile,Stein
Yeah that's all it was is that i just hadn't found the way to draw lines etc with it yet. I seem to be suffering from a high degree of inpatience. Like my wife says "I have to READ?!"
Just a matter of me allocating time to really sit down and learn it instead of just futilly playing around.
tormadel wrote: Yeah that's all it was is that i just hadn't found the way to draw lines etc with it yet. I seem to be suffering from a high degree of inpatience. Like my wife says "I have to READ?!" Just a matter of me allocating time to really sit down and learn it instead of just futilly playing around.
Do the tutorial! You will feel like you are wasting your time, but in the end it will save you hours!
http://www.anyrail.com/download_en.html
Has anybody tried this yet? Super simple and really powerful! It's got a great selection of libraries. All the tools are SUPER EZ to use. I didn't even have to read the manual. I built a layout in about 15 minutes with it! Highly recommended!
Tormadel!
Mark the piece of track(s) you want to connect to any other track. It will normally became red. Then click the "Join track" button. Hold down the shift key while clicking on the two ends of the tracks you want joined. Thats all!
Thank you for the input NOF. I think i found what my problem may have been. I had track on the far left wall mostly marked out and i was trying to extend it around a curve onto the penisula across the 4' aisle. On the peninsula i was laying a single 9" piece of straight track to mark where i wanted the curve to end from where it started on the other side. But the easement automatic build track between 2 points was having some issues with my placement I believe. I then tried to simply lay it piece by peces starting on the right side. When you "connect 2 tracks" and both of them are single pieces it moves them both in a comprimise to link them. But when i started on the other side where a large body of tracks were already connected it would only move the single piece not the collection of interconnected existing tracks.
Now it's on to solveing the next issue <grin>. A long string of problems large and small make up the design of anything. So I'll take some sugar with my occasional frustration and ask my fellow modelers for advice when I get stuck and carry on.
Brad B :)