Raised on the Erie Lackawanna Mainline- Supt. of the Black River Transfer & Terminal R.R.
Honestly, I think a pencil, eraser, ruler (marked in 1/16"), and a compass are more useful than any template. Lay out a grid of 3/4" squares so each 1/16" becomes 1 inch on the scale. Then draw. Just remember that a number 4 turnout is 4 units run and one unit diverge. To get some idea of what it'll actually fit like,
I forget right now exactly where I got the numbers for this, it may have been the NMRA website where they list the recommended practices for trackwork. At any rate, the green center lines is what would be drawn on a single line drawing. The important part is where the points of the turnout actually line up with respect to the center lines. The red lines are for layout of the ties. The guard rails, etc are not drawn in the above picture. Where the white lines cross is the point of the frog.
All that said, I cannot speak on the CTT template. Never used one.
Are you by any chance referring to This template??
Hey Capt.
I just have to recommend that you stick to it for a bit with the computer. I know some of the guys like the "old fashioned" pencil and eraser method, but I gotta tell you, once you get the hang of design software.... it's wonderful.
You can move an entire track section a few inches with a few clicks, substitue different turnout sizes to see how the angles might work, try radius substitutions, and bend flex track to your heart's content with a readout telling you the minimum radius you have created. Pencils and a big box of erasers just can't do that.
I really like XtrxCad. Free. Do the tutorial that comes with it step by step, and you'll "get it." And when you're done, create a 1:1 size print-out, use carbon paper to trace it onto your layout, and you will have flawless derailment-free operation.
Just my
I haven't received any new PMs, yes, I checked. Try my email instead..
rolleifix at rolleiman dot com
rolleiman wrote: What I Didn't like about it is the scale, 1:12 or 1" = 12". Other than an drafting ruler, show me one that has 1/12" divisions.
I used it extensively to plan my HO layout. I actually thought the one inch = one foot scale was very useful. I purchased two "pads" of very large size graph paper at an office supply shop. One was marked in one inch squares, the other was marked in quarter inch squares but with the one inch squares darker and more prominent. I carefully measured my room size and marked it on the large sheets. Actually my space is large enough that I had to split it into components -- no one sheet was large enough to show the entire layout.
My own layout uses David Barrow style "dominos" for planning of 2'x4' so I made a bunch of 2 inch by 4 inch green dominos and moved them around the basement room outline on the large sheets of graph paper. I penciled in several arrangements that made visual sense to me. (Having already built several of the actual benchwork dominos I could also move them around the basement to test the drawings against reality). Thinking inches for feet was actually a very efficient way to build and plan using the domino system.
Once I arrived at a small library of possible benchwork arrangements using the dominos, I very roughly sketched a few ideas I had, perhaps made "easier" (ha!) by the fact that I am trying to replicate exact C&NW trackage using track charts and maps. So the relative placement of sidings, crossovers, industries was mandated by the prototype -- my job was to see how close i could come and still be practical.
I followed Tony Koester's idea of separating the area I was trying to model into a series of LDE - layout design elements, which are the more or less 100% prototypical track arrangements connected by track. So while the entire layout is presumably an accurate depiction of South Milwaukee WI on the CNW in 1967 (South Milwaukee is four miles long, and my layout is a bit over a scale mile long so the compression is one to four, although that compression ratio is not consistent and some parts are much more compressed than that), in point of fact it is a sequence of 6 or 7 LDEs.
Once I had my ideas down in a general way I used the CTT template on the graph paper that was quarter inch squares/one inch squares to actually plan. So each quarter inch square represented 3" square. Using an ordinary ruler got me down to pretty fine degrees of accuracy. I needed to create my own curve templates since I wanted a 38" radius minimum and for my main I preferred where possible 42" and 40" double track main line curves. I found the turnout templates to be close enough for my Peco turnouts (I also use some of the large radius curved turnouts that Peco makes). Maybe it was not mathematically precise but it was certainly very close and very useful and I would use the CTT template again, in conjunction with the graph paper.
I would reproduce and then cut out the various LDE's of complex trackage as shown on the track plan. Those were handier to pin to the benchwork while I actually put down subroadbed and then track. Where possible I prefered not to modify the turnouts although frankly there is no reason to shy away from this and some modification is essential.
Dave Nelson-
CAPT
Atlas has some templates and suggestions for planning for various Custom-Line turnout arrangements in their Atlas HO Layouts for Every Space book.
Kalmbach's Model Railroad Planning 2007 came with a pretty good guide for planning layouts with pencil and paper. It had a very good section on laying out turnouts, and gave the key dimensions for Walters/Shinohara, Peco, and Atlas turnouts, IIRC. Kalmbach should be able to sell you a copy of the guide (they will make copies of articles for items no longer in stock).
For Atlas Custom-Line turnouts, the following dimensions used to apply:
I have never used a commercial template in drawing layout plans (almost all by hand), so I can't comment on its use. Some tips for drawing layouts by hand (learned by me the hard way, naturally):
Drawing a layout with software is an entirely different animal. You still want to do things in the same order. But getting the crtical curves, and turnouts contained in them, is very time-consuming, at least for me. One of the good points of the software is that it will do a very nice job of linking areas with flex track, and warning you of potential problems - at least RTS and XtrkCad do. And the structure libraries make checking structure space quite painless.
Hope this helps.
Fred W
I have always been a contrarian, so I never have found a template that matches my needs (there is a significant difference between a 26" radius and a 670mm radius - and I prefer to work in metric.) I also have a preference for pencil and paper (which may be a result of my being a straight-A student in all of my drafting and drafting-related courses.) Just give me a pad of quadrille-ruled paper, an accurate diagram of my available space in Armstrong squares and a couple of minutes' time and I'll have a rough plan, ready for detailing.
I've also learned Murphy's First Law of track planning: No paper track plan ever survives the first contact between flex track and roadbed.
If you can use a template, by all means do so - but be aware that you will almost certainly end up having to adjust the paper plan to full-scale reality when you convert it to hardware, whether hand-laid or Made in China.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Using the CTT templates or simply marking off the divergence in a general drawing or CAD program is OK for a general idea of what will fit. For tight trackage in yards or elsewhere, the actual size and configurations of the particular brand and line of turnouts starts to matter. A lot.One of my recent jobs was redesigning an entire mid-sized layout a fellow had done for himself in a general-purpose CAD program. He estimated the diverging angle reasonably well, but forgot to leave room for the actual physical length of the point rails (the parts that move in a turnout). Thus, he had most of his turnouts too close to one another to actually be built. This guy really packed a lot into his design and the general-purpose CAD made it look great. He had also received rave reviews from his pals on an Internet forum (not this one). Unfortunately, only about half of it would have fit in real life. He discovered the problem when he tried to lay his first yard ladder. Thankfully, that was early in the construction process.I've seen the same kinds of things happen with generic paper-and-pencil templates. A bigger problem with these is not having turnouts or track lines meet squarely when drawing. Even a small divergence in angle can add up to big challenges across a good-sized layout.If you are willing to re-engineer some of the design while actually laying track or if your design does not contain a lot of tightly-packed elements, these tools can work fine. Or, if you choose to use a general-purpose drawing or CAD program, build precise templates that take into account the length of the points, the lead into the points, and the lengths and configuration of the straight and diverging legs of the specific turnouts you plan to use. Then you'll know that what you draw will actually fit.Using copies of the actual turnouts 1:1 on the floor or butcher paper avoids a lot of these problems, but you still have to make sure that track ends meet squarely if your plan includes complex trackwork.
ByronModel RR Blog
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Capt. Grimek wrote:I've contacted rolleiman to see if I can receive his "donations" template and I'll return mine unopened for the two 36" box cars/reefers I had in my other hand when making the purchasing decision. (Then there was that additional #6 supertrack turnout in my "third hand" :-). I see that your name is Jeff now that I'm back at the thread.Sorry I didn't address you more personably in my email to you!Photo copy a 1"=12" square published trackplanTake it to a print shop and blow it up to actual l' squares.Lay the print out on the train room floor or benchwork and start laying track?This would be the ideal method for me if it doesn't introduce a lot more or varied errors thanother paper and pencil drawings do?What do you guys think about this method?
No problem on less than personal address.. I haven't received an email either. I sent one to you just now using the email link in your profile. If you get it, respond, we'll make arrangements and the template is yours.
With regard to your blow up idea. Sounds expensive to me but I'm sure it would work. To get a Scaled drawing that you could use a regular ruler with, blow it up 1.5x. That will give you 1 1/2" grids, 1/8" (on paper) equals 1" (actual). 1/16" (on paper) then equals 1/2" (actual). I use full blown autocad for everything and can print any scale I want so the template isn't of much use to me. It'll enjoy it's new home, I'm sure.