Hi, Ken!
No, we don't live far apart. I think I still have your phone # somewhere in my desk. I've just never taken the time to call and visit (my bad!). I don't even get to K-10's as much as I used to!
I've been lurking on the forum for a long time, only posting when I have something worthwhile to contribute. Then I started the "Dream Layout Quest" thread. Lots of activity!
But I'm on model railroading hiatus for the time being. Too much else to do! I'll get back to the the Quest soon. Once I have something more definite for a trackplan, I'll design the benchwork and start building. THEN I'll give you a call! LOL
Ken, I'm really impressed with how far you've come in only a few years. You picked up a LOT of knowledge along the way and you're always willing to share your knowledge and experience.
Now if we could just get you to put a train in your avatar................... ROFLMAO!
Darrell, quiet...for now
Paul,
Yes, I looked at some sort of peninsula to hold the roundhouse. I roughly calculated that the roundhouse would fit on a 28-30" peninsula (sideways, of course, since the roundhouse is over 3 feet long!) My problem was getting believable access to the RH from the layout. "Believable" is the operative word here! I'd have to have pretty strange approach tracks from odd locations in the yard area to get to the peninsula.
I also thought about putting a passenger station on a narrow peninsula. I haven't drawn a plan with that yet. It would be more workable than the RH, but access would still be a problem.
I like the simplicity of your plan. And you've captured the overall layout size perfectly. I saved a copy of your plan so I can return to it when I have more time and play with it. I also like that your RH is not really on a peninsula but more of a 'bump-out' from the main layout area. Big space savings there!
I appreciate your comments. They really get me thinking again!
Darrell, good to see you posting again. I believe you and I do not live far from each other, so when you are ready let me know and I be happy to give a hand. That means watch you work! I do pretty good now with laying rail and do good foam rock faces work.
You helped me a lot when I first joined this site all most 4 years ago.
Ken
I hate Rust
Hi darrel
Did you ever try to use a small peninsula in the centre? IT is about the idea, it's not worked out nicely. But no access problems at all; when you enter the room you'll see just a building, go around the corner......
Have fun with your mobile home as well
Paul
Thanks for the link, Doc. I've bookmarked it for future reference.
For those who were following this thread, the "Great Dream Layout Quest" is in hiatus. The layout pictured earlier in this post has been greatly modified. The most recent version may be seen in another old post entitled "The Great Dream Layout Quest Continues", although it, too, has received many modifications since it's first publication. The modified plan has not been posted yet.
I am working, slowly, to develop a history for my layout plan. Yes, I said 'layout plan' rather than railroad because that's more in line with what I have been working on: a history that justifies the design elements that I want on my Dream Layout. That may be backwards thinking, but it seems to be the only way to get where I want to go. I have some justifications but haven't been able to translate them into a layout plan yet.
I'm still in no rush. I refuse to submit to a deadline on what is supposed to be a "hobby"! I fully intend to enjoy this journey from start to finish! Besides, right now I'm incredibly busy trying to get a huge rental home back in good condition. That does have a deadline of Sept 1 and I don't think I'm going to make it! It's a good income producer when it's rented, but right now it's an albatross! LOL
Once more, I appreciate all the help I've received on this forum even though some suggestions set me back to square one! LOL To all those helpful folks, I promise to return with more requests for help. I just hope my impending return doesn't strike fear in the hearts of forum members!
dgwinupFor the reverser to work, the train must be in an electrically isolated section. The reverser adjusts the phase in the insulated section which is then in phase with the next block section so the train can continue in it's forward direction.
Turning trains hands-free with DCCMake an automated reverse loop for Digital Command Control layouts using off-the-shelf componentsPublished: MR 05/29/2007
Co-owner of the proposed CT River Valley RR (HO scale) http://home.comcast.net/~docinct/CTRiverValleyRR/
Would it be to your advantage to take the door to the closet off and store it so that you don't have to waste space. You could put up a curtin rod and curtin to hide whats in the closet.
Byron! Ulrich! Please don't get upset with each other! BOTH of you have contributed greatly to my efforts and I wouldn't want either one of you to NOT read this thread because of a dispute! I can't afford to lose that much help!! LOL
I will say that I had seen the RRN trackplan to which Ulrich refers when I started designing my layout. There were some features in it that appealed to me. I don't think I was able to incorporate them in my current plan, but I liked having the suggestions available.
Speaking of my current plan, I've already made several changes to it and I'm considering several more. All of the changes offered some improvement in track usage, like having the mainlines run through the straight legs of the turnouts. I'm also considering some major changes and I'll play around with some of those before posting another track plan version.
I appreciate all the help I've received here and on other forums. I try to give credit for those suggestions. I hope I don't miss anyone.
cuyamaSir Madog, I don't understand why you don't give credit for these copies of others' track plans.
Sir Madog, I don't understand why you don't give credit for these copies of others' track plans.
... I did mention that I saw in in MR, but I do not always remember who developed it. If you have a problem with that PM me next time, instead of "policing" me publically.
Thank you
Sir Madog, I don't understand why you don't give credit for these copies of others' track plans. I believe this is your version of Jerry Boudreaux's Red Rock Northern (Model Railroader June 2007), but it fails to correct some of the flaws of the orginal and adds new concerns. The issues with this layout have been discussed a few times on the forum, beginning here:http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/106033.aspx
Subscribers can see the layout here:http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=1235
As a twice-around, I don't see how this meets the original poster's request for two separate loops or a doule-track main. The yard is less than optimal, both in the original and the copy. And there's no staging in this version, at least there was minimal (if nearly inaccessible) staging on the original. And of course, there are the gimmicky double-ended industry switchback tracks on both original and copy.
If one would have the courtesy to list the original source, interested readers could find the original and compare it with the changes you made as well as finding past discussions. And it is also a courtesy to give credit where credit is due.
ByronModel RR Blog Layout Design Gallery
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Darrell,
just a quick remark.
If that grid is a 12" spacing, than your upper right track is over three feet away from the edge and that is hard to reach!
Here is a plan which is quite similar to your plan - it is based on a plan I saw in MR. It is in HO scale, but could easily be adapred for N scale, making it look very "generous".
Here's the latest revisions with changes suggested by Mystere on the trainboard.com forum:
Comments and suggestions welcomed!
Oops! My bad!
Gandydancer19 posted some comments that gave me the idea of putting the town over the staging tracks. Cuyama had several good comments in an earlier post. I confused the two responses in my reply. Sorry for any confusion. I greatly appreciate the fact that I'm getting good comments from many forum members and I'm trying to give credit where it's due.
The “Quest” continues………..
As promised, the updated version of my track plan with pictures!
I’ve made a few modifications to track plan 7, which started out as a heavily modified version of Will Annand’s CVR layout. I know it doesn’t look anything like Will’s layout anymore, but I wanted to give credit where credit was due! Besides, Will offered some comments to a previous design that helped me focus on my druthers.
Here’s the newly revised track plan:
The changes I made are minor. I relocated one of the main lines, streamlined a few areas and corrected some areas where the radius had fallen below my minimum. I also decided that I wanted some variation in height by elevating the yard and roundhouse. I also wanted to hide the “staging” area along the bottom and lower right side.
Based on a suggestion I received from cuyama on the trains.com forum, I located a town on a platform above the staging tracks. I wanted the town to have rail service, but couldn’t get a track up to that elevation without a very steep grade, so I put a lower level between the town and the inside of the layout. That allowed me to run a siding off the main, climb up to the lower town area and split the siding into two stubs.
I printed out the track plan and mounted it on ¼” foamcore. I cut and fit where necessary to illustrate topography, although the various heights are exaggerated so they would show up in pictures.
Here’s the overview of the layout set inside the train room. Both the layout and train room are scaled 1”=1’.
I want to have 3 ½” clearance for the staging tracks so the town above them will be at 4” elevation. The sidings serving the town will be at a 1” height. Grade up to the sidings will be 2%, a little higher than what I would prefer, but workable for a few cars and a loco.
The following pictures show the layout as viewed from outside the windows and through the closet and doorway into the room.
Looking in the windows:
Looking through the doorways:
I’ve put some effort into this particular track plan because it scored high with my list of druthers. I still have to work out the benchwork and scenery and figure out what industries will be located on the various sidings. I will also need to design the swing gate for the lower left hand corner where the entrance to the room is located.
I keep going back to previous plans. There are several things I like on the previous plans, but none of those plans scored as high on my list of druthers as this latest one. This could be my “Dream Layout” and the culmination of my “Dream Layout Quest”!
What do YOU think?
Darrell, quiet…for now
"Asimov wrote: "If technology is distinguishable from magic, it is insufficiently advanced."
We are not quite there yet with DCC
Grin, Stein"
Speak for yourself, Stein! As for me, right now, DCC IS magic!! LOL
Guess my brain isn't what it used to be. (So whose is??) I used to read a lot of SF and used to be able to remember stuff like that. Now all I can remember is "Grok"! And that it was from Heinlein's 'Stranger in a Strange Land'. (Wow! I think I just impressed myself!)
I need to put aside any fears and reservations and jump into DCC. Maybe a little loop of track to play with and test things on might be good. I also used to be good at soldering, but my skills have waned with the passing years. Used to build electronic equipment and worked in stained glass for several years. Maybe like riding a bicycle, it's something you never forget? Hope so!
With any luck, my next post will be pictures of the model I made of my last layout design.
dgwinup For the reverser to work, the train must be in an electrically isolated section. The reverser adjusts the phase in the insulated section which is then in phase with the next block section so the train can continue in it's forward direction. So is my understanding correct?
For the reverser to work, the train must be in an electrically isolated section. The reverser adjusts the phase in the insulated section which is then in phase with the next block section so the train can continue in it's forward direction.
So is my understanding correct?
Sounds right.
Wasn't it Isaac Asimov who said that to a prehistoric civilization, modern civilization would look like magic? Or something to that effect!
Almost. Arthur C Clarke wrote: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic". Doesn't say anything about the observer being prehistoric - just that it is hard to tell what is happing inside a black box - it might be technology, it might be magic. That statement is known as Clarke's Third Law.
Of course, SF being what it is, quite a few people has made interesting twists on Clarke's third law. Asimov wrote: "If technology is distinguishable from magic, it is insufficiently advanced."
Grin, Stein
Hi, Mike. Thanks for the explanation.
You said: "The DCC reverser detects the short, and flips the polarity only in the block it is hooked up to. Should only be 1 train in the affected area when the flip happens. Everything else should continue on its merry way. Polarity on the rails isn't as important, the decoder tells the motor to move forward or backwards."
I'm old school DC. I understand the + and - rails, etc.
Let's see if I'm getting this. As I understand it, DCC uses an AC current on the rails and the decoder converts it to DC voltage to feed to the motor. In that case, there is no + or - on the rails. How the decoder feeds DC voltage to the motor determines the direction of travel.
Now, while there is no + or - on the rails with DCC, the AC voltage has phases that alternate 60 times a second. A track that reverses on itself will have the AC out of phase where the tracks come back together. Then the reverser adjusts the phases, rather than the polarity, on the section with the reverser. The decoder still feeds DC to the motor, maintaining the direction of travel.
So is my understanding correct? Does all this happen as I described or am I still in the dark? Or is it all magic? LOL I can't do magic, I shorted out my magic wand a looooong time ago!! ROFLOL
I appreciate you taking the time to provide the information. Wasn't it Isaac Asimov who said that to a prehistoric civilization, modern civilization would look like magic? Or something to that effect! Maybe I'm a throw-back!!! Somebody call Geico quick! LOL
Hi, spearo.
I've really been thinking about that. I've delayed using DCC because of all the locos I have that aren't DCC. I recently went though a lot of my locos and sold off those that weren't good performers. They worked okay, but I didn't think they worked well enough to justify installing a decoder. Most of them were older models and conversion would have been difficult on most of them.
But with a new layout in the planning stages, I'm giving new thoughts to starting out with DCC. I know many modelers have a DPDT switch to toggle between DC and DCC and that's an alternative I've consedered. The layout would then be primarily DCC with DC as an option. I think that's a better proposition than making the layout DC to begin with with all the attendant wiring, etc. and then trying to convert to DCC.
I'll look the situation over again after I have a completed a layout plan, have the benchwork designed and given considerations to scenery. At that point, I'll know more about what electrical work will be necessary for either DC or DCC. I am leaning heavily towards DCC.
Thanks for your comments.
Darrell - If you have the equipment allready to install a DCC system THEN DO IT. It will save you lots of time, frustration and $ if you do it now. Even if you only have a handful of locos that are equiped with deocders, they will get you up and running. Depending on how much time you have on your hands, just the benchwork and track work alone will take you a significant amount of time to install so yo ushould have time to purchase/install a few more decoders.
dgwinupNow, DCC is supposed to be easier and hands-off. That's an aspect of DCC I don't really understand yet. The DCC reverser module detects the movement of a locomotive into the protected block and automatically reverses polarity so the train continues without slowing or stopping and with no input from the operator. So what happens to other trains when that polarity reverses beneath them? Do the decoders sense the change and react to it, thereby keeping the trains running in the proper direction? That's the only answer I can imagine that would work. As I've said before, I'm not the brightest bulb on the string when it comes to DCC! Anyone reading this who can explain the theory to me is welcome to try. LOL
The DCC reverser detects the short, and flips the polarity only in the block it is hooked up to. Should only be 1 train in the affected area when the flip happens. Everything else should continue on its merry way. Polarity on the rails isn't as important, the decoder tells the motor to move forward or backwards.
Mike WSOR engineer | HO scale since 1988 | Visit our club www.WCGandyDancers.com
You commented that "it looks better when a train "returns" instead of circling in the same direction all the time." I have to agree with you on that but I am willing to sacrifice some looks in the interests of much easier single-handed operations. If this layout were to be used by 3 or more poeple at one time, I would have no problem at all with the reverse loops. Being the lone wolf operator, I'm really looking for simple in terms of operation. LOL
You also stated: "DCC operation brings you really close to real railroad operation." On that, I must agree! I already have a Digitrax Big Boy DCC system. I also have a supply of Digitrax and other decoders. I don't know how many locos I have, but it's more than I have decoders for!! Maybe 30 or 40 locos, and that's speaking conservatively. Some of those locos will not be converted to DCC. Those that are NOT decent runners to begin with will not be converted. I will either sell them off or hold on to them for future re-motoring and DCC-ing.
As I have already mentioned, time is not critical at this stage. I suspect any layout plan is going to be subject to myriad revisions, adding more time to the process. Then there is the benchwork and scenery designs to plan out.
Although your schematic shows reverse loops, it doesn't look like it's overcrowded with track. That can change in the actual design, but I know you will avoid the spaghetti bowl look! LOL
In the meantime I have completed a model of the last layout plan I posted with some topographical features. Soon I will get pictures of it set in place in the model of my train room.
I am anxious to see what you have in mind but don't want to rush you. To coin a phrase in the style of Casey Stengel, "Take your time, but be quick about it!" ROFLOL
Thanks in advance for all your work on my behalf.
ofcause I will continue, but as I said, it takes some time. I need the thoughts to settle down in my brain before I can start to draw. If you don´t like reverse loops, that is no problem. I just think it looks better, when a train "returns" instead of circling in the same direction all the time. But let´s wait and see what I can come up with.
In general, I go for "simple" straight forward design, that do not look like a bowl of spaghetti.
If you have a chance, go for DCC. First of all, you save a lot of time wiring your layout, and also cost, especially when you want to go into multiple train operation. NCE Power cab or MRC Prodigy Express should be sufficient and they are not so expensive. Plus the decoders...
DCC operation brings you really close to real railroad operation.
HI, Ulrich.
Good looking schematic. Yes, I'm familiar with them.
I'm not 100% comfortable with loop-to-loop layouts, especially on DC. Wiring them isn't difficult (at least not for me). The difficulty comes in operating. While a train is in the reverse loop, the operator has to reverse the polarity on the track outside the loop. If another train is operating outside the loop, it's direction will change when the polarity changes. The simple solution is to use multiple control blocks so the train outside the loop isn't on the control block whose polarity is reversed. But multiple control blocks have to be tended, which pulls an operator's attention from his own train. On a large layout, I can see the operator (ME!) doing a St. Vitus dance trying to keep polarity correct for multiple trains! LOL
Now, DCC is supposed to be easier and hands-off. That's an aspect of DCC I don't really understand yet. The DCC reverser module detects the movement of a locomotive into the protected block and automatically reverses polarity so the train continues without slowing or stopping and with no input from the operator. So what happens to other trains when that polarity reverses beneath them? Do the decoders sense the change and react to it, thereby keeping the trains running in the proper direction? That's the only answer I can imagine that would work. As I've said before, I'm not the brightest bulb on the string when it comes to DCC! Anyone reading this who can explain the theory to me is welcome to try. LOL
But I'm not afraid of reverse loops. I've used them in previous layouts with success. They just don't lend themselves very well to hands-off operations. I have been able to eliminate some reverse loops (when I didn't absolutely need the feature) by converting a loop-to-loop track plan into a simple loop track plan. Of course, you have to be careful about placing crossovers or double crossovers in a simple loop plan because they can create unintentional reverse loops.
With that in mind, I'm not sure you'll want to proceed with a track plan, although I'm very much interested in seeing what you have in mind. I'll leave the decision to you.
In any event, you have my gratitude for all the help you've given me. It's always amazing to see how different people can take the same parameters and devise multiple solutions. Shows how inventive and creative the human mind can be!
before I start to draw a proper track plan, I´d like to agree upon the layout schemeatics with you.
Here is a pic:
Now this is not a track plan, so some comments on it.
Focal point is the "town" with it´s depot, yard and engine facility. I plan to put that on the upper part of the layout, with the town in the back of it. To the right, there will be some industries connected by spurs, the track then moving through some scenery to disappear in a tunnel to disguise the return loop. The the left of the town, the track will eventually double up in order to simulate a double track main, crossing a bridge over a river, then finally disappearing in a tunnel, again to disguise the return loop.
I hope you can picture that...
Hi, Ulrich.
Yes I have a LOT of Atlas Code 80 - about 600' of flex and enough cork roadbed for it, too! I have a mixed supply of Atlas, Peco and other turnouts. I like the Atlas and Peco Code 55, but I'd rather not go to the expense of replacing the Code 80 stocks I already had. Call me cheap...... (Okay, YOU"RE CHEAP! LOL)
You have the layout dimensions correct and you've correctly identified my druthers. Below are the answers to your other questions.
Open items:
Will you be using DCC? Eventually, and most likely not from the beginning. Too many older locos that need to be DCC'd first!
How many operatores? Most of the time, just myself. I can't imagine more than three people in the room at one time.
How many trains simultaneously? One or two on the mainlines, one working the yard. Maybe one local switcher working between or in place of one of the trains on the mains.
Will you be running one of those glorious "Streamliners? If I find one at a price I can live with, absolutely! In the meantime, I'll have to settle for my Big Boy and several 2-8-8-2's in freight service and some E8/9 A-B or A-B-B-A lashups pulling the varnish.
What era? Steam/Diesel? Steam only? Diesel only? Transition-era layout with late steam and early diesel.
Hope the additional information helps. Can't wait to see what you have in mind, but don't let me rush you!
Thanks for your help.
OK, Darrell,
let me recap your givens/druthers
U-shaped layout, with the left leg being 6 1/2´ long, the "upper" part 12´ long, and the right leg 8 1/2´.
Atlas Code 80 track (do you have that much track already, that you cannot change to code 55?)
Double track main
Classification Yard
Engine service facility with roundhouse
Passenger station / depot
Some lineside industries
Will you be using DCC?
How many operatores?
How many trains simultaneously?
Will you be running one of those glorious "Streamliners?
What era? Steam/Diesel? Steam only? Diesel only?
Things start to form uüp in my mind, but I need the input to the above.
ARRRRRGGH!!
Wrong room dimensions! The layout room is 10.5 feet by 12 feet, not the 9.5 dimension in my last post. The layout size and other dimensions given ARE correct.
Sometimes my brain just up and walks out on me without any notice whatsoever! LOL
Thank your for your offer, Ulrich.
I have a lot of Atlas Code 80 track, turnouts and flextrack. I will also use Peco and other turnouts in some places.
The room itself is 9.5' x 12'. The right side of the layout can be 8-8.5' long but the left side cannot be longer than 78" to provide clearance for the door that swings into the room. the wall along the top is 12'.
I'm nowhere NEAR the point of starting construction, so time is not critical yet! LOL After I decide on a track plan, I'll begin working on designing the benchwork for it. Since the layouts I've drawn have been about 24" wide, I am planning on some sort of shelf support, at least around 3 walls (left, top and right walls). With a swing or lift gate in the lower left corner, I'll need more substantial benchwork in that area.
Please let me know if you have any more questions.
Darrel,
if you leave me some time, I will try to design a track plan - just tell me, which track you would like to use.
I am using WinRail as the tool to draw track plans, which is the same as RTS from Atlas, only with a bigger library to choose from. Room size is 8´ by 12´, right?