After some thought and review of all the responses to my other thread, I've redone some things and gotten rid of others and come up with this...
WOWEE ZOWEE!!
Now THIS is the PLAN!! Double mainline, good yard access, great roundhouse and lots of sidings for the local to work! Looks like there'll be good scenicking opportunities, too!
I don't like the access from the yard lead to the A/D tracks, but I can't see a better way to do it. As it is, the yard switcher will have to use part of the mainline to clear the A/D tracks. Guess the hostler will just have to live with it! LOL
Overall, I like it!
Darrell, quiet...for now
I'll give that one some thought, of course I didn't realize it t the time because of forest:tree issues... I think the only change I might make is to either hide a crossover to make it a folded figure eight as I did in the other plan or just deliberately put in a double slip switch...
I can almost see my Bachmann Spectrum Mallet dragging a coal train, or that empire builder...
Forest? What forest? I can't see ANYTHING through these d*mn TREES!!! LOL
I like to mentally run a train around a layout plan and imagine how it's supposed to operate. Gives me an indication of potential problems. But it only works on OTHER PEOPLES plans! Doesn't seem to work that way on my OWN plans! LOL
If you look at the middle of the left side, there is an opportunity to have one or both of the mainlines cross over, which could result in some interesting effects. If you just did it with the inner loop, then you might have the scenic interest of either a bridge or a diamond crossing, and if you add in crossovers to the outer loop then you could use this inner loop as a return loop to turn trains. If you did the same with both main lines, crossing either at grade or with some vertical separation, then you'd create a mobius strip which would act like a single longer mainline, which could be fun but it wouldn't let you run two trains in independent orbit. I'd say keep the yard at the lower elevation, then the mains as they exit to the left would bend down, pass under the bridge and begin climbing as they sweep around the loop at the bottom left, then pass over the bridge and head towards the curves at top left. Rest of the plan is as you've got it drawn. Doing this, a further opportunity is that the yard lead can follow the mains and pass under the bridge as well, if that will gain drill track length.
This configuration would put a nice-looking bridge with decently long approaches at an acute angle to the front edge of the layout... I think the aesthetics of track that moves from foreground to background is far better than just tracing the perimeter of a layout. It works you into the scene and even makes it seem deeper, because while one part of the scene has a deep background, another part has a deep foreground, and they work together to help your mind put together a wider world. Plus, you get the vantage point of looking down along the tracks rather than just from the side.
Of course, this is all predicated on using grades and vertical separation. To do it all flat would mean a large junction, and also a limit on train lengths (they can't be longer than the loop at bottom left, as you'd have the engines swinging around and meeting their own caboose at the diamond).
Just fooling around but thinking of a rural layout serving a small city...
Good idea to imagineer the scenes of the layout, which way you'll be viewing, how to set up viewblocks, how each scene is unique & has a purpose, etc.
If you keep the mountains / tunnel in the back left, you can cut away the baseboard and leave space for a hand to reach any derailings in there. That's better than removeable mountains, IMHO. Otherwise, that back left corner is a far stretch for any arm besides Wilt Chamberlain, Mr. Fantastic or Ms. Incredible.
The other issue I see is the "S" curve around the lake. Looks "S"naky. Test it out! Would be a shame to have to have to "abandon" that line / section because of uncoupling / grinding issues.
Is Penneburg / back lines going to be elevated at all? or is that going to be a valley between the bottom industry & the wall on the left?
Are you operating clockwise or counter? If counter, there's very little opportunity to go from outer main to inner, and thus into the yard.
Can take that yard lead that angles at 10oclock and curve it down and connect to the inner main just above the bottom industry? Then you could also have a crossover from inner to outer to allow outermain trains in.
I like yr idea of having 3 separate scenes. It's coming along!Cheers!--Mark
M.C. Fujiwara
My YouTube Channel (How-to's, Layout progress videos)
Silicon Valley Free-moN
I see two things.
-The guy who overcomplicates things,
-Morgan
Yes they are number 4 switches, I somehow wound up with a couple of dozen of both right and left #4s... all of my freight and all but three of my passenger cars are shorties... I have four Empire Builder passenger cars, but they've never been out of the box... My thoughs are that the outer loop is for the passenger trains and the inner for the freight, but I think either will run inside... Of course I'll know when I connect the track anf run my longest loco around it pulling a combination load of freight and passenger cars just to set up trouble.... I've done this in the past-connecting the track in order to trace around it and then running a ridiculous consist just to check my math... I don't care what the software says, nothing like a good old fashioned try out to see if you need a do over, before you lay all that track on roadbed...
PB&J RR Yes they are number 4 switches, I somehow wound up with a couple of dozen of both right and left #4s... all of my freight and all but three of my passenger cars are shorties... I have four Empire Builder passenger cars, but they've never been out of the box... My thoughs are that the outer loop is for the passenger trains and the inner for the freight, but I think either will run inside... Of course I'll know when I connect the track anf run my longest loco around it pulling a combination load of freight and passenger cars just to set up trouble.... I've done this in the past-connecting the track in order to trace around it and then running a ridiculous consist just to check my math... I don't care what the software says, nothing like a good old fashioned try out to see if you need a do over, before you lay all that track on roadbed...
Smart, it never works in real life as it does on paper or digi. TheAtlas is off in a few places, especially the radii for flex track. It think they'll make it around the inside, least the shorties