I built this layout using the Atlas layout kit. I extendened onto 4x12 benchwork by Mianne. I didn't use the turntable because it would take up to much room. I added a few extra storage tracks and used Caboose Industries ground throws. I had some issues with some sections not lining up, but resovled that by trimming some section or using different sections other than what the plan calls for. I am going to add a extension some time soon.
If this is the plan with triple track on one end, I built a copy back in the late sixties. Cheated a little bit and used a Ping-Pong table. This enabled me to add an additional 9" on each side. Every thing fit as the plan showed. I was even able to operate it, especially after I moved it out from one wall. Only had one major wreck when my then new PFM Santa Fe 1950 class consol took a dive. Only damage there was the shell separated from the tender frame. The hard part of this one was that it was all brass track, a real dog to keep clean.
It should be a real gem to operate using DCC.
nukemsmithI built this plan following the directions in the atlas track plan book #13 and everything worked with no flex track. However i tried to recreate it in AnyRail track planing Software and can't get the curves to work.
As noted earlier in this very thread, building many of these Atlas layouts involves some small gaps, tiny misalignments, angular offsets, "springing" curves, and fudging throughout the layout to make everything line up. The precision of CAD does not allow for this tweaking, so it can be hard to line things up exactly with sectional track in CAD.
It's more reliable to build with flextrack in any case (fewer track joints = fewer problems), so you might be well-advised to design and build that way for a larger layout. Not to mention that there might be more-interesting alternatives in a larger space than simply expanding the Atlas layout.
Best of luck.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I built this plan following the directions in the atlas track plan book #13 and everything worked with no flex track. However i tried to recreate it in AnyRail track planing Software and can't get the curves to work. I have also tried in other track planing software and have the same issues. I like the layout design but now i want to try and expand it to take up a bigger space than just the 4x8 sheet of plywood.
BroadwayLion This is what the LION was wondering about. Suppose they printed a track plan in 1960, and reprinted it every 10 years since. But they have changed the geometry of their track in the mean time. LION *knows* darn well and first hand that 1960s switches are different from 1990s switches. But the LIONs use flex track and a motor tool. You want geometry, I make you geometry.
This is what the LION was wondering about. Suppose they printed a track plan in 1960, and reprinted it every 10 years since. But they have changed the geometry of their track in the mean time. LION *knows* darn well and first hand that 1960s switches are different from 1990s switches. But the LIONs use flex track and a motor tool. You want geometry, I make you geometry.
The external geometry of both the Custom Line turnouts and Snap Switches have not changed since their introduction. The Custom Line frog angles are still the same, and the length of straight beyond the points and frog are still the same. Overall angles and replacement radius of the Snap Switches are still the same. That's why the Atlas plans still work the same way they always did. That's not to say the internals have not changed over the years. But the external geometry has deliberately been kept constant.
Are the Atlas plans perfect? Far from it. The designs mixing Custom Line turnouts and Snap Track (Great Eastern Trunk is an example of the mix) frequently have angular mismatches of 2.5 degrees on curves with turnouts. Once in a while you'll see 7.5 degree mismatches - Morgan Valley is the example of such a mismatch.
One also needs to consider whether actual track laid is laid with the same tolerances that are in the Atlas scale drawing. Even when all the track pieces are laid exactly per the plan, tolerances in manufacturing and track laying are going to make things match slightly differently than in the Atlas build of the layout. At least most of the Atlas layouts have actually been built to verify the plan drawing, and corrections made where needed. Not many plans published in Model Railroader can say the same.
The repeated suggestion to use flex track to compensate for slight discrepancies is an excellent one. I would not necessarily replace the 180 degree turns on the end with flex track because it is hard to get an accurate consistent radius with flex track. Rather use the flex track as a replacement for the fitter pieces - the stand-alone 1/3 18" radius pieces and the small pieces of straight. This is where flex track shines - replacing a bunch of small pieces of sectional track with gradual curves and track cut to match your specific situation.
my thoughts, your choices
Fred W
Hamltnblue Welcome to the forums One of the biggest problems with Atlas track plans is the use of turnouts. They have a few part numbers that are pretty close but not exact. If you use the wrong one it will not line up correctly. As noted earlier, the best fix is to use flex track.
Welcome to the forums
One of the biggest problems with Atlas track plans is the use of turnouts. They have a few part numbers that are pretty close but not exact. If you use the wrong one it will not line up correctly. As noted earlier, the best fix is to use flex track.
This is what the LION was wondering about. Suppose they printed a track plan in 1960, and reprinted it every 10 years since. But they have changed the geometry of their track in the mean time. LION *knows* darn well and first hand that 1960s switches are different from 1990s switches. But the LIONs use flex track and a motor tool. You want geometry, I make you geometry. You want train to run flawlessly, go ask someone else!
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Hamltnblue One of the biggest problems with Atlas track plans is the use of turnouts.
One of the biggest problems with Atlas track plans is the use of turnouts.
I don't know the track plan in question but there is slightly different geometry between Atlas #4s and the old fashioned Atlas "snap track" turnout. That could account for some variants in how things connect up. And as a prior poster mentions, even the slightest gap between pieces of track means the track is actually at a slight angle that can and will change the results.
What you do NOT want to to is to introduce even greater gaps between rail ends just to make pieces fit. if all else fails, taking one piece of flex track and cutting it to length can give you a nice smooth transition. My own advice would be NOT to try to make it the equivalent of one 9" piece of sectional track, but two pieces -- so closer to 18". And don't cut it first -- fine out the actual length it needs to be.
Dave Nelson
Springfield PA
Thanks to all for the help. # 1. Well you could say I was new to model railroading since its been 30 years since I built my last track and hung it on the back side of sliding closet doors when I wasnt using it. I have packed my gear with me for 30 years knowing 1 day I would unpack it again. Since Aug. 3 I have invested over 800.00 in track and tables and cars. I build an over under a month ago complete with a large HO scale mountain to boot. But I got tierd of it because it was complex and the cars would run fine one day then derail the next. So Im going flat trak. I saw the Great Eastern Trunk in this new Atlas book Seven trak designs complete with detailed instructions. Im 49 and this is the first time I have ever tried to build a trak layout from a plan. Anyway As I said I triple checked the trak and could not figure it out. The problem was I should have quadrachecked the track becase just looking at a piece of track its sometimes hard to differ 18 and 22. I had a 18 where a 22 needed to be and walla. Im back in the trak building game. Having fun with My new Amtrak dcc locos...in anolog form for now. Again thanks for all yer help. Chitty
I believe that I built that plan in the 80s for my son who was 4 at the time. The plan lined up just fine for me. The key is to make sure that the rail joiners are connected and there are no gaps or kinks in the curves. The kids loved it. It is triple track on one end and double on the other with some switching possible. John Armstrong and Vic Stuepeck (sp) designed the plans for atlas a long time ago, one of them was built by my parents for me more than 50 years ago, it also lined up. I also believe that the guys at atlas assembled all of the plans prior to publishing them.
You can imagine the back lash if the things would not fit or connect after sending the things out into the world with their name on it.
I am not trying to be harsh but in the case of one of the plans that atlas has sent out for years I suspect the problem is a component that is mislabeled or an extra section inserted somewhere to cause problems.
Good luck in finding it.
Unfortunately, most published track plans for sectional track don't quite line up without some fiddling. This fiddling usually leaves small gaps and places there the tracks don't meet precisely squarely. This is not ideal, because it makes the track less reliable.
As others have mentioned, replacing some of the sectional track runs with flextrack cut to length will allow you to make these connections without the tweaked joints.
Welcome to the forums.
Yes, flex track is a useful tool. However, you could go to the Atlas web site and ask them the question. If there is an error in the track listing, they should be able to tell you what is wrong. If they don't know about the problem, it would help them out to know about it.
Good luck,
Richard
Welcome, sounds like you're new to model railroading. Yes, you have to improvise, but wait, hear me out. That's a good thing. One of the great things about model railroading is the ability to create and adapt. The post above mentions flex track. It's one of the great tools of model railroading. It allows you to create track plans that flow in realitic manner unconstrained by prefab sizes. That's a good thing, because, as you see, no track plan will transfer directly to wood and rail. Small deviations add up. Also, the measurements used in track plans do not always match actual material size.
One of the key things to watch out for in published track plans, especially smaller sizes, is the designer didn't leave enough room to fit elements in. It's very easy to draw curves a little tighter or switches a little smaller than they actually are.
When you pick up the flex track, also get a razor saw, or better yet, rail nippers. These let you cut the flex track or even your other track to the exact length you need to fit. Even speciality pieces of track such as switches can be trimmed a little on the ends to fit.
This is why flex track is desired over sectional. It will allow you to lay track as did the proyotype w/ easements, spiraling turns, superelevation etc. Also longer lengths allow for better power feeds and less chance of voltage drops and dead spots.
If you're still going to use the sectional track and having troubles no matter how it checks out, lay connecting pieces of flex to tie in trouble spots. May even stop any potential trouble areas and kinks as well.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
I went to Bruces today to get all track needed for the Great eastern trunk (Atlas plan) But I outer track (the first lay) doesnt line up on the back side. I have tripple checked all track sizes and increments. Do I have to improvise. I have triple checked all of my 18 and 22 and 1/2 18ns and 1.5s and 6". Belive me I have counted every piece of track. I think the plan is an error. Help if you think you can.