Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

New layout design....Need some suggestions!

2666 views
64 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 27,713 posts
Posted by rrinker on Sunday, December 8, 2019 12:14 AM

 I'd get stuck too, especially since the narrowest point literally has a point on the penninsular - I'd add a couple of more sides to the pentagon lobe so that at least the edge directly across from the other benchwork is flat. I'd still get stuck in a 24" passage.

 Maybe exaggerating a bit, as I did manage to squeeze through a WWII submarine. but a standard door width of 30" is much nicer than 24". You wouldn;t want to reduce the curve radius if you want to run modern equipment, but with a 16" radius you could gain a couple of extra inches on either side. You could get the aisle all the way to 30" but that would mean the track would only be 2" from the edge of the layout. If you can squeeze 2" out of both long sides, then you can have the tracks in the peninsula turnback 4" from the edge but still have a 30" aisle.

                                                 --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 7:45 AM

rrinker

 I'd get stuck too, especially since the narrowest point literally has a point on the penninsular - I'd add a couple of more sides to the pentagon lobe so that at least the edge directly across from the other benchwork is flat. I'd still get stuck in a 24" passage.

 Maybe exaggerating a bit, as I did manage to squeeze through a WWII submarine. but a standard door width of 30" is much nicer than 24". You wouldn;t want to reduce the curve radius if you want to run modern equipment, but with a 16" radius you could gain a couple of extra inches on either side. You could get the aisle all the way to 30" but that would mean the track would only be 2" from the edge of the layout. If you can squeeze 2" out of both long sides, then you can have the tracks in the peninsula turnback 4" from the edge but still have a 30" aisle.

                                                 --Randy

 

 

 

Thanks Randy for the feedback, i appreciate it. I did remove the sharp edges of the peninsula and it did give me a few more inches of clearence...Heres what i came up with!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 7:49 AM

hon30critter

Hi Trainzman2435,

My suggestion would be to do a mock up of the narrow spots on the aisles. If you are a skinny guy, 24" might be all right. I'm afraid I would get stuck!Embarrassed Even if you are okay with the narrow aisles, give some thought to how close the track and other items can be to the edge of the layout before things start to get knocked about by errant elbows and sleeves.

I visited a friend's layout last week. He is very slender so he is fine with his narrow aisles. I could barely get through them and it felt claustrophobic. We were discussing the locations for his signals and I suggested that he mount them where they are less likely to get knocked as opposed to where they probably should be. Same with trees, telephone poles or structures.

By the way, I have to comment on how polite and appreciative you are. Very nice to see! I'll bet your kids are polite too!

Dave

 

 

Dave, thank you sir for your kind comments sir, i really appreciate them. I was taught many years ago to treat people like i would want to be treated so i try my best. As for the tight spots between my peninsula and benchwork i attempted to "smooth" the edges of the peninsula which did in fact give me a little more room. I am not really skinny but i dont really have what you would call a "big" belly either lol. Anyways, let me know what you think and thanks again sir!

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Sunday, December 8, 2019 8:45 AM

I would suggest you go with a Peco Double Slip in your loop instead of two turnouts.  It seems to me it would make a smoother operation.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 27,713 posts
Posted by rrinker on Sunday, December 8, 2019 10:14 AM

 Looks like you can make the penninsula 6-12" longer and still maintain the clearance at the corners with the other two turnback curves. My trick to measure this is to draw a circile the diameter of the desired aisle width and place it there so you don't cramp the space too much. Not much,m but another foot or two of running distance is another foot or two of running distance - and for N scale room to stick in another turnout without shortening the clearance distance - perhaps room for a siding where youy didn't think you had room to allow your desired train length.

                                --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 10:22 AM

RR_Mel

I would suggest you go with a Peco Double Slip in your loop instead of two turnouts.  It seems to me it would make a smoother operation.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

Mel, exactly where  do you mean sir? Thanks!

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Sunday, December 8, 2019 10:31 AM

Trainzman2435

 

 
RR_Mel

I would suggest you go with a Peco Double Slip in your loop instead of two turnouts.  It seems to me it would make a smoother operation.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

 

 

Mel, exactly where  do you mean sir? Thanks!

 

 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 10:48 AM

RR_Mel

 

 
Trainzman2435

 

 
RR_Mel

I would suggest you go with a Peco Double Slip in your loop instead of two turnouts.  It seems to me it would make a smoother operation.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

 

 

Mel, exactly where  do you mean sir? Thanks!

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

Mel, like this sir? Also, i am currently using Atlas code 80 flex track...Will the Peco code 55 work with this? Thanks!

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,642 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Sunday, December 8, 2019 12:56 PM

You got it.  As for N gauge I don’t know but the HO track is compatible.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 1:23 PM

RR_Mel

You got it.  As for N gauge I don’t know but the HO track is compatible.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

Thanks Mel, i appreciate the info sir. One last thing, on my reverse loop, where would i isolate and should i go with the Digitraxx AR-1 or is there a better method for controlling the reversing loop?

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • From: 53° 33′ N, 10° 0′ E
  • 2,126 posts
Posted by Tinplate Toddler on Sunday, December 8, 2019 1:25 PM

You will have to shim the code 55 track to bring it up to the same height.

Happy times!

Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)

"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Sunday, December 8, 2019 2:16 PM

Tinplate Toddler

You will have to shim the code 55 track to bring it up to the same height.

 

 

Thank you sir for the information....Is mixing codes like this a common thing or is it not advised? If i get the code 55 shimmed correctly do you forsee any problems or would you advise that i not mix codes? Thanks again!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, December 10, 2019 5:21 PM

Any more suggestions or comments? Anyone?

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,445 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 7:45 AM

The most recent track plan looks pretty good to me.  You can mix track codes.  Just make sure the top and inside rail surfaces match evenly where they connect.  Shimming may be needed.  I've used old business cards for shimming.  They will be covered up when you paint and ballast the track.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 2:30 PM

riogrande5761

The most recent track plan looks pretty good to me.  You can mix track codes.  Just make sure the top and inside rail surfaces match evenly where they connect.  Shimming may be needed.  I've used old business cards for shimming.  They will be covered up when you paint and ballast the track.

 

 

riogrande5761, thank you sir....Thats what i was looking for before i began laying any track....I will post progress pics as i go and as work allows lol....Thanks again!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 7:03 PM

RR_Mel

I would suggest you go with a Peco Double Slip in your loop instead of two turnouts.  It seems to me it would make a smoother operation.
 
 
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
 

 

Mel, could you please provide me with the correct Peco part number for the double slip that i need...For some reason all the ones i am finding say they are a single slip....Thank you sir!

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 801 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 7:48 PM

Peco  N code 55 10 degree double slip  SLE390F or SL390F. the SLE is available at modeltrainstuf for $50. not sure about the SL model

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 8:34 PM

floridaflyer

Peco  N code 55 10 degree double slip  SLE390F or SL390F. the SLE is available at modeltrainstuf for $50. not sure about the SL model

 

 

Thanks floridaflyer, can you tell me the difference between the 2 models?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 801 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Wednesday, December 11, 2019 8:57 PM

Not an expert on turnouts but I believe the SLE in an electro frog and the SL is an insl frog. Others can verify this.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,445 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Thursday, December 12, 2019 7:18 AM

Peco sells two lines of HO and N scale track.  Electrofrog and Insulfrog. 

Electrofrog needs insulated rail joiners to prevent shorting at the bifurcating end.  Advantage is you eliminate a dead spot that engines might stall on but wiring is a bit different.

Insulfrog has a plastic frog and easier to wire.  

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:25 PM

riogrande5761

Peco sells two lines of HO and N scale track.  Electrofrog and Insulfrog. 

Electrofrog needs insulated rail joiners to prevent shorting at the bifurcating end.  Advantage is you eliminate a dead spot that engines might stall on but wiring is a bit different.

Insulfrog has a plastic frog and easier to wire.  

 

Thank you sir....The information is much appreciated...I think i will go with the InsulFrog line for now.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,445 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Thursday, December 12, 2019 5:05 PM

Probably the best choice if you want to keep things as so.ple as possible.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, December 12, 2019 7:17 PM

riogrande5761

Probably the best choice if you want to keep things as so.ple as possible.

 

I agree sir....Thanks!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, December 12, 2019 7:32 PM

riogrande5761and anyone else, i need a little advice here please. On my layout on the North ladder yard, i am considering shortening the length of it by 2' to 3'. After laying out my printed track templates i realized how long the ladder yard really is. It would take me a ton of rolling stock to fill it plus for my era i dont really plan on running a train that long. In N scale it just looks to long to me. Whats some pros and cons of shortening it as opposed to leaving it the length it currently is? Would you leave it the current 9' length or would you shorten it and use the extra room for something else? If so, what might be a good substitution for the extra several feet on the edge of the layout? Just looking at options so any comments or suggestions are as always "Welcome".....Thanks everyone!

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,445 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Friday, December 13, 2019 7:06 AM

I wouldn't shorten the ladders.  It's kind of like saying, gee, I'd like to get a big flat screen TV and then deciding, no ... the one I was going to buy was too big.  Most say whatever size you get, you wish later you would have gotten bigger.  I'd say it's kinda like that with a layout.

You say it would take a ton of rolling stock to fill the yard.  See ... this is how I know you are a noob, cause hobbyists who have been into trains for a long time know they are like Lay's potato chips.  You keep buying more and more and more.  And pretty soon that  yard you thought that would be hard to fill is freaking overflowing and there is not enough room on the layout.  Wink

That's my My 2 Cents My 2 Cents

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 27,713 posts
Posted by rrinker on Friday, December 13, 2019 9:11 AM

 For 70's and 80's era, that means some long cars - will it really take that many to fill it up? Actually, what I would do with the yard is extend it lower, closer to the edge, so you have at least one arrival/departure track as well as the yard tracks - and you also have space for a switch lead to make it possible to actually do switching without blocking the main. See both Armstrong's Track Planning for Realistic Operation as well as Andy Sperandeo's book on yard design.

 Something else you could do. Ditch the reversing section. Have the engine services accessed off the yard ladder, and the mine on the upper right accessed off the long siding. Then instead of that 60 degree at grade crossing, you could have the track on the penninsula at a higher leve to cross over the lower track and then descend along the wall and around behind the roundhouse.

                         --Randy


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • From: Richmond, VA
  • 1,824 posts
Posted by carl425 on Friday, December 13, 2019 11:37 AM

riogrande5761
You say it would take a ton of rolling stock to fill the yard.  See ... this is how I know you are a noob, cause hobbyists who have been into trains for a long time know they are like Lay's potato chips.

While it is true that all collections (trains or otherwise) grow to exceed the space available to keep them, the real "noob" part of the question is thinking yards are to be filled.  Working yards are for sorting cars, not storing them.  The job of the yardmaster is impossible when the yard is full.  You should plan on having the yard no more than half full at any time.

I have the right to remain silent.  By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,445 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Friday, December 13, 2019 11:41 AM

carl425
the real "noob" part of the question is thinking yards are to be filled. 

Whether thinking yard should be full or not, it tends to happen without trying.

Now spaking of storing, staging can be helpful in that regard.  Does the track plan have provision for staging?  

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Friday, December 13, 2019 3:08 PM

riogrande5761

I wouldn't shorten the ladders.  It's kind of like saying, gee, I'd like to get a big flat screen TV and then deciding, no ... the one I was going to buy was too big.  Most say whatever size you get, you wish later you would have gotten bigger.  I'd say it's kinda like that with a layout.

You say it would take a ton of rolling stock to fill the yard.  See ... this is how I know you are a noob, cause hobbyists who have been into trains for a long time know they are like Lay's potato chips.  You keep buying more and more and more.  And pretty soon that  yard you thought that would be hard to fill is freaking overflowing and there is not enough room on the layout.  Wink

That's my My 2 Cents My 2 Cents

 

 

LOL....riogrande5761, i actually not a noob but i have been away from the hobby for some years now. As for your comments, i agree. I can remember years ago when i was actually modelling HO scale and i had a large layout i was building that occupied a 2 car garage (Which i never got to finish"...The yard i had on it was way under sized and i can remember always wishing that i had the room to make it a lot larger....Thanks for openning my eyes, i will eventually get er filled up to capacity!

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 182 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Friday, December 13, 2019 3:09 PM

riogrande5761

 

 
carl425
the real "noob" part of the question is thinking yards are to be filled. 

 

Whether thinking yard should be full or not, it tends to happen without trying.

Now spaking of storing, staging can be helpful in that regard.  Does the track plan have provision for staging?  

 

 

riogrande5761, not as of yet but i plan a secong level to my current track plan with a helix that should serve as some staging!

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!