Track Software

[Anonymous]

I am looking for some easy to use software that will permit me to develop my layout on my PC, rather than spending time doing it by trial and error on the framework. I have tried the Atlas software and found it all but impossible to use. any suggestions will be appreciated.

[Anonymous]

You can try XtrkCad. It is available at http://www.sillub.com/ . About halfway down the page is a link to the free registration information. There is a good tutorial in under the Help menu.

[tstage]

...and it's FREE! Atlas (http://www.atlasrr.com) also makes a free software package for dwonload. It's a bit quirky but still handy.

Tom

BTW, CC, welcome to the forum! [:)] Good to have you aboard!

[claycts]

To see what you can do with 3rd planet Follow the link under my signature. Learing curve is high but if you read the manual on what you are trying to do it works fine.

[Anonymous]

look on ebay also.

[wickman]

I use xtrack my self I found it very user friendly then again I learned it from some one. I tried 3rd planit found it had alot to offer especilly the contour viewer for see how plan looks with the diff elevations xtrack doesn't have any thing like that .

[Anonymous]

I used the atlas freeware to plan my layout of just over 300' of mainline. It takes some practice to get proficient with it, but like any software, once I figured it out, I mastered it. It is not perfect, but it is only for planning. I have yet to have difficulty translating the plan to reality.

Mike in Tulsa

[Medina1128]

Cappy, What kinds of problems did you have with the Right Track program from Atlas. I've designed my entire layout with it and like Mike in Tulsa said, it just takes a little practice. I've tried some of the others and, WOW!!, talk about steep learning curves. Or maybe it's just me... [D)] [censored]

[SpaceMouse]

I've used the Atlas program, the XtraCAD and the 3rd Planit.

The Atlas program wia clunky and although it can get the job down, it is clunky.

XtraCAD has a good tutorial and is far more powerful than the Atlas program. It is intuitive and easy to learn.

3rd Planet gives you 3D rendering and you can run trains on it. However, it is harder to learn and is counter intuitive. Everytime I tried to lern something new, I had to spend time trying to figure it out. There is a users group, but often getting an answer is time consuming and the answer is "check the manual."

[wickman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

I've used the Atlas program, the XtraCAD and the 3rd Planit.

The Atlas program wia clunky and although it can get the job down, it is clunky.

XtraCAD has a good tutorial and is far more powerful than the Atlas program. It is intuitive and easy to learn.

3rd Planet gives you 3D rendering and you can run trains on it. However, it is harder to learn and is counter intuitive. Everytime I tried to lern something new, I had to spend time trying to figure it out. There is a users group, but often getting an answer is time consuming and the answer is "check the manual."

chip had mentioned 3rd planet giving capability to run trains the plan you create xtrack also gives this option of running as many trains as you like on the layout. I'm not sure about the other sw's but I do know xtrack will give you an exact parts list when your done creating your layout as well you can print 1:1 full scale and lay it out on the bench work thats what I did and it worked great.



you can see how the printing 1:1 can be a handy feature
this is a screen print of a parts list
XTrkCad Parts List

wickmans gorge
By Open Registration

Wed Sep 14 11:17:07 2005

Count | Description
------+-----------------------------------------
13 | Atlas 281 #4 Mark 3 Left
12 | Atlas 282 #4 Mark 3 Right
4 | Atlas 836 22" 22.5D Curve
1 | Fleischmann-Modell 6154 Small Turntable
0 | 2053.314 HO Flex Track
------+-----------------------------------------
now when printing parts list and while inserting switches TT sectional if you go that way the sw matches these parts in the parts list so if you decide to go with peco switches be sure to choose peco switches when inserting into the plan
Hopefully this helps you out
Lynn

[joeh19012]

Here's a link to another thread about track planning software.

http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=43534

If you ask me, there is no truly easy program that does this--they all take time to learn, and you have be willing to put the time in. Personally, I used CadRail--a very geometrically oriented program. It works well, but it's not easy at first unless you're familiar with tangents, spirals, arcs, and the like.

You may also want to consult some of the publications on track planning. One of them mentions "Track Squares." Basically, these represent a 90 degree curve (a 30 inch radius is a 30 inch square). Planning using squares to start may help you with dimensions and fitting your layout to your room.

Welcome, and good luck. [8D]

[Anonymous]

I think John Armstrong's squares are actually 1 track center width wider than the mainline radius to allow for a non-substandard passing track on a curve. (A not too important detail, unless you get to that point and things don't fit.) In "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" he also has diagrams for how many squares certain common element take up. I think there is also a summary of what type of layouts require a certain number of squares, as a guidline. I think nearly everyone who has designed a layout reccomends the book. I think any of the software packages will work, with a little work. XTrkcad works for me, although a 3-D view would be nice.

[claycts]

Formula for track squares is (R+2C) R=Radius, C=center to center. SO using that a 30"R with a 2 1/2" C = 35" square.
My $.02

[Anonymous]

That's it! I know it allowed for another track plus a little...doing that keeps you from thinking that a 48" table can really handle 24" curves.

[rrinker]

And it also allows you to double track in the same space.

[Anonymous]

Without overhanging the edge (hence the 2C factor).

[Anonymous]

I started using 3rd PlanIt about two weeks ago after trying it and CadRail on demo. Found 3rd PlanIt to be more oriented to my thought process and assumptions on user interface design (sorry, by day I'm a software guy). It seemed to have more orientation towards automating certain drawing tasks, such as easements and helixes, as opposed to CadRail which seemed to want the user to provide more geometric input (as a previous post mentioned).

It's true that all such programs will have some learning curve associated with them, although I can easily envision numerous enhancements to these programs that would allow a novice user to click the mouse a few times indicating to "make the mainline pass through these points in a closed loop" or whatever the basic track plan idea is.

Although I'm quickly becoming quite proficient with 3P it does have its quirks. I'd like to hear from others out there using it. Maybe someone can get me over some of the more bizarre things it seems to do.

Chris

[rrinker]

If someone else has figured out how to get around some of the quirks I'd love to hear them too. My favorite pain in the posterior quirk is the inability to join a curve to a turnout - it goes all over the place. I have to add a short section of straight track to the turnout end and then connect to that, even if the resulting straight section ends up being one tie wide.

--Randy

[Anonymous]

Precisely! Sorry, that's my solution too! Turnouts seem to be objects of very special and obscure properties, which the program does not allow to behave as normal track. I have not found any way out of this.

Perhaps a practical solution - more like a work-around - would be to create a new composite library part based on the existing turnout with the addition of the typical short straght section pre-attached. Using such a composite part in the drawing- and connection tools would save the step of manually adding the little bit every time.

I'm suggesting this only hypothetically because I have not yet learned the library side of the program.

When I have a little more time I'll post a list of things I've learned and things I'd like to know, and maybe we can get a sort of FAQ going. Is it possible to start a new subtopic forum here, focused on 3P?

Chris

[tsasala]

I'm interested in the same thing that Randy is. The only "solution" I've found is the same as Randy's - a small straight piece. I think software tries to help too much some times.

-Tom

[Anonymous]

In my opinion, as a professional software developer, software that tries to help rarely does. Sorry to go off topic. :)

[daveinga]

Answers to many of your questions can be found at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/3rdPlanIt/

where 3PI users exchange ideas, methods, and files. Take a look.

[Anonymous]

What about some ideas for us poor Macintosh people.

[mandelswamp]

captaincad, what version of Atlas Right Track System (RTS) did you use? Was it the older 5.0 version or the newly released 7.0 version? Yes, RTS is not perfect and takes some time to learn but it is a helpful tool to use - especially for adding in buildings to the layour that are in its library.

[mandelswamp]

peteragrossman, check out RailModeller from MacRailSoft at:
http://www.railmodeller.com/
The firm offers a trial version so that you can play with it before you buy.

[jfrank138]

I agree with Chris.
I use AutoCAD for everything.
Yeah, the learning curve is long and steep, but you get what you pay for (in time expended). Once learned, you can use it for layout design, structures, cars and locos, wiring, sketching the house, . . .
John

[fkrall]

peteragrossman, I agree with mandleswamp--I find Railmodeller very good for us enlightened (!) Mac users. AFAIK, there's only one alternative for Macs, sofTrack systems (softrack.com), but I read elsewhere it's buggy, somewhat outdated, and offers poor tech support.

By contrast, Railmodeller is highly competent, and the developer in Germany is very responsive. Not as full-featured as some of the PC apps with the bells and whistles (e.g., easements--you have to engineer your own; many of the templates are described in German (!)), but I feel it covers the basics extremely well. And cost-effective--$35 or so, as I recall. And as mandleswamp said, you can try it out free!

Most critically, at least in my case as a beginner, it'll really keep you honest with your turnout, crossover, and curve geometries.

[rrinker]

With OS X on a Mac there's a chance that the Linux version of XTrack might work too.

[Tom Bryant_MR]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrinker

If someone else has figured out how to get around some of the quirks I'd love to hear them too. My favorite pain in the posterior quirk is the inability to join a curve to a turnout - it goes all over the place. I have to add a short section of straight track to the turnout end and then connect to that, even if the resulting straight section ends up being one tie wide.

--Randy

Talk about timing! I've been stuggling with this same issue in XtrkCad. Very timely input [:)] Thanks Randy.
Also, found out this also works when connecting two apposing turnouts in a yard.

[claycts]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jfrank138

I agree with Chris.
I use AutoCAD for everything.
Yeah, the learning curve is long and steep, but you get what you pay for (in time expended). Once learned, you can use it for layout design, structures, cars and locos, wiring, sketching the house, . . .
John

Do not forget doing fill in projects for a local cad firm. At $35.00 to $45.00 per hour it does give you some great model money![:D]
Take care
George P. (AutoCADD since Release 1.2)