Trains.com

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!

My new N Scale Layout - Comments, Critiques?

13554 views
19 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 36 posts
Posted by Proctous on Thursday, November 28, 2013 4:46 PM

Made a change as suggested. added a few buildings and roads and lake. took away one of the runarounds as i didnt think i needed it in the yard, allows longer trains.

 

change1

My 13x9 L Shape Garage Layout build

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/225242.aspx

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,638 posts
Posted by zstripe on Thursday, November 28, 2013 4:08 PM

Proctous,

I realize now, that you are ''new'' here so, Welcome To The Forums!, It would have been less confusing, for anyone to critque, your plan, if you would have started, your own thread, by clicking on, create a New Disscussion Topic, on the top right of the page. You could have used the same title, as this one,but it would have started,with your layout, not all the other replys to the old thread. My response, was to the original post.

Cheers, Drinks

Frank

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,638 posts
Posted by zstripe on Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:36 PM

With the plans for the industries and the yard. I only have maybe one question. When a train leaves the yard,with emptys, or loads, getting to the inds. it will be nose first, some how the engine,has to be, put on the other end of the cars, in order to switch the inds. that little run around track there, maybe will hold three cars. Now should you be able to accomplish, your moves and you want to take them back to the yard, you will have the same problem, nose first, how do you get the train in the yard and still be able to use the engine, that brought the train there.  Or am I missing something?

Edit: I'll say, I'm missing something. I'm replying,to a 7 year old thread. Laugh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers, Drinks

Frank

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 36 posts
Posted by Proctous on Thursday, November 28, 2013 4:21 AM

I know this post is old But I liked the Layout so much I tried to use Anyrail and create a HO scale of it on my garage 5x10 table. Let me know what you think.

HO layout

My 13x9 L Shape Garage Layout build

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/225242.aspx

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 36 posts
Posted by Proctous on Thursday, November 28, 2013 4:18 AM

I know this fourm is old, but I liked the layout so much I wanted to try to build a HO layout based off of it. tell me what you think. 

HO layout

My 13x9 L Shape Garage Layout build

http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/225242.aspx

  • Member since
    October 2004
  • From: Colorful Colorado
  • 8,639 posts
Posted by Texas Zepher on Wednesday, December 6, 2006 11:03 PM
What is the "reverse" tail off the UP yard for?  Seems like that will just reduce the capacity on that last yard track.   Wouldn't a track coming off the main in that direction be a better choice?
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Wednesday, December 6, 2006 5:59 PM
 SpaceMouse wrote:

One suggestion and a comment.

IF you are not going to use a software program, you might invest in a N-scale template. IT will keep your turnouts, etc. at the right angles. From the looks of your drawings yours seem a little optimistic.

I do have one, but for some weird reason it does not have 18" radius curves (my minimum mainline radius) in the template. It does have 16" and 19" though. Also it does not have #7 turnouts, which comprise the majority of turnouts in my layout. So it's pretty much useless to me. 

  • Member since
    September 2006
  • 170 posts
Posted by ft-fan on Wednesday, December 6, 2006 4:19 PM

I think (anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Smile [:)] ) that if you use an automatic reversing loop module (like Tony's PS-Rev), it won't matter if the turnout is set or not, the module should take care of it when you cross the boundary of the reversing loop. The only problem is if you were to switch the turnout while your loco/lashup was partway across the gap. That would probably cause a short circuit. But otherwise, when in the loop, which is isolated, you don't care which way the turnout is thrown. You only care when you are crossing the gap. All this is assuming you are using DCC. If you are using regular DC, then I don't know.

FT 

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,179 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Wednesday, December 6, 2006 9:04 AM

One suggestion and a comment.

IF you are not going to use a software program, you might invest in a N-scale template. IT will keep your turnouts, etc. at the right angles. From the looks of your drawings yours seem a little optimistic.

About XtraCAD and turnouts flipping. If I remember correctly a turnout can be flipped using a key sequence like shift F10 or something--so all you do is get it close then manipulate it.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Tuesday, December 5, 2006 12:11 AM

Okay, here's my second revision, taking into account a few comments here, in other forums and even from my LHS:

Key changes: 1. Tunnel has been moved. Now all tunnels go into/out of same mountain on right side of layout.

2. Main features of right side of layout are mountain and canyon. Upper tracks are hidden in mountain so as not to distract from tracks running in river canyon.

3. Street underpass will be added to inclined tracks at top left of layout.

4. Industries and street trackage realigned (the turnout degrees are exaggerated, but the sidings will end up in the same places).

5. That unorthodox "yard lead" has been changed to true double-track main.

6. UP yard on the bottom has ben reconfigured, runaround track added.

7. Now here's the biggie: Reverse loop, or is it? In test-laying track, I can add a couple switches that would make it a reverse loop, only problem is that unlike conventional reverse loops, this one is not absolutely isolated and in fact connects with the main. How can I wire this? Because on the bottom half of the turnout pair (highlighted by red circle), if the turnout is thrown to the diverging track, it's a reverse loop, but if it is set straight, it is not a reverse loop! Is that possible (as in wiring?)

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vail, AZ
  • 1,943 posts
Posted by Vail and Southwestern RR on Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:26 PM
If you do the whole tutorial in XTrkCad you choudl be able to handle placing turnouts.  The end that will be placed is the one with the dot, you can change that before you place it.  Then, make sure you hit enter or ok to actually place it where you want it, or it is still in limbo land.  Using one of the programs will help you to know that it will fit, pencils sometimes cheat unwillingly!

Jeff But it's a dry heat!

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:37 PM

It's just food for thought.

I eliminated the siding that was going to hide the train for two reasons.  First, it really wasn't going to be able to serve that purpose any more as per your last drawing.  Second, it was the problem when it comes to the sidings in the middle being workable.

The radii that Atlas uses appear to be arbitrary, but there's a method to the madness.  They are designed to fit inside of each other in a curve and maintain proper track spacing.  That's why you have a 17.5 curve and an 18.75, then a 20 inch radius.  See, it makes sense if you know the reasoning.

I agree, the yard area needs some work.  I was really just trying to get something "on paper" so to speak, that would be workable. 

If you'd like, I can Email you the .ral file so you can play with it yourself.  Just click on my profile and send me an Email and I'll return it with the file.

Philip
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:02 PM
 pcarrell wrote:

OK, I tried this in the Atlas RTS program and it comes close to fitting, but not quite.  I had to drop to a 17.5" radius, though larger is used where possible.  The sidings have a min. radius of 11.25".  I also adressed the switching problem in the middle.  It's not perfect, but it's workable.



Wow, thanks for taking the time to do this! I appreciate it (I don't have the patience with RTS, plus their choice of radii is kind of arbitrary, as you pointed out).

My only issues with it for my intentions for the layout is that it eliminates the double tracking on the bottom loop as I intend to park some trains there (originally with the tunnel curve I wanted to keep certain trains out of sight temporarily). Also in your "Yard throat" I no longer can put a perfectly 45-degree grade crossing there (I like putting a grade crossing out in front so I can feature working crossbucks or even a crossing gate).

But the way you have the main/yard/passenger siding configured gives me new ideas by which to envision that par of the layout, so thanks, I'll be thinking about that for a while.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, November 19, 2006 6:39 PM

OK, I tried this in the Atlas RTS program and it comes close to fitting, but not quite.  I had to drop to a 17.5" radius, though larger is used where possible.  The sidings have a min. radius of 11.25".  I also adressed the switching problem in the middle.  It's not perfect, but it's workable.

Philip
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, November 19, 2006 5:56 PM

I like the plan a bit better.  I can see how you're refining things and it looks good.

I don't see any reverse loop though.

Also, switching the industries in the center still blocks the yard lead.

Or am I missing something?

Philip
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Sunday, November 19, 2006 5:40 PM
I've updated my plan as per various people's comments...



1. The problem "tunnel switch" at the top has been moved back.
2. The tunnel on the lower portion of the loop has been shrunken, so trains can be more accessible and visible. The additional advantage, it will run in a canyon and I can extend the flood control channel into a more natural river setting. The downside is that I won't be able to "hide" trains out of sight like I originally intended
3. The industrial mini-yard has been reduced from 3 tracks to 2.
4. The siding meant to snake across the street has been moved to another turnout (I did like having tracks snake through the town though...ideally I'd like to have some street tracks).

I'm on the fence on the reverse loop. My passenger trains are intended to be long and I don't think it's safe (prorotypically) to have a reverse loop train slam into the track where a passenger train is stopped. The NTSB would frown on that.

Also, my intent is to eventually have a basic DCC system (running 2 trains plus a switching operation simultaneously), but operate it as DC in the interim. I know it's a question intended for the DCC forum, but I still would have to insulate the loop, correct?
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, November 19, 2006 5:28 PM

My point on the yard lead is that on the other end of it, in the middle of the layout, you can't switch the industries without blocking the lead and doing some of your switching in a tunnel.

As far as XtrakCad and RTS go, the learning curve can be a little tough.  I like the RTS program a bit better myself, though the XtrakCad is more sofisticated.

For the flex track tool on the Atlas program, connect the two ends and then click the shape tool.  Now click on the track you just made and in the popup window move the two needles in the meters to the left almost all the way.  Now click the optimize button a couple of times (it gets better and better as it dials in).  That should get you some better looking curves.

Philip
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
Posted by Metro Red Line on Sunday, November 19, 2006 3:36 PM
 pcarrell wrote:

Overall the plan looks workable, but I have one question.  There is no passing siding for the industries to be switched from.  The track they are now off of is a yard lead, so if you use that, not only are you switching in a tunnel, but your yard is totally blocked and no traffic can leave the right side of it.

Also, it might be good to try one of those programs again to make sure this really fits.

I think you're onto something here, but that one thing should maybe see a bit more development.

Any reason for a 4x8 in particular?  Have you read this? http://home.earthlink.net/~mrsvc/id28.html



If you follow the yard lead into the tunnel it appears to look like a main but it actually leads into the UP yard. The real main is the other track. But perhaps I should put the turnout in another place so I don't have to be switching in the tunnel?

I did do a version of this on XtrkCAD but I got so frustrated placing turnouts on the thing that I just gave up and drew all the turnouts by hand. They kept flipping on different directions and disappearing for no reason. And Atlas Right Track isn't any better, the flex track feature almost caused me to get committed to the looney farm.

As for 4x8, yes I'm stuck to it. The Layout takes up 1/3 of my room, and I don't have the space to run trains all along the walls of my room. I'm not a point-to-point guy, I like having trains go around with the option of having enough sidings within it to make for operations.
  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: In the State of insanity!
  • 7,982 posts
Posted by pcarrell on Sunday, November 19, 2006 8:44 AM

Overall the plan looks workable, but I have one question.  There is no passing siding for the industries to be switched from.  The track they are now off of is a yard lead, so if you use that, not only are you switching in a tunnel, but your yard is totally blocked and no traffic can leave the right side of it.

Also, it might be good to try one of those programs again to make sure this really fits.

I think you're onto something here, but that one thing should maybe see a bit more development.

Any reason for a 4x8 in particular?  Have you read this? http://home.earthlink.net/~mrsvc/id28.html

Philip
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Under The Streets of Los Angeles
  • 1,119 posts
My new N Scale Layout - Comments, Critiques?
Posted by Metro Red Line on Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:01 AM
This is the track plan for my 4x8' N scale layout. This is my first N scale layout after converting from HO. The layout with feature UP (with some motive power still in SP livery) with some BNSF trains running through. It'll also have some Amtrak and commuter (Metrolink) operations. The layout is ambiguously set  somewhere between Southern and Central California in the present-day.

Minimum mainline curves are 18" radius; sidings are 11" radius.
 
I'm a pretty technologically-inclinded person but both the Atlas and XTrkCad programs drove me up the wall, so I drew my own dang diagram by hand, scanned it and added some enhancements via Photoshop. So there :P




Welcome any comments, critiques, tweaks, suggestions.

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!