Nuther Software Riddle

[Leon Silverman]

Spacemouse:
Your Jeep maybe too small to carry a 4x8 sheet of foam but either Lowes or Homedepot will cut a 4x8 sheet of anything into two 4 x 4 sheets if that's what is necessary for the customer to get it home in their vehicle. The alternative is to rent a truck from them for $20.

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trollw

One other option is to draw your own track library. Use the centerline measurements. Once you have the track piece drawn, print it out at 1:1 and lay the actual piece over it - if it doesn't quite fit, adjust the drawing until it does. The turnouts are a little trickier (to measure, not draw): connect a piece of straight track to each of the diverging legs - this will give you sufficient lengths to make decent relative measurements. Send me an e-mail with a number where I can reach you between 9 AM and 5 PM CST (M-F) and I will give you a call and talk you through the measurement process. I started trying to write a description and it was beginning to look like War and Peace, even though the process is really very easy. You should be able to generate a library for all the track piece types you have in an hour or less. You then just save them and copy them over and over. By the way, I have used CADRail for over 10 years and am now dabbling in 3rdPlanit just to see what it does. In my opinion, I would not even consider trying to build a layout without laying it out first in one of those 2 progams - if it fits without kinks or conflicts in the program - it will fit without kinks or conflicts in the world (IF youalways make the track pieces align using the software and don't 'force' an alignment.

John
[e-mail]

"You are what you eat", said a wise old man.
Oh Lord, if it's true, I'm a garbage can.

Thanks,

I pretty much know what I'm going to do with the Bachman EZ track. For my big layout I'm going with Atlas 100.

[StillGrande]

Make sure with 3rd Planit you go through the tutorials and play with it a little first. Once you get the basics, you can usually do the basic trackwork in about 5 minutes. Don't be overwhelmed with all the features. You will probably won't use some of them ever. It is nice to know how much of everything you will need before you start.

[robengland]

Someone must have created a library of components by now - it is just a matter of finding them. Do some heavy Googling to search the forums...

[trollw]

One other option is to draw your own track library. Use the centerline measurements. Once you have the track piece drawn, print it out at 1:1 and lay the actual piece over it - if it doesn't quite fit, adjust the drawing until it does. The turnouts are a little trickier (to measure, not draw): connect a piece of straight track to each of the diverging legs - this will give you sufficient lengths to make decent relative measurements. Send me an e-mail with a number where I can reach you between 9 AM and 5 PM CST (M-F) and I will give you a call and talk you through the measurement process. I started trying to write a description and it was beginning to look like War and Peace, even though the process is really very easy. You should be able to generate a library for all the track piece types you have in an hour or less. You then just save them and copy them over and over. By the way, I have used CADRail for over 10 years and am now dabbling in 3rdPlanit just to see what it does. In my opinion, I would not even consider trying to build a layout without laying it out first in one of those 2 progams - if it fits without kinks or conflicts in the program - it will fit without kinks or conflicts in the world (IF youalways make the track pieces align using the software and don't 'force' an alignment.

John
[e-mail]

"You are what you eat", said a wise old man.
Oh Lord, if it's true, I'm a garbage can.

[Jetrock]

I too come from the old school of laying out trackplans on pencil and paper. And the real thing NEVER matches the track plan.

You are NOT stuck using the Bachmann track, spacemouse--it's nice that you have it, but think of it as a training tool. You can use it to lay out ideas in the real world, but don't feel obliged to use it for your layout just because you have it.

[rrinker]

If you use exclusively Atlas track than it's worth it to get the Atlast Right Track software, since it's FREE. I find it a bit quirky, but that's because I have some CAD training and the RTS is very simplified. But for laying out possible plans with ATlas sectional track, it works great.

--Randy

[Anonymous]

I have a stack of different types of track in a box. I literally assemble them and test a configuration by hand. Pencil and paper gets you a long way. Computer track programs do not have a "grab this and put it there" feel to me. I suppose I am reluctant to spend the 100- on a program that may or may not work for me.

I use atlas code 83. At the present time there is really no other alternative except Peco which thanks to the dollar vs europe is kind of high.

[Anonymous]

I too find the lack of mutilple roadbed-track libraries frustrating. I would expect it's in each vendor's interest to provide a library supporting their products (both roadbed and non-roadbed). Of course this does entail a certain amount of initial effort and I imagine ongoing support (as in the software industry, my field).

I tried RTS and eventually, when I tire of fooling with the physical EZ-track, may be inspired to make up a component library of what I have for this application. (or any other I end up using, if I can figure out how to make the components) When I do so, I'll certainly share here.

Scott

[SpaceMouse]

I like the idea of designing the railway on the computer first simply because it is faster that playing with the sections. It also means that can make a lot of my mistakes before I make the layout mistakes. The problem is that the Altas turnouts are different than the EZ turnouts and what fits in the draft doesn't fit on the table.

[Anonymous]

Being a dinosaur sure makes it easy, I can use a pencil, compass and straight edge ruler to design track work. I downloaded right track from Atlas and fooled around with it a few times. I found it complicated and quickly gave-up on it as I can do as good or better with the simple tools mentioned. I was really only untested in playing with a CAD program. I hope other CAD programs are more intuitive and easier to use than Right Track. However, the price is right, for Right Track, nothing!

I know nothing of Bachmann's steel or nickle silver track. Atlas is the standard in the industry and you can't go wrong. Sectional track is for kids, so they can lay track out on the floor and get trains running. You will find the less joints your track work has, the less problems you will have. Each joint is an electrical connection and also holds the potential for derailments. Rail does move with temperature variations and road bed and layout wooden structure moves with humidity, so every joint will "WORK" over time, becoming less and less reliable. Less joints = better reliability.

I am a dinosaur, however, I try not to be an ogre. There are many CAD programs on the market. If CAD "turns your crank", go for it! I just think with all the other things to buy when starting out, you need to know it ain't necessary! With 18-22 inch radius, there is only so much you can do with a 4 X 8.

A good point would be to consider that many very smart model railroaders with lots of time in the hobby have already designed numerous excellent 4 X 8 layouts that would likely be better than anything you might design. They understand the hobby and have thought about and designed into their layouts possibilities which you haven't yet considered. I think a 4 X 8 is the way to start out and it is easy enough to make provisions for a 4 X 8 to become a part of a larger layout if that becomes the direction you want to go.

[rrinker]

That'll teach me to do two things at once - you are correc,t it's steel and nickle silver. I HAVE the steel stuff.
If EZ Track holds together BETTER than Atlas, the Atlas must be pretty bad. I got the steel EZ Track in a Hogwarts set and decided it should be fine for a test track until I built my layout. I picked up a few extra straight sections at a train show for a good price, and proceeded to build a simple test oval. A few broken clips later, it was running, but even with two sets of feeders I had slow spots. I would NOT recommend this stuff for ANY sort of permanent layout. What's crazy is I have the first main completed on my layout, which is 8x12, and I can connect power to just ONE of the multitude of track feeders I soldered on and have absolutely no slowdowns, even with the switch frogs unpowered. And I did NOT solder my rail joints. NOTE: Don't think this means you can just put one set of feeders for a large railroad. This is only TEMPORARY as I haven't wired the main power bus yet, I just wanted to see how my equipment would run over my track work.

- -Randy

[Anonymous]

I built my first layout with EZ track, and i wasnt happy with it. The trains didnt run well, so After a few months I threw it out and relaid with Flex track which worked much better. That layout is gone now anyway, but Im not impressed with EZ track. I have some TT under the Xmas tree, and it seems to work fine just for the circle. Wouldnt build a layout with it though.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rrinker

If you are pretty set on using sectional track with built-in roadbed, Atlas True-Track is WAY superior to the Bachmann. Code 83, not 100, nickle-silver, not brass. And when you move to the next level of doing your own ballast, True-Track is removeable from the plastic base and becomes ordinary Atlas Snap-Track.

--Randy

Randy -
You are mistaken regarding rail material - Bachmann track comes in nickel-silver -(gray roadbed) - and steel (black roadbed). No brass. I believe you are correct in that it is all code 100.

I have not worked with the Atlas product, but while researching roadbed track products, I saw that the Bachmann line was more extensive than either Atlas or Lifelike. I do think the removability of Atlas is a plus (appeals to my thrifty streak), but not if in the meantime (before advancing to roadbed and nailing down the track) my young son and I could not get the pieces we want to use. Kato Unitrack was more expensive, also maybe a narrow range.

Also recently saw an opinion that the EZ-track stays together better than the TT.

ballast? I thought that was put on top of the roadbed and track, so not (necessarily) confined to the "next level". I guess one would only ballast track that was expected to stay put for some time. Whether that is ordinary sectional or roadbed track is not, I expect, particularly relevant. Anyway my son and I aren't going to do that for some time, and I guess Spacemouse isn't near there yet either (except if/when he works at his club layout)

regards,
Scott

[SpaceMouse]

Thanks Randy,

I just happen to have about 70 ft of EZ track and 11 turnouts so I'm kinda stuck.

On my main layout, I plan on using Atlas 100 alternating between flex and sectional.

But I need to get my kid's track up and running. (Soon as I can figure out how to get the foam home in my jeep.)

[rrinker]

Well, you can't expect the Atlas package to include Bachmann track. 3rdPlanIt doesn't have EZ Track in it either, unless someone created an add-on library for it. 3PI and Cadrail are fairly high-end CAD packages, usually by the time you're ready for something like that, you're not using sectional track anymore.
If you are pretty set on using sectional track with built-in roadbed, Atlas True-Track is WAY superior to the Bachmann. Code 83, not 100, nickle-silver, not brass. And when you move to the next level of doing your own ballast, True-Track is removeable from the plastic base and becomes ordinary Atlas Snap-Track.

--Randy

[SpaceMouse]

I'm about a nickle short of pulling the trigger on 3dPlanit--even though I really haven't figured it out yet. I've tried a couple demos of software and I've yet to find one that has both Atlas Track and Bachman EZ track. I keep designing the 4x8 layouts for my son using Atlas only to find that it doesn't work with the EZ track.

Can't a package have both libraries?

(No Jetrock I'm not going to use them on the same layout [:o)])