Would you get bored with only one train operating at a time?

[Wes Whitmore]

I guess I will shop around then...

Wes

[fifedog]

5 to 5-3/4 inches is all you need, Buddy.  If the tunnel portal is throwing you off, get a smaller bore portal, that's all...

[Wes Whitmore]

So I used the MTH portals to see how high the upper layer is going to be.  It seems very high.  Over 7.5", plus roadbed and track.  My tallest car is probably under 4" tall, but the portal has material that forms the arch over the train that makes it over 7.5" tall.  Are you guys using something else to allow you to use a shorter mountain?

Wes

[Wes Whitmore]

Ok then, I think I like the changes.  It's nice not having the crossing track that goes in front of the layout at full height.  I'll switch it around and see what happens.

Thanks,
Wes

[Anonymous]

Wes,
Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you... been out all morning and afternoon.

You got it!   The reason this plan is better is because your three switches are now in plain view and you do not have to create removable scenery to get to the switches if you have problems.

Your last plan had the inner loop on the right behind the front track which was raised.  This could be really nice if modeled correctly, but it poses a huge challenge, and would have resulted in two of your switches being either behind raised track or under a mountain... both should be avoided at all costs... and yes I am fully aware that my design has I think 6 switches that are hidden!

[Wes Whitmore]

Sorry Brent, I just can't see it for some reason.  The incline starts at the back left, and works its way up to height as it comes around the right end of the layout, continuing to the left for the loopback.  If I make the left side outer loop the higher section, then the ramp going across the front of the layout will now be on the bench, and start the incline there, and the back section will incline will rise from right to left, until reaching the left section of the track.  I have a switch there to hit my little island part of my bench, which will now have to be built elevated (not big deal).  But because the right inner spur is connected to the left outer loop, it will now have to be elevated, which is really just flipping what I have one one end of the bench for the other.  I don't know what I am gaining...I'm sure it's right in front of my face, but to me it looks like I am just putting the problem to the other end of the layout.

 

Guide me!
Wes

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804354062702/0

 

[Anonymous]

Wes, Everything stays the same, all you do is tuck the inner loop under the outer loop... then your hill will be on the left and not on the right. So instead of your rise being from left to right it will be from right to left...

[Wes Whitmore]

So how do I flip the left side tracks so the larger diameter track is on top, and NOT flip the right loops as well? Or is that not a problem since there aren't any switches there? 

Thanks,
Wes

[Wes Whitmore]

Yup, just free lancing something that fits on my small layout.  I want to use some sort of trustles (I already have the MTH plastic ones).  As for flipping the loops, that's really what I need to do.  It might fix my problems of tunnels and mountain buildup on the left side.  I'll try it and see what happens.

Thanks for the help!

Wes

[csxt30]

A little off topic, but been meaning to post to the original question.  (No Offense)  I found out what the emergency stop button was for.  After reading the original question, I decided to see if I could handle 5 engines and two hand helds.  Not too bad considering I was doing that on a 31" circle.  Had them all running, probably for about 5 minutes whistles a little chatter and fun then decided to bring them down!  That was going to be a problem didn't think that far ahead.  Looked like the freeway at rush hour.  So just did the emergency stop.

What fun this all is!  Love TMCC and DCS 

Too !!

Don : looks like you had your hands full !! Sometimes I make up a lashup with all the engines going the same direction, then separate them all & can have them all going at once keeping a good space from each other. Now that's in TMCC, not familiar with DCS.  Also, if you forget what engine you're controlling, just hit the horn button !! That emergency button is nice !!

Thanks, John

[dbaker48]

A little off topic, but been meaning to post to the original question.  (No Offense)  I found out what the emergency stop button was for.  After reading the original question, I decided to see if I could handle 5 engines and two hand helds.  Not too bad considering I was doing that on a 31" circle.  Had them all running, probably for about 5 minutes whistles a little chatter and fun then decided to bring them down!  That was going to be a problem didn't think that far ahead.  Looked like the freeway at rush hour.  So just did the emergency stop.

What fun this all is!  Love TMCC and DCS 

[Anonymous]

Wes,
I agree with Fife... lookin' good!  One other option, that Fife ignored, is to change which is the upper route with the lower route, so the larger loop is your upper (raised track) and the inner loop would be inside a tunnel.  This exposes more of your track to viewing and makes both of your switches easily accessible.

[fifedog]

Hey, WES, I like that.  Can I suggest you use wooden or steel trestles to finish your climb in the foreground, so that you can still see your lower/inner loop on the right.

Are you freelancing, or do you have a certain roadname/region in mind?

[Wes Whitmore]

Well, I'm back from the Philippines.  It's pretty hot there.  Not too many trains to be found.  I finalized on my design, and finally picked up enough track to complete it.  I found by adding an internal loop instead of heading back up the hill, I could start the incline back at the top left corner (there is a switch there at that corner that I didn't include in this picture).  That create less than a 2% incline at 7" rise.  If I can go shorter, then that's even better.  It also allows me two good "stop" zones so I can run two short trains at a time.  I'll tweak some more, but watching the train go up the long grade is very rewarding already.  I just need to find a better way to build up that mountain.  RIght now the track is sitting on CD cases for testing purposes.  I just wanted to let you guys know where I was in my long process.

 Thanks,
Wes

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804351683287/0

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, you could do that... but you're starting to add complexity and possibly start getting the spaghetti look you were trying to avoid...

Then I did this... and it doesn't look too bad, even in 3D - you can still see the switches...
[img=http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/2914/wess5vf0.jpg]

I would go with the last image, then if you want to experiment, try this one... or something along those lines.  I try to avoid blocking track views with other track...

[Wes Whitmore]

No, I meant take out the curve (on your grid about, 3 down, 4 to the right, starting from the top left), and send it straight over the the right of the bench, connecting it with the ramping section, and eventually down the hill.  That would give you two paths back down the hill. 

Wes

[Anonymous]

Any reason why not to send the upper track on switch across the front to connect with the elavated track heading back down?  It cuts into the scenery area, but might make operations even more fun.

No, no 3D modeling with RR-Track Lite (get that with the full version).

I didn't quite get the last paragraph... If I get you, you are asking 'why not add a passing siding on the elevated section?  I didn't do that because:

1. It would be a short siding
2. It would cover up too many switches - want to reduce the number of 'inaccessible' switches so you aren't ducking under the layout (reduces the number of train related concusions).

[Wes Whitmore]

Gotcha.  I'll have to modify just a little to fit on the benchwork, but it looks good. Thanks for doing it.  It leaves the center open for some scenery.

The 3D modeling is nice.  I don't think I have that with RR Track Lite...

Any reason why not to send the upper track on switch across the front to connect with the elavated track heading back down?  It cuts into the scenery area, but might make operations even more fun.

Wes

[Anonymous]

This is what I was getting at...


Here it is in 3D...

[Anonymous]

LOL!

What you could do... I haven't messed with this design...

1. your deep siding in the back - move the left most switch to the track section just before it.  This will pull the siding a bit closer to the rear track.
2. remove the curve section leading to the longest siding, and have that siding run infront of your raised track, you will lose a little length on this siding, but not much.

That should give you enough extra room to clear the middle siding.  The WYE switch should land just over the switch leading to the passing loop/front siding.  You may now have enough room to put a small operating siding off the inside of the left bottom passing loop (not sure about this or if it will even look good - may want that space for scenery)... hmmm...

[Wes Whitmore]

That steel support looks really nice.  At $8 a foot, it's a steel (get it!).

 

I could get rid of the middle siding on the 3 siding design just so I don't have to rebuilt my bench.

I tried to swing the 0-31 spur back up to how the other 3 siding design is, but I am not going to be able to clear that single parking siding towards the right of the layout without severly sacrificing grade.  Any ideas?

Wes

[Anonymous]

Wes,
I understood you fully!   If you can't move the switch lamps to the back of the layout then you can not have the three stacked sidings.  You will have to eliminate the inner siding and go with two as the lamps will get in your way.  The sidings I added will allow you to add a couple opperating cars and also give you room to park a train or two.

I too like your latest version... it adds a bit more 'depth' to the layout.

As for the elevated risers... this is what I am referring to: http://www.steeltoys.com/steel_el.htm

[Wes Whitmore]

Brent, The lamp and motor structure for the switches is all one piece, so it's got to stay.  I can add the the front of the layout, but not the rear.  I think I can achieve the same results by adding to the front.

I'm interested in those stacking truss you are talking about.  I don't think I have seen them, but I have been wondering how I was going to support an over-and-under track.

I like the sidings that you added.  I'm still up in the air on the triple siding like you drew, or the latest one I just did.  I like the openness of the my latest, but I also like having those three trains sitting side by side.  The more open one will allow me to trigger a train as I pass by on the top long straight as it works to the left, and parks in the most right siding, waiting for the train that just left that siding to go up and back down the hill.  It's a little longer loop to the left, so two trains will be operating at the same time for a little longer.  I probably didn't explain that too well. 

I'll try your flip and see what happens.

Wes

[Anonymous]

Wes,
I like the latest version... it would probably be more aestheticly pleasing if you moved the upper loop (front most squiggle) back over the rear tracks... or flip the track so the rear would be the front and you could then straighten the squiggle...

My mind is starting to swim again from all these layout designs!  LOL!

Brent

[Anonymous]

Wes,
I just noticed something... I don't know if the MTH RealTrack switches can be used without the lamp, but you do not have enough room for the switch lamps on your two left most rear switches.  In order to use switches this close together you have to place the switch lamps on the outside of the switch, then you don't have enough depth on the table... You need to add 4 inches to the back of the layout.  It you can use the switches without the switch lamp, then you can leave the depth as is...

This has a 7 inch rise resulting in 4.7% grade:


Dropping to a 6 inch rise results in a 4% grade.

I added a couple industrial sidings to the top of the hills:


IF you can use O-31 curves you can do something like this, and get the 7 inch rise down to 3.7%:


Keep in mind that your upper track is going to be high enough to clear the back straights, so you can double stack them and us elevated track trestles (think NY Subway steel risers) to raise the upper track over the lower track. Going down to 6 inches reduces the grade to 3.4%... if you are using Proto2 engines, then they should have no problems with these grades...

[Wes Whitmore]

True, but I have to buy the rest of the switches, and just a little bit more track.  I'm sure I will buy pieces that I won't end up using, but if I can help it, I will try to avoid it.

Thanks for all of your help.  I have at least 2 designs that I like now.

Wes

[fifedog]

You're starting to get a plate of spaghetti there.  You have posted quite a few variations in this column.  I think you already have the layout, just print them all out and set them before you, then pick and choose...

[Wes Whitmore]

Well here is a different approach.  It was getting a little too busy.  I think this is better.  I can automate two trains to run on their own without my supervision, and I now have a place to park a train while not in use.  Let me know what you think.

Oh, and I don't cook very well.

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/weswhitmore/photo/294928804328284267/0

Wes

[Anonymous]

I'm just fascinated with all the pretty lights, bells and whistles!