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!

First designed layout

8811 views
51 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2005
  • 535 posts
Posted by nucat78 on Monday, November 5, 2007 12:15 PM
 dehusman wrote:

The N runaround is virtually useless.  I would suggest losing the runaround, use the real estate to lengthen the tracks and put in a sector plate at the end of the tracks. [...] I suggest he draw the plan to about 1/2 or 1.4 scale and cut out scale sized cars and try to operate it.  

I agree completely.  That north runaround can hold maybe one car.  So if you pull a cut from the IM yard, do you want to pull one car onto the runaround, shove it into the yard, go back and get one more car, shove it in, etc?   Better to use the longer runaround and push the cars up to the yard.  Maybe you want a single car runaround to add to operational complexity, but I don't think it will prove very satisfying in the long term.

If you don't try operating with scale-sized cutouts, measure the lengths of your tracks and see what each track can hold.  I had a similar problem trying to shoehorm in a tailtrack for a runaround.  It couldn't hold more than a switcher and one 50-ft boxcar.  Since I wanted to run GPs, I had to redesign.

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Monday, November 5, 2007 12:56 PM

 Wikious wrote:

Now, I know that if an intermodal train is in WI, it's probably lost, and that coal mine should be, if anything, a gravel quarry. I really want to build something with interesting operations, however.

That's why I suggested a paper mill. A little more plausible than a coal mine and a lot more variety. Chemicals and pulpwood/chips in, paper in a variety of boxcars, waste chemicals out. It could concieveably handle tank cars, covered hoppers, open top hoppers, flats and boxcars.

The first industry that came to mind that I could model both ends was hauling coal to a powerplant.

But you have both ends of the paper mill on your layout, you could have 3 moves (there is a 4th but we'll get to that later). If you made your power plant into a bag plant, you could move paper from the paper mill to the bag plant, then bags to the flour mill, then flour to the interchange. Plus you could make the industry in the center either a chemical plant that makes chemicals to supply the paper mill or uses the spent chemicals from the paper mill to make something else. So now you have several interplant moves on the same layout.

Regarding that yard, it will serve, at most, a dozen containers per train (One 5-car unit train and one separate car) with one of those container cranes on the huge forklift.
Here's where the paper mill comes into play. Why is there a intermodal ramp? It serves the export business of the paper mill and flour mill. Both companies have either export activities or sell to truck served customers, so between them they generate enough business to support a small ramp.

The north yard will serve as an interchange yard, with who it really doesn't matter.
Good choice, basically open staging. You do need a longer runaround, that is basically a train length long. Since this is a industrial branch kinda thing, the tail of the runaround only needs to be an engine length long. Or you could make it a sector plate and essentially have a runaround on every track. You could also put a couple tracks in the town area for an industry. I would suggest putting a small station about the middle of the town, with a "house track" on one end. Then put a concrete foundation next to the house track. The house track would be your engine service/tieup track (where the old freight house used to be). The station is now the railroad's office. You could put what used to be a platform and the other stuff as detail elements to show what used to be there when it was a passenger station.

Between the current bakery tracks and the intermodal yard I'm going to build a viewblock- large hills with forest and possibly even a vertical board.
I would suggest a vertical board of foamcore or double sidfed masonite with a thin treeline against it. Paint hills in the distance. It will make a better view block and use up way less real estate.

As to the turnouts, well, you really have to use what you have, and snap switches are sadly what I have several of, as well as lots of sectional track.

Use the switches if that's what you have, but every place you can, replace the sectional track with flex track. You will be way, way better off.

Dave H.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: The mystic shores of Lake Eerie
  • 1,329 posts
Posted by Autobus Prime on Monday, November 5, 2007 2:37 PM
W:

I like this layout. It does look like you are using the wrong track library, but HO track should fit in the same place without too much trouble. I'd go with the switches and track you have, if you've already got it, perhaps with those short straights added so you can relay them later. OTOH, flextrack isn't so expensive, and it will look smoother and have fewer joints.

I do have some suggestions:



You can use a runaround as stub tracks, but you can never use stub tracks as a runaround, try as you might, so I lengthened it into the yard. I like what you did with the container yard; it can be switched somewhat without blocking the main. I added the stub track near the mine to allow shuffling of empties and loads there while letting mainline trains pass in the same way.

Finally, I added rough suggestions for a loop connection and wye. I find that, especially on a small layout, I want continuous running, to lengthen the run, to break stuff in, or just to watch trains sometimes. The wye allows you to use the 1 terminal as 2 cities in an out-&-back plan.

That's just my 2 cents.
 Currently president of: a slowly upgrading trainset fleet o'doom.
  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Monday, November 5, 2007 3:07 PM

Thanks to whoever recommended XtrkCAD (I can't find who said it); I'm putting my track plan into the program now and I'd have run some trains if I could only figure out how to work the switches in the program Confused [%-)]. I do think that a longer North runaround will be needed, and I am going to expand the north yard- I just have to figure out the specifics of what I can fit in. I should have another plan up later this evening (not at my home computer all day, so I can't really work on it).

Thanks to everybody who's replied to this, even if I don't use your advice. It's really great to have this kind of support for making your own track plan for the first time. One thing I thought of with the coal mine would be to have 2 tracks load coal, and the last track load rock at a faster rate- several runs would be required per session for gravel. I could put in part of a cement factory above the yard.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: East Granby, CT, USA
  • 505 posts
Posted by jim22 on Monday, November 5, 2007 8:57 PM

edited to correct misinformation about snap switches... 

 

I like xtrkcad.  If I remember correctly, when simulating, you flip the turnouts with the mouse, maybe clicking on the rails past the frog.

Just to clarify my previous suggestion that you use a left switch to eliminate the s-curve in the north runaround, I meant a snap-switch due to it's curved diverging leg.  If it's any consolation, I have a loop at one end of my layout that I'm about to rebuild with code 83 snap switches. The #4 customlines work great for me.  I'm assuming (hoping) the snap switches will too.  One significant difference is the frogs - the customlines have conductive frogs that can be wired (I haven't need to wire any of them).  The snap switches have plastic frogs.

When I do rebuild my loop, I will use sectional track to do it.  My experience with flex track is ok, but it's difficult to lay perfect curves, especially when joining with turnouts.  The result of an imperfect 18 inch radius curve is that portions of it are more than 18 inch and portions of it are LESS.  The less parts tend to be derailing points.  I will cut and solder together sectional track so I get exaclty 18 inch this time.   It might work well to use flex on the less severe curves, or perhaps solder flex to a piece of sectional track to establish the initial curve.

By the way, I notice you're taking a bit of a beating about your layout.   I recommend you take it all with a grain of salt.  The suggestions are good, and can help you make a better layout, it in the end it will be YOUR layout.  You can certainly lay some track, wire it, and TRY IT OUT FOR YOURSELF.  Nobody will ever tell you that you can't dissassemble it and try something different :-)  Remember: it's a hobby!  Keep it fun!

Jim 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vail, AZ
  • 1,943 posts
Posted by Vail and Southwestern RR on Monday, November 5, 2007 9:05 PM

Shift-left click to throw turnouts in XTrkCad.

 

Jeff But it's a dry heat!

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Monday, November 5, 2007 10:45 PM

Thanks for the help with turnouts, Jeff. I took a test spin doing a little bit of shuffling cars around and switching, and I was very glad of two things right away: the longer north runaround (which actually does serve a purpose when delivering to the bakery, etc.) and the extra two tracks on the north yard. The only thing that was a problem running was that the tracks under the mine are too short, but that's easily fixed. I also had problems with tank cars, but I think that's because the ones I was using are 25' at least longer than the ones I'll be using.

Anyway, here's my latest plan, done on XtrkCAD:
 

one square = 1' foot. I didn't bother drawing in benchwork this time. 

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Tuesday, November 6, 2007 8:46 AM

Without going into any operational aspects of the layout, there re a couple minor things that I might help you solve and show you a little about the program.

1) Look at the top yard. You notice how the train takes a little S turn while the one below is smooth. Okay delete everything above the turnout (the top two tracks the two short curved pieces)

Now using the extend track tool. Click on the diverging leg of the turnout and drag out some track. Now click on a right turnout from your library place it on the track and drag it toward the turnout until it won't go any more. Select the remaining straight track and delete it. Use the extend track tool, click on the diverging leg, and drag track with the lower yard. Use your parallel track tool to make a straight piece of track above the track you just made. Now use the join track tool to connect the new leg to the open leg of the turnout.

(actually you could have put a second turnout before you deleted the excess and created a third yard track. You have room.)  

2) The upper runaround is still a little small and awkwardly shaped. You have one section with a turn tighter than your minimum radius (in red). Select and delete all the tracks between the yard throats and the siding in the upper right corner.

Use your extend track tool to extend the diverging leg. Like before select a right turnout and slide it until it cant go any further. Delete the excess straight track. Use the join tool to connect the diverging track of the new turnout to the lower yard throat. Use the join tool again to connect the other leg of the turnout to the upper yard throat.

Your runaround is longer and smoother.

 

Chip

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

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Wednesday, November 7, 2007 10:25 PM

Here's the latest (sorry for the long delay, I've been busy). I had to zoom out, since the last one on Xtrk was done by combining about 7 screenshots and I don't feel like doing that again. I added in lines for how I'm going to break up the benchwork. It has to be modular, since I can't devote the room permanantly to the layout. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vail, AZ
  • 1,943 posts
Posted by Vail and Southwestern RR on Thursday, November 8, 2007 12:47 AM

You can export the XTrkCad drawing to a .bmp (under the file menu), convert to jpg using your favorite graphics manipulation program (irfanview, in my case), and then post the jpg.  No need to stitch screenshots.

 

Jeff But it's a dry heat!

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Thursday, November 8, 2007 8:20 PM

Thanks for yet another Xtrk tip. Here's the fixed version:

Should I take the relative silence on this to mean that this plan is mostly okay?  I was also wondering if anybody had ideas for small industries served by one or two cars a day (mainly boxcars, but open gondolas would work, too) that I might put along the industry sidings?

And in case anyone was wondering, since I never got an answer on this, adding short straight sections between tight turn radius tracks doesn't help run longer cars.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Thursday, November 8, 2007 11:26 PM

Well since you ask...

The upper runaround is still not long enough for you to get around your train without cutting it, which will get old after a while. I explained how you could fix it, but since you didn't... Likewise, it makes no sense to have two runarounds right next to each other that only come together for a car length and split apart. The dual curve probably should go since coupling and uncoupling will be difficult. All the places where the track shows red are problems. You need to work those out.  

Finally you could have twice the yard you have now if you used the technique I explained to you. Thing is once you learn it you could cut your design time down by a factor of 10. No kidding.  

Chip

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

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Vail, AZ
  • 1,943 posts
Posted by Vail and Southwestern RR on Thursday, November 8, 2007 11:45 PM

As far as an 'industry' that might use a box car or two a day....team track.  Just a road, and a ramp if there's room.

 

Jeff But it's a dry heat!

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Friday, November 9, 2007 7:29 AM
 SpaceMouse wrote:

Well since you ask...

The upper runaround is still not long enough for you to get around your train without cutting it, which will get old after a while. I explained how you could fix it, but since you didn't... Likewise, it makes no sense to have two runarounds right next to each other that only come together for a car length and split apart. The dual curve probably should go since coupling and uncoupling will be difficult. All the places where the track shows red are problems. You need to work those out.  

Finally you could have twice the yard you have now if you used the technique I explained to you. Thing is once you learn it you could cut your design time down by a factor of 10. No kidding.  

Well, I thought I understood your advice. Any chance you might be able to draw a picture or two? 

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Friday, November 9, 2007 9:25 AM
Sent a pm.

Chip

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

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Friday, November 9, 2007 5:05 PM

Okay, I tried to stick to your concept here, but I must say the snap switches are a limitation. They absorb space in the layout.

Both runarounds are extended to provide for longer trains. I added two tracks to the yard, assuming the lower tracks are A/D or de facto staging. The upper yard is for building trains. I added engine service. The crossovers are for engines escaping--I guess redundant with the runaround.  

I deleted the redundant loop. The saved space can be used of a scenic element or another industry coming from the top of the lower runaround.  

 

 

Chip

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

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Saturday, November 10, 2007 6:54 AM

I decided I couldn't live with the yard split like that so I fixed it. I also threw in a couple more sidings to go with the extra yard capacity.

Chip

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

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Saturday, November 10, 2007 4:17 PM
That's amazing, SpaceMouse. Thank you for putting the time into my layout plan to do that. I just have one question. The extreme north yard track looks a bit too short to really do anything with, though. I might take that out on the final plan.

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Saturday, November 10, 2007 4:22 PM
You do and your engine can't release and get around the train.

Chip

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

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Saturday, November 10, 2007 6:08 PM

 SpaceMouse wrote:
You do and your engine can't release and get around the train.

Yeah, I realized that once I had a chance to do some operations on Xtrk. The engine house will most likely get cut, though. I'm not sure I'd need it with a 2 engine operation, and it'll save me from buying 2 more switches. 

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Saturday, November 10, 2007 7:48 PM
It's just more to do. You might want another engine or two at some point and need the space. It can be cut in later. Notice the two little squares--sand tower and diesel fuel.

Chip

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

  • Member since
    October 2007
  • From: Wisconsin
  • 378 posts
Posted by Wikious on Saturday, November 10, 2007 7:59 PM

 SpaceMouse wrote:
It's just more to do. You might want another engine or two at some point and need the space. It can be cut in later. Notice the two little squares--sand tower and diesel fuel.

I did see those. I might move engine operations to the far north yard track if I do keep them in. Then it'll serve a double purpose and won't just be "there". 

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

There are no community member 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!