November 2012 MR features a number of 4 by 8 layouts which may fit your bill much better than the Cactus Valley RR.
This one also offers nice scenic possibilities. The scenic divider down the middle will make appear the layout much larger and gives it two different faces.
Hi Dave - good question. No, the layout is not fastened to the wall and when operating and working on it I will pull it away from the walls so I can walk around. Haven't decided if I want to put casters or some sort of leveler-glide-type feet. Also I haven't fastened the joists to the girders yet because I want to figure out my track plan first. I also need to add the long-way cross braces as well.One of the things I like about this Cactus Valley layout is that it has a pretty long main line for a small plan. I guess the trade off for that is less operational opportunities.I want to ask a question about that, and I hope I don't sound ignorant. I'm not sure I totally understand what people mean actually when they talk about operations. If you have some sort of industry, does this mean that you just go back and forth from the industry to another part of the layout to simulate operation? This also seems like it could get boring after a while, no? I can't really picture myself creating work orders, carrying them out, etc . I also don't think I would be interested in doing extensive yard switching ever, other than maybe swapping out one locomotive for another. I can envison passenger operations though, seems like it would be fun to go through stations on a schedule, stop at the right platform locations, have express/local trains, etc. With my kids I think it would be most fun to just be able to give each of them a controller and let them control the trains going around, switch up locos, etc. Or have one control the train and the other do the switching. Not sure extensive operations is my goal, but that may be because I don't completely understand what that means.So far I'm considering this plan, as well as the Virginian but am open to other ideas as well.
Hi Byron,
the grade at the right side is much steeper; 22" length for a 1" rise is already 4,5%. The effective grade will then be 4,5% + (32/18)% = 6,25%.
Also the length of the passing siding indicates very short trains only.
Smile
Paul
I doubt that the plan can easily be adapted for two-train operation. You´d have to change the single-line track into double track all the way, which would make the layout look like a bowl of spaghetti - even more than it already does.
Take a look at last year´s MR project layout, the Virginian. It may not be as fancy as the Cactus Valley RR in terms of scenery, but it offers ops for two people.
H:
I hope you are not annoyed by this question but I have to ask. Is your benchwork located against the wall permanently or will it be moved into open space? If it is going to stay against the wall, how will you reach the back of the layout when (not if) you have a derailment. How will you do scenery etc.?
All that is necessary is to pull the layout away from the far wall enough that you can get down that side of the layout. Depending on your girth that might only be 24" but more would be nicer. You could temporarily pull the benchwork further from the wall to make construction easier and then move it closer when things are done. Castors would make that easy to do.
If I can suggest, it looks like you have left a generous amount of space between the right wall and the benchwork. If you can relocate the shelf (workbench?) unit elsewhere you could add another 12" - 18" of benchwork to the right side. That might make double tracking a bit easier.
Keep in mind that the benchwork only has to be accessable on three sides, so the left side can stay against the wall.
If you have already figured this all out I apologise for not giving you enough credit.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
Dave Frary holds the copyright and has placed the Cactus Valley article series on-line here as a .pdf
hominamadNow my question...I'm wondering if there's any way anyone can think of to modify this plan slightly to allow for 2 train operation. Ideally it would be 2 trains operating continuously, but I'd also be happy to have one train run continuous, while another train does a short point-point ops movement. I have two kids and would love for them both to be able to operate it at the same time.
As you'll note, the grades are pretty steep (on very sharp curves) and things are pretty tight overall. The five-foot width will help a bit, but without a corresponding increase in length, you won't be able to ease things as much as you might like like.
Adding another path is going to be a bit of a challenge -- it will likely take more than modifying it "slightly" to have two trains in continuous motion. In my humble opinion, beginning with a plan already designed for two separate ovals or paths would be easier than retrofitting them to this plan. But others may see an easy approach that I am missing.*
As published, the plan does not offer much in the way of long-term operating interest, but that's perhaps not on your list of desires.
Note that the grades are around 3% before allowing for the additional friction caused by the 18" radius curves. That puts the effective grades at 3% + (32/18) = 4.75% or so. As drawn, the plan does not allow room for the vertical easements into the grade, but you'll need them when you build, so that will have the effect of increasing the grade a bit more. But you will get a little break on grades from the extra width if you use it well. In any case, short trains of short cars will be the order of the day. Which is not a show-stopper, so long as you are aware and use care in setting the grades and vertical easements as you build.
Frary's published Cactus Valley was a neat scenic exercise on the HO 4X8 sacred sheet. As a beginning model railroad track plan for two trains in continuous motion, perhaps not the ideal starting point. But if you are careful and patient in the construction, it's not impossible.
Best of luck.
Byron
*Edit: Obviously, the simplest conceptual way would be to make the layout double-tracked with the same general plan. But this does create some grade and clearance challenges, I think. Some or all of these might be solved through thoughtful use of the additional width.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
After deliberating for two years I finally took the step toward creating my first layout. After a lot of internal struggle, I decided to go with a 5x8 rather than an around the room in my space. I chose 5x8 because I could afford the extra foot and thought it could give me a bit more opportunity than a standard 4x8.
I built my base benchwork (L-girder) last weekend and now just have to come up with a track plan for it.
I've been researching a lot and really like the Cactus Valley plan that was featured in MRR a few years back. It is also in this book here for those that want to see it (not sure if I'm allowed to post the plan directly here) on page 6: http://tinyurl.com/bgufbq6
Now my question...I'm wondering if there's any way anyone can think of to modify this plan slightly to allow for 2 train operation. Ideally it would be 2 trains operating continuously, but I'd also be happy to have one train run continuous, while another train does a short point-point ops movement. I have two kids and would love for them both to be able to operate it at the same time.
I do have an extra foot in width from the original plan's 4x8.
Another plan I like is the Granite Gorge layout, but from what I've read this is really not a good plan for a first timer.
I would love to be able to run two trains continuously, one passenger and one freight or industry but I think the most important thing for me is to have a plan that I can realistically complete, and have minimum to no derailments.
Thanks!
H