A layout can stretch your pocket book in a hurry. However, some things need to be charged in different categories. Rolling stock power packs and electrical switches are easily movable to another layout. Scenic material such as ground foam is used up, not recyclable. Then there is track, turnouts and trees. With careful application and removal much of these can be salvaged. Wiring and lumber, some will be useful some scrapped, feeder wires and shorter pieces of lumber. A little like fixed and variable costs, some are layout specific and some are "hobby" expenses.
When laying your track, do not "glue" your turnouts down, makes them much easier to repair or replace and much easier to salvage. I put a wire peg in the trunks of my trees poke a hole in the foam, put a drop of white glue on the hole and insert the wire peg, they stay in place, easily removable, if necessary with no damage to the tree.
Have fun,
Richard
yeah, I wasn't going to count rolling stock because it's moveable.
Edit- I might also add that the cost of locos and rolling stock will be immense because the SP&S is pretty much non existent in N scale, locomotive wise anyways(and passenger car wise)
limits for freight trains is 10-14 pieces of rolling stock(including locos and caboose), or atleast whatever will fit into sidings.
SP&S modeler, 1960's give or take a decade or two for some equipment.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SGTDUPREY?feature=guide
Gary DuPrey
N scale model railroader
A while back I read that a layout will run between $50-$100 a square foot ( I guess depending on the urban to rural ratio of the layout--and figuring N tends to be more rural than HO) AT any rate, I shopped bargains on eBay etc. and I was able to keep my HO layout at around $50 per square foot. But I traded time for money. I spent a lot of time fixing up and reworking my eBay purchases to make them work for me. You can cut the costs by a lot if you plan out your layout carefully. A good investment would be to pick up a free layout design program and work out your kinks with pixels instead of money.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Yeah, I was going to build it slowly. I don't mind having extra track, when I built my first layout I made lots of mistakes so this one I will be working piece by piece.
Burlington Northern #24The general idea of the plan is a single track with passing siding(s) as well as operational capabilities.
to save space so I can represent industries I was thinking of keeping the yard tracks to 3 or 4 wide and running just short of the length. I need to draw a track plan and take some above layout photos.
I have 18.25 R C55 curves I need to buy some more track.
Texas Zepher Are you thinking once around with just two passing sidings, twice around with 3 or 4 sidings, point-to-point, or something more creative? Always a good idea, as a small layout doesn't necessarily need a large yard. Another option could be just 1 or 2 tracks wide that are longer. So with curves this big one could basically take any of the HO scale 4 x 6 track plans out there to use as a starting point. Any particular reason you are using such large curves?
Are you thinking once around with just two passing sidings, twice around with 3 or 4 sidings, point-to-point, or something more creative?
Always a good idea, as a small layout doesn't necessarily need a large yard. Another option could be just 1 or 2 tracks wide that are longer.
So with curves this big one could basically take any of the HO scale 4 x 6 track plans out there to use as a starting point. Any particular reason you are using such large curves?
I'm not sure, the SP&S main is full of passing sidings because it's a one track main(even today). I want to represent it fairly without burying it under the rest of the stuff.
yeah 1-2 tracks, I'd like 3 but would settle for less. just so a local/thru could originate in pasco and then reach vancouver and be seperated/switched.
18.25 curves why so big , I like passenger service and there were lots of pool trains from the GN,NP, SP&S, MILW, & UP though the UP & MILW may get a little underrepresented on this layout. plus it gives freight locos(usually a lone RS3, or RS1) an edge and makes the weight of the train not such a burden around curves.
So I am trying to understand, I am guessing you are talking about Vancouver Washington, not Vancouver BC. If so do you want to do the big bridge just out from the station? That would be an amazing centerpiece for the layout. Shucks, might be a bit hard in 4x6. How much River do you want on the layout?
Texas Zepher So I am trying to understand, I am guessing you are talking about Vancouver Washington, not Vancouver BC. If so do you want to do the big bridge just out from the station? That would be an amazing centerpiece for the layout. Shucks, might be a bit hard in 4x6. How much River do you want on the layout?
Hmmm, and another question. How do the trains arriving down the SP&S from the east get into the station. Do they head south on the bridge and back in. Or do they just stop on the east side of the station.
Do any trains terminate here? If so, where is the locomotive facility, and coach yard? Do the road loco's take the train there or are they detached and a switcher take the empty train away?
Edit - looks like you were posting part of the answer while I was drafting the question.
hmmmm, I didn't think of that. I could put the loco facility next to the roundhouse and turntable or on the opposite side of it. let's see stub end passenger track, I could place the loco track, switcher track, and car storage track.... hmmmm Texas Zephyr I'm scratching my head on this one, these are good questions I need to figure it out. hmmmmmm...
While waiting for class to start I was working on it a bit more erased the Pasco side, I'll work on that once the vancouver side gets finished/tweaked. lets see the left side will be trains coming from the west and the right side will be west. passenger service from the west t will back in(locos on front of train which forward is right), locos will detach and head to loco tracks for servicing. eastern(trains headed left)will pass station uncouple and the switcher will couple to the observation car and push the train into the station and will switch and cut cars as needed. let's see to place coaches in the coach yard the switcher will have to cross the main(which is already being held up by this operation anyways) to places coaches in the coach yard.
that will be done for trains longer than 8 cars(like my BN HS ones and pool trains), trains like my Centralian, Olympia Zephyr, a GN train and the SP&S train(which I need to get cars paint cars and Name will all be 6-7 cars, so there probably will be no removal of any cars . Feel free to tweak it, I'm open to opinions and thoughts. keep them civil though, please.
Perhaps you've already laid this out and it will all work, but from your drawing, it doesn't seem likely. There is just too much in the space. Before I mentioned getting a free layout program to design your layout. That software will keep you from over-designing. I like XtrkCAD. You can get it here: http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage There is a tutorial to get you started. I suggest using that as well.
Thanks Spacemouse, yeah I'm trying to keep it so that trains won't be sidelined for an hour while cars get switched around.
even with the tutorial I'm having a bugger of a time trying to figure it out, I'll use a ruler and some track.
Yeah, I'll check those out too. I'm going to pick up some turnouts, some more sectional track. Should I put some cork roadbed down under the track or straight to board it. I did cork roadbed on my first layout and I have track straight to board on my ti"N"y project layout. the sound isn't any different.
hi BN,
the plan you provided lacks lots of information. You could be specific about turnout sizes and the applied minimum radius. From a previous post I had the impression your are aiming for 18,75; you might want to use #7 turnouts for the passenger tracks, especially since you will be backing long consits.
However when I try to draw your plan with a 15 minimum radius and #5 turnouts there is no space at all left for the three track yard in the middle. Even without a ruler and a compass, using "Armstrong" squares, you will be able to draw plans that will fit in your space. Yours doesn't even come close. Please do your homework before posting plans.
Paul
First off it's a sketch not in concrete, the yard was an idea I was tossing around in my head. I'm trying to be as flexible as possible. "Please do your homework before posting plans" look is that necessary, the choice to partcipate in others thread is yours but statements like these are not needed. The NTS on the bottom of the paper stands for not to scale, I need to get some more track before I can actually get this thing down and figure out exactly what I can and can't do.
http://download.atlasrr.com/09TrackCat/NScale16-40.pdf I'
I'm looking at this N scale track, I wonder if a switch to 21.25" R track would be plausible because it would allow curved turnouts. I could always place a turnout in the area between the 18.25" R curves so that way passenger rains could easily reach the station.
Also I have 3 side access to the layout(bottom, Right side, Top).
Modification proposition: I could have a passing siding and have it return to the main and link up to the station.
Gary,
if you want to be taken serious, you will have to show a serious drawing. Just one turnout is enough to know its length. Some easy calculating will give you an idea how long a row of 7 turnouts will be.
Throwing impossible ideas around and then asking others to comment on them might not be the way to get respectful responses. It is not about what is exactly possible or not. It's not even about drawing to scale. But when you draw turnouts one inch long while they are almost 5" in reality you are cheating and wasting my time.
As I've said before even a NTS scetch can be based on a known minimum radius and known turnout-sizes. That exactly is the beauty of doodling with Armstrong squares.
I'll be more patient, so I'll wait till you've found what's really possible after you have acquired some more track.
Paulus Jas Gary, if you want to be taken serious, you will have to show a serious drawing. Just one turnout is enough to know its length. Some easy calculating will give you an idea how long a row of 7 turnouts will be. Throwing impossible ideas around and then asking others to comment on them might not be the way to get respectful responses. It is not about what is exactly possible or not. It's not even about drawing to scale. But when you draw turnouts one inch long while they are almost 5" in reality you are cheating and wasting my time. As I've said before even a NTS scetch can be based on a known minimum radius and known turnout-sizes. That exactly is the beauty of doodling with Armstrong squares. I'll be more patient, so I'll wait till you've found what's really possible after you have acquired some more track. Paul
I'm not asking you to not throw in comments or suggestions, please don't do it with such a rude tone. To be honest but not disrespectful your comment did come off as slightly disrespectful, the track shortage is not making it any easier for me to get exact dimensions on what I need.
the minimum radius is 18.75, I tried finding track dimensions but to no avail. I managed to get one atlas C55 #5 turnout(I think) I will do some measurements when it gets here in 3-4 days. If turnouts are 5" long then placing one in the middle of the curve isn't doable, it takes 4 18.75's to make half a curve.
BN#24,
That sketch,that you posted,looks like,that would be a very interesting,layout,,,,now if it was on a bigger,plan,,, obviously,that will not fit in the space,provided,,,, I believe,you may have to be more,realistic in your approach to designing a plan.......
Cheers,
Frank
hi Gary,
I made a mistake, those #5 turnouts are 6" long.
Looking at the row of 10 turnouts I instantly knew these alone would take about 60" or 5 ft. Then you still need to add space for the yard-tracks, the two end-curves and some extra space for the engine terminal. Tan-coloured are (Armstrong) squares. By using them you can easily estimate the total length a track configuration will take. BTW when printing out turnouts from CAD 1:1 you are able to find their length. Peco has done it for their line of turnouts and placed it on the web. Their turnouts are shorter, however keep in mind you might have to use small filler pieces to obtain the required spacing. A 180 degree turn takes 37,50" , add 6" for a turnout in the middle and you still have 4,5 inches left. Enough for on more track at the bottom, still keeping 3,25" for the two spaces between the tracks and the edge of the layout. Pretty tight though just doable. On my drawing i've two turnouts in the middle, so I need half a foot more width. You could win some space by using Peco curved turnouts, they don't come really cheap however.
Looking at the row of 10 turnouts I instantly knew these alone would take about 60" or 5 ft. Then you still need to add space for the yard-tracks, the two end-curves and some extra space for the engine terminal.
Tan-coloured are (Armstrong) squares. By using them you can easily estimate the total length a track configuration will take.
BTW when printing out turnouts from CAD 1:1 you are able to find their length. Peco has done it for their line of turnouts and placed it on the web. Their turnouts are shorter, however keep in mind you might have to use small filler pieces to obtain the required spacing.
A 180 degree turn takes 37,50" , add 6" for a turnout in the middle and you still have 4,5 inches left. Enough for on more track at the bottom, still keeping 3,25" for the two spaces between the tracks and the edge of the layout. Pretty tight though just doable. On my drawing i've two turnouts in the middle, so I need half a foot more width. You could win some space by using Peco curved turnouts, they don't come really cheap however.
Hi Gary,
I know you are probably getting frustrated with everyone pushing you to have an accurate representation of your layout plans. The thing is there are some very talented layout designers who would like nothing more than to help you. Most of these people look at what you have presented and moved on because you have not given them anything to work with.
Learning a design program is not just for today, it will save you a lot of time and money with every layout you imagine--and it works big time when you imagine a layout and find out it won't work in the space you have...before you build it to test it with your track. Plus fiddling around with different options takes only seconds. Here's a plan I drew in n-scale just for laughs and giggles a few years ago. it is 42" x 6'8" so not quite your space. When I opened it up to show you I immediately spotted a couple problems, so it is not perfect. I used XtrkCAD.
Two of the compromises that people with small space usually make is foregoing a roundhouse and turntable because they take a lot of space with very little operational return. Likewise, a double ended yard also takes a lot of space--and in your case above, serves little purpose. A stub yard takes less space.
Paulus Jas hi Gary, I made a mistake, those #5 turnouts are 6" long. Looking at the row of 10 turnouts I instantly knew these alone would take about 60" or 5 ft. Then you still need to add space for the yard-tracks, the two end-curves and some extra space for the engine terminal. Tan-coloured are (Armstrong) squares. By using them you can easily estimate the total length a track configuration will take. BTW when printing out turnouts from CAD 1:1 you are able to find their length. Peco has done it for their line of turnouts and placed it on the web. Their turnouts are shorter, however keep in mind you might have to use small filler pieces to obtain the required spacing. A 180 degree turn takes 37,50" , add 6" for a turnout in the middle and you still have 4,5 inches left. Enough for on more track at the bottom, still keeping 3,25" for the two spaces between the tracks and the edge of the layout. Pretty tight though just doable. On my drawing i've two turnouts in the middle, so I need half a foot more width. You could win some space by using Peco curved turnouts, they don't come really cheap however.
I've contacted Atlas, to try and get length and width for their turnouts. I got an email address, so I'll send it. are there custom turnout kits in code 55?
Yes, but be sitting down when you see the price:
http://www.handlaidtrack.com/N-Scale-Turnout-Track-Kits-s/415.htm
Most of the cost of that kit is in the jig and tools, not the parts. Once you have one you can build more turnouts for the cost of track rail and ties.
I've done some more measuring and I think I've found a way to get around the station predicement. so the curve on the lower right side of the layout will get moved over enough that I can place two right hand turnouts which will serve as main line track and passenger station entry. I'm going to pull the yard and make it stub ended 2 track coach yard that can house 3 coaches a track which is 19.5" long I think those tracks would be easier to access if I placed them farther back maybe below the round house and turn table so that way I won't have switches cramming up the main. does this sound like a better alternative?
I was going to have a 3-4 track yard on the Pasco side of the layout. would that be doable in 4 feet?
kevinrr Yes, but be sitting down when you see the price: http://www.handlaidtrack.com/HO-4-Turnout-Kit-for-ME-Code-55-Rail-cw-Rail-p/ak-ho-t-4-me55.htm Most of the cost of that kit is in the jig and tools, not the parts. Once you have one you can build more turnouts for the cost of track rail and ties.
http://www.handlaidtrack.com/HO-4-Turnout-Kit-for-ME-Code-55-Rail-cw-Rail-p/ak-ho-t-4-me55.htm
Yes, that was the wrong page (sorry!). I edited the link above for thread history.
I almost fell out of my chair when I saw the kit price. But, if I intended to build a LOT of turnouts the jigs would be an excellent investment.
Instead I downloaded turnout templates to be printed, and the turnouts built directly on the printed templates. Here's a long-winded but still excellent tutorial on the subject.
Interesting, thank you for sharing. I'll also go check out Micro engineering's switches.
A general comment about the direction this is going. It might be a way to gain a little more space and make it more interesting scenically if the divider is not straight square across the space but put at an angle.
Texas Zepher A general comment about the direction this is going. It might be a way to gain a little more space and make it more interesting scenically if the divider is not straight square across the space but put at an angle.
Burlington Northern #24 what degree would you recommend Texas?
I think it might depend on everything else.
placement of everything else?
I was looking at ME C55 switches they're expensive but would they be worth it?
a few years ago I made two plans for a 6x4 sheet; one HO the other in N-scale. In HO the Yule Central was modified.
Inspired by the HO Delaware & Hudson (Model Railroad Planning 2006 and 102 Realistic Track Plans #22) I made an N-scale version; just to explore passenger train running.
North Bank would be more urban with 4 story town buildings, while River Junction would stay rural. Paul
North Bank would be more urban with 4 story town buildings, while River Junction would stay rural.
your passenger track came out to 42" long right?
I think I'm going to do a tiny bit more chopping. I'll modify the plan a little bit more.
I'm going to check how long 40' MTL cars are in inches, then measure other cars the longest car I own is a 5 unit Well car set.
just a few remarks to your plan:
Look at Pauls plan - it is a good balance between track & scenery!
Sir Madog Gary, just a few remarks to your plan: Lining all the track neatly alongside the edges of your layout will create an artificial, less prototypical or "organic" look of your layout The turntable will eat up more space than you will have on that layout. The lead to the turntable should not act as a yard lead - the way you have drawn it, you won´t be able to pull out more than just 1-2 cars out of the yard. Do you really need a turntable - I know it is an eye catcher, but in the Diesel era you can go without it. Look at Pauls plan - it is a good balance between track & scenery!
As for the roundhouse, well I'll be running steam(only a couple engines though) the engines I was planning on having in there was a light mountain, I will get a GN Mikado, and I will see what other wheel arrangements I will need for an SP&S loco to sit in the roundhouse.
thank you for having me re examine it, I have one question though for the three track yard how long are those tracks? will they be long enough to store coaches? if not I could stub end it on all of the tracks other than the one leading to the roundhouse would that also be a viable option?
I can also shorten turnouts to save space like in the N scale insights a couple issues ago.
You don't always have to have a roundhouse with a turntable. It is the roundhouse that is the space killer.
SpaceMouse You don't always have to have a roundhouse with a turntable. It is the roundhouse that is the space killer.
If you would like to keep your roundhouse, why not build an extension off to the side and have it on that so it doesn't hog space on the main part? That way, you can have all your locomotive servicing on a separate module and would be easier to work with leaving you more room on the 4X6.
Lone Geep
\
If you want to keep the roundhouse, why not make most of your layout a engine servicing facility? A small yard with the roundhouse,,not ALL tracks HAVE to lead to the roundhouse,,,some can just radial off the TT to dead ends for open air loco 'storage".
You could still ring it with a loop if you wanted continuous running, BUT:
I have a concern. I know how big some of the larger radius of curves Can get...it can take up a large space just for a circle OR oval...have you considered that? What radius did you say you wanted?
{ponders}
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
to answer both suggestions: Building an extension would be great unfortunately, the space for the layout is all the space that's allowed.
I've been pondering it and I can give space away space on the Pasco side because I was going to have a small yard there. all I'd need is the yard to be at least 3 tracks wide or in an effort to save space and better represent the SP&S main the pasco side can become a main and passing siding running parallel to the columbia, with detailing in the fore and background. the minimum radius is 18.75, I love my passenger trains.
With all due respect,,,,shelve,the idea of the turntable and roundhouse,for now.. You said you love your passenger trains,I believe the plan,#22,would be great for passenger,the one Paul,posted... It is only ''My Thought''....
I've been watching your thread BN #24, cool little project, just thought I'd jump in with a track planning tool I used, kind of a full size type of planning guide, I made cardboard cutt-outs of various track elements by tracing around the actual turn out, etc, that I would be using, and used them as a guide as to what might work, and kind of "mock-up" an idea I wanted to try with out, before I started to actually lay the track. For the different radius templates, I made a compass from pieces of 3/4" x 3/4" wood, with a thumb screw holding them together at one end, and taped a pencil on one "leg" and a nail on the other, then just used a tape measure to set what ever radius I wanted. Here's a couple of pics while I was in the planning stage, showing a few of the templates:
It worked for me, helped me work out some yard and industry track arrangements, and just what would fit in a given area. It might seem old fashioned, considering all of the available track planning programs around but it gave me a "full-scale" look at what I wanted to do. I kept the compass and templates, as I'll be using them again this coming winter ( not that it needs to hurry, still waiting for spring in a lot of WI) when I add on a staging yard and balloon track, and maybe another industry or two. I really like your idea / project, especially when you posted that picture of a train running along the Columbia River. Mike.
It worked for me, helped me work out some yard and industry track arrangements, and just what would fit in a given area. It might seem old fashioned, considering all of the available track planning programs around but it gave me a "full-scale" look at what I wanted to do. I kept the compass and templates, as I'll be using them again this coming winter ( not that it needs to hurry, still waiting for spring in a lot of WI) when I add on a staging yard and balloon track, and maybe another industry or two.
I really like your idea / project, especially when you posted that picture of a train running along the Columbia River.
Mike.
My You Tube
zstripe Gary, With all due respect,,,,shelve,the idea of the turntable and roundhouse,for now.. You said you love your passenger trains,I believe the plan,#22,would be great for passenger,the one Paul,posted... It is only ''My Thought''.... Cheers, Frank
Mike, thank you for your interest. Yeah that's why I've been bugging atlas for turnout dimensions so I can try and figure out exactly what amount of space they'll eat.
Paulus Jas Hi Gary, a few years ago I made two plans for a 6x4 sheet; one HO the other in N-scale. In HO the Yule Central was modified. Inspired by the HO Delaware & Hudson (Model Railroad Planning 2006 and 102 Realistic Track Plans #22) I made an N-scale version; just to explore passenger train running. North Bank would be more urban with 4 story town buildings, while River Junction would stay rural. Paul
This is what I was referring to,
oh, maybe. I'm gonna need some time to think this over, I feel like this layouts going backwards farther than it is forward...
I think that's a neat little plan, too. Maybe have the river run with the divider on one, or both sides, to give the "riverside running" feel, and use some "forced perspective" ideas with the scenery between the river and the divider backdrop painting to add to the depth.
The reason I'm so wary of that though is that I want something to call my own, I know I can take his track plan and add my creative license but is it really mine?
I'm gonna keep thinking this over and making some adjustments.
Galaxy in the cork or any roadbed in general thread you mentioned WS risers, I was thinking of getting the lowest ones and and making a small bridgeand getting a level piece so the main is elevated along the river.
Burlington Northern #24 The reason I'm so wary of that though is that I want something to call my own, I know I can take his track plan and add my creative license but is it really mine? I'm gonna keep thinking this over and making some adjustments.
I can certainly understand that. Can you use the track you already have for size and shape dimensions to aid in the designing of this layout? I would think what you use now would be close enough for design puposes. I guess I would use a scaled drawing, (you know, good old scale ruler, drawing board, compass for radiues, etc ), maybe track mock-ups, whatever works, and do your design. Maybe get the track plan down, just the way you want it, and operationally possible, and figure out from there how to add in the divider. Maybe it would work best on an angle, or maybe curved, or a "dog-leg" type with a couple of angles. I think you have a good random sampling of input from all those that are interested, and you are the one that knows what you want, and make it work. I'm anxious to see what you come up with!
Have fun designing!
Burlington Northern #24 oh, maybe. I'm gonna need some time to think this over, I feel like this layouts going backwards farther than it is forward...
If I were French, I´d say "aux contraire, Monsieur!" OK, we dump a lot of good advice over you, which is sometimes hard to digest, but that´s called learning curve.
Take your time to develop a layout design which you´ll like. It is time well spent - after all, a layout will cost you some $$$ and time, which you want to see invested into something finding your own appreciation.
yeah, I'll do a 1:1 scale version of my trackplan. my not to scale one seems to be getting me into more trouble than it's worth. it'll take me a bit though a family issue has arisen. I'm going to do some rearranging, my track should be here tomorrow or saturday, I've contacted atlas.
I am saying this to be ''Funny'' so please,don't take it to heart... You by any chance related to,,Brett Fayre???
LOL,,,,
Gary, you may be beyond this stage, maybe not, but you can always acquire some of the track you think you need in various size R cuves, straight pieces and switches, and COPY them on a copier/scanner/printer to get a template of what they look like and with accurate dimensions.
Then tape them down in place on your board to see what fits where.
Its a bit crude, but works to give you a life-sized layout plan with buying/wasting too much track.
That is how I determined what all I could fit in my HO scale 3.5 x 5.1 foot layout.
Burlington Northern #24The reason I'm so wary of that though is that I want something to call my own, I know I can take his track plan and add my creative license but is it really mine?
No one is going to care if you use this plan. This is not school and you will not be arrested for plagiarism or copyright infringement. Hell, I'm sure Paul will be flattered.
There are so many aspects to this hobby that by the time you get the track laid, this layout will be your own.
Gary - don´t be afraid of using someone else´s track plan for your own layout. It´ll be your layout anyway, as there is much more to a well built layout than just the track plan. You care in building the scenery, placing the structures and detailing the whole thing will add your personal flavor, making it your layout!
the plan provided by me was to check out what could be done on a 6x4 when passenger train running was a priority.
Design crireria were #7 turnouts on the main, a 15" minimum radius and a trainlength of about 3 ft. (one engine + 5 coaches) These were my criteria, not necessarily yours. Other wishes like a small engine terminal, some industrial switching and river-scenes were mine as well.
Playing with some-one elses trackplan is always a great start. What are the consequences when you must have a larger (18,75) radius? Using a compass and a ruler and knowing some basic dimensions of turnouts will allow you to make rather accurate drawings; though it will take time.
How are your trains looking on a 15" radius? Do you really need 8 car or even longer passengers trains pulled by two engines? The resulting 5 or 6 ft long train might dwarf your layout.
No-one will design your plan. You will surely have a lot of drawing ahead of you.
BTW how is your 2x2 going?
SmilePaul
hmmmmmm, I see what you're saying, yeah I like passenger trains running them. My last layout was limited to 4 axle service and freight cars because my passenger equipment was going to fight me the whole way on that one.
yeah once my atlas turnout gets here I'm putting my nose to the grinder to figure out what I can and can't do.
A 15" Radii curve, I'm not sure I run them on 19" R EZ track.
an 8 car train no I don't need it but boy does it look cool when it's rolling by.
I put the ballast down yesterday as well as a sign for the road that crosses the tracks.
zstripe Gary, I am saying this to be ''Funny'' so please,don't take it to heart... You by any chance related to,,Brett Fayre??? LOL,,,, Cheers, Frank
Ok so I've had a thought, I could move the station to the other side of the layout which will free up atleast 6 inches. Instead of representing Pasco Washington on the other side that will become Rosemary Washington(Named after my grandmother, my moms mother) I could have a small coach yard on that side and the Vancouver side can represent the engine service facilities plus a couple tracks for freight cars to represent the outer area of the yard. SP&S #50's(the RS1) original home.
I guess,you are not a football fan,,,Brett Fayre,was a famous quarter back for the Green Bay Packers,went to the Min.Vikings,for a season,or two,,said he was going to retire,didn't,,He had a hard time,making,up his mind.. He was even in commercials,that showed him as being hard to make up his mind...But he was a darn good quarter back...
zstripe Gary, I guess,you are not a football fan,,,Brett Fayre,was a famous quarter back for the Green Bay Packers,went to the Min.Vikings,for a season,or two,,said he was going to retire,didn't,,He had a hard time,making,up his mind.. He was even in commercials,that showed him as being hard to make up his mind...But he was a darn good quarter back... Cheers, Frank
so I've been doing some thinking and to free up space on the vancouver side I think I'll pull the station and build it on the rosemary side, same idea just a different corner this should free up 6 inches worth of space on the lower left hand corner as well as the overall area on the vancouver side. I'm thinking of moving the divider up a couple inches, my track that I ordered still isn't here yet.
Ok so the box of track just got here the turnout is a left hand turnout I measured the length it is 8 inches, due to that length it will serve as the re entry to the main from the passing siding. I was also looking at SP&S non pool service passenger trains and found that they ran two I just cant remember their names at the moment.
a left hand turnout will go here also the vancouver side station has been reduced to one track so that a passing track can exist.
There will be a passing track connected to the turnout that joins the bend behind the roundhouse which has been moved.
The round house has been moved to the right side.
Hi Gary
besides the S-curve you have got a #10 turnout. A #7 would do as well and is only 6" long.
Wish you luck with planning.
Paulus Jas Hi Gary besides the S-curve you have got a #10 turnout. A #7 would do as well and is only 6" long. Wish you luck with planning. Paul
I modified the plan again. the turnout will lead somewhere on the other side.
just got power terminal wires and insulated joiners in the mail today, the MRC Tech II will power the mainline, I'll get a couple more power packs one for the yard in Pasco, and one for the facilities on the vancouver side.
The track work is looking nice. To allow more flexibility in operations, you might want to consider insulating both passing tracks to allow trains to "take the siding" or "hold the main" instead of the train having to pull into the siding because the turnouts are part of the main line block.
Looking good - I like the roundhouse. Atlas?
S&S
Modeling the Pennsy and loving it!
Schuylkill and SusquehannaTo allow more flexibility in operations, you might want to consider insulating both passing tracks to allow trains to "take the siding" or "hold the main" instead of the train having to pull into the siding because the turnouts are part of the main line block.
Sounds like DCC is on it's way to becoming a lot simpler and a lot less expensive really quickly.
Schuylkill and Susquehanna The track work is looking nice. To allow more flexibility in operations, you might want to consider insulating both passing tracks to allow trains to "take the siding" or "hold the main" instead of the train having to pull into the siding because the turnouts are part of the main line block. Looking good - I like the roundhouse. Atlas? S&S
Spacemouse I'd upgrade to DCC but my electrical knowledge is very limited, and 90% of my fleet is not DCC ready. when I bu HO scale stuff I'll do dcc but I don't want to fight with it in N.
Burlington Northern #24 Spacemouse I'd upgrade to DCC but my electrical knowledge is very limited, and 90% of my fleet is not DCC ready. when I bu HO scale stuff I'll do dcc but I don't want to fight with it in N.
Burlington Northern #24Spacemouse I'd upgrade to DCC but my electrical knowledge is very limited, and 90% of my fleet is not DCC ready. when I bu HO scale stuff I'll do dcc but I don't want to fight with it in N.
With DCC you hook two track wires and go. With DC you will be wiring blocks, switches, and some pretty sophisticated wiring the way you describe your layout. With DC you ARE going to learn wiring.
yeah, the problem is that I still have a lot of non DCC ready models. DCC is also a bit out of my price range( I think, I haven't bothered to check).
I know I will have to learn it but wiring a layout and wiring a loco are two different things, I think?
You can get a decent starter set for around $150. Wiring a loco is 8 wires, always the same color. Most locos sold now have plugs for rapid attachment. Only the older models need to be wired. Wiring your layout will be a lot more complicated. Now you said you were planning to buy some more power supplies. How many power supplies will add up to $150. Use the one you have to power your lights and accessories. Look, you are starting a new layout. Why spend a lot of money on a VCR age technology when it is becoming more and more obsolete every day. Old does not mean simple.
Wow! That's VERY nice of you, Brian!
That is one of the things I like about this forum. I've done the same for some forum members. Sent stuff I won't/can't use.
Terry in NW Wisconsin
Queenbogey715 is my Youtube channel
Thank you Brian, but I'll have to pass on this one.
Spacemouse I understand that but, DCC is not something I'm ready for. I understand that if your in this hobby you should be able to afford nearly everything out there, I'd rather spend that money on locos, rolling stock, buildings, and scenic details. I just picked up atlas' book on wiring a layout, if I do switch it'll be easy to take lessons I learned here and use them later. Honestly though the only reason I'd switch is if I switched to HO or O.
BrianinBuffalo Burlington Northern #24 Thank you Brian, but I'll have to pass on this one. Spacemouse I understand that but, DCC is not something I'm ready for. I understand that if your in this hobby you should be able to afford nearly everything out there, I'd rather spend that money on locos, rolling stock, buildings, and scenic details. I just picked up atlas' book on wiring a layout, if I do switch it'll be easy to take lessons I learned here and use them later. Honestly though the only reason I'd switch is if I switched to HO or O. No Problem Just ask if you change your mind. I have a friend that collected many hundreds of Locos (N scale) and never got into DCC. He has as much fun with his Trains as I do with mine. Cheers, Brian
Burlington Northern #24 Thank you Brian, but I'll have to pass on this one. Spacemouse I understand that but, DCC is not something I'm ready for. I understand that if your in this hobby you should be able to afford nearly everything out there, I'd rather spend that money on locos, rolling stock, buildings, and scenic details. I just picked up atlas' book on wiring a layout, if I do switch it'll be easy to take lessons I learned here and use them later. Honestly though the only reason I'd switch is if I switched to HO or O.
No Problem Just ask if you change your mind.
I have a friend that collected many hundreds of Locos (N scale) and never got into DCC. He has as much fun with his Trains as I do with mine.
Brian
This is just an FYI:
not to sway you {though that may happen anyway,} but to give you food for thought that I used and converted my HO to DCC.: { I started anew in HO with nothing and went the DC route but the more I read about DCC I decided I wanted that, so I put away the DC locos and started buying DCC locos}:
~ A free offer of a DCC set...even the simple one..would allow you to test out DCC and decide with at-hand information. AS I said your whole layout could be wired with just two wires. {I have the B EZC so I am prejudiced, but it is simple to use and can run 3 HO locos, so N locos could possible run 4 or 5 on just those two wires!.
~ Dcc is required if you decide you want sound. Some locos have a no-dcc sound system, but not so good. You will want a higher lever DCC system to control all the sounds though, thee B EZC only does a few.
~DCC Seems more expensive but the convenience is remarkable. Its like having had a model T and now a 2013 car with A/c cruise, etc. You Can buy a cheap basic standard car that will "Get the job done" but for a few dollars more you can get the conveniences.
~ I am on a tight budget {non-existent the last 2 years} but when I did have a budget, I made ti work to get my DCC OnBoard locos. The Bachmanns are great quiet runners that have lasted me well the last 7 or 8 years. I expect more good use in the future.
~ COnverting IS something I won't/Can't do as I can fry a toaster getting it out of the box. SO I only get DCC onboards and wasted money on DC stuff before I saw the value in the DCC.
~ ONE controller Can control all those locos the system will handle {boosters are available for them to run more locos}, whereas you may need more than one power source for your DC control. In DCC Simply select the loco you want to control and away you go with that one running, while you select another and run it too.
~ wiring is so simple its not funny!
~ once you transfer the DCC stuff won't "seem so expensive" for the value you get.
~ Remember My HO scale layout is smaller than your N scale {3.5 x 5.1 feet} with 2 interconnected ovals, a 4 spur yard and a 2 spur engine facility inside the inner oval. I Can run 3 locos anywhere on that and not have a problem with controlling blocks etc. SO a small layout can benefit from DCC.
~ you Can always sell or convert your fleet,,, I gave away my DC stuff or traded for something I wanted they were brand new DC locos and I bought DCC ones instead of converting because I can't do it. SO oh, well, i wasted a few bucks on my tight budget {I am disabled and on a fixed income "pension"}
~ you CAN get DCC controllers for everything from turnout switches to signals to TTs to auto uncoupling/coupling devices on board!
you are free to decide, but don't rule out DCC as DC may not disappear altogether, but DCC is the wave of the future..so, come on, ride in on that wave!
Just food for thought and
hmmmmm, I think I'll just have to pass on it. I really like my DC locos, some of them are runs that may never happen again like my BN F7, E units, the Execs., the SP&S Alco RS1, and a couple other locos. I'm not ruling it out for the future, but at the current moment I'd like to get an SP&S fleet and layout up and running before I do anything else. then I'll switch, get milled frames, etc.
A 6x4 is a rather small layout, you have just found out how much space even one turnout takes. Why invest on a fleet of engines when already 3 or 4 are all you need.
Did you do any research on the cost of wiring? Also toggle switches don't come free.
Anyway, is it time to invest in the future? Or will you be adding more and more NON-DCC stuff? Knowing that changing later will become even more costly.
The above is not telling you what to do, but is meant as an invitation to think hard about the best way to spend your money and resources.
I know, but is DCC really different from DC? to be Honest I feel all I'd be doing is pouring money into a system that performs essentially the same task. I understand what you guys are trying to say, I'd love to switch it's just not a very economically viable option at the moment.
Burlington Northern #24I know, but is DCC really different from DC?
YES!
In DC you control power to the track, In DCC you control the train--the individual locomotive. Imagine pulling into a siding and a switcher pulling in behind you and pulling off 4 cars putting on 3 and replacing your caboose. In DC you would have to move the train engine into a different block for the operation.
That is just one example. You can match power of dissimilar locos in consists. You can run independent helper engines.
Track wiring in DCC is two wires. Very simple, very cheap. No blocks. In DC, the more you grow your layout the more complicated it gets. DCC is still two wires. (although when it gets really big it pays to put in circuit breakers in each section.) I understand reluctance to wire small locos. Only you can decide if you want to try it. The first one is the hardest.
What Space Mouse said and more...
With a 5 amp booster {on the DCC system's 1 to 3 amps existing}, you can run up to about 10-12 LOCOS, {maybe 15 N scale locos} on your layout AT THE SAME TIME, in ANY DIRECTION, DOING ANYTHING YOU WANT, RUNNING ALL AT THE SAME TIME with just those TWO WIRES connected to your layout! ZERO BLOCKS! {well The whole layout as ONE BIG BLOCK}
{disclaimer: your 4x6 will be fine with the above, but if it gets bigger you will want to put in feeder wires so more than 2 wires will be needed..{BUT the buss wire to feed the feeders can be run off those two wires}...and you may want blocks fused off as Space Mouse said...With 10 or 12 running you may still need feeder wires but as I said the buss can run off the initial two wires and feed all the feeders. The feeders are there just to ensure continuity of the signal to your locos.}
DCC is simple, easy, and effective.
More like realistic operations! Because you control the LOCO not the track!
Up to you.
hi gentlemen,
Gary does understand the above very well. What bothered me was his wish to add loads of new engines (a fleet he called it) for DC- operation only. Though I do understand his wish not to invest in DCC right now, his wish to spend his money on more DC-only stuff will surely keep him from using DCC in the future. Installing decoders in a fleet of engines will turn out to be very costly when done later.
Operating a couple of trains on a DC layout, with numerous blocks you have to (dis)connect, might be not all that after all. The longer he waits the more difficult the change to DCC will become.
Wish you wisdom
my fleet probably won't get much bigger than this, one more RS1, an Alco FA/FB pair, an E7, a trio of RS3's. it's a 4' x 6' layout I'm going to try ad get it to look realistically populated. When the funds allow this summer I will come back and ask about a proper DCC system.
The layout is at a standstill currently, the right hand #5 ME turnout arrived yesterday and locomotives make it past the frog but the moment the front truck crosses it the loco dies and loses power. I got another pack of 4.25", a box of 1.25", and a box 15" R curve.
You might consider getting the DCC ready locos if you have the option. It will make things easier if you make a switch later--you know plugging in a decoder instead of wiring it.
current DCC ready fleet: AC4400CW, SD70MAC, GP40-2, SD40, 2x Alco FA/FB, 4-8-2, GS-4, E5A, and NW2.
non DCC ready: F7A, RS1, E8A, and 4-8-4.
upcoming release pre order locos: F3 AB set, Dash 8-32BWH
Future purchases: E7A, F3A(multiple), RS units(unknown if DCC ready), another NW2, S-2 or S-4, possible C424/425, possible F7's.
yeah, I'm just going to bail on this layout there's no point in it anymore. it's a project that will never see fruition.
it's done, there's just no point in it anymore.
I would but I like to use atlas track because I can ballast it myself.
Kato Unitrack is pretty reliable and easy to enhance in appearance - see for yourself:
It is easy to become discouraged when you want a lot in a small space and it does not all fit. It has seemed like you imagined more than could fit in 4X6
So look at it the other way and start with what does fit. Some layout is always better than nothing.
I was never discouraged about the layout, but there's no point it anymore. I've already cleaned it off and will be storing my trains until I feel ready to pull them out again.
I made some modifications changed it around all I need was the track, how to wire it, and how to make a mountainous/ riverside looking terrain. Instead of further wasting my time and money on this layout, I'll wait until I have the space and money to re pursue this goal again.
I'm not going to bother with it anymore I made simple guidelines I was trying to stay between, but it seemed that it wasn't going to happen and I knew better too.
BrianinBuffalo Gary; Please don't give up. You are learning a lot. It looks like you are having a lot of fun too. Brian
Gary;
Please don't give up. You are learning a lot. It looks like you are having a lot of fun too.
alco_fan It is easy to become discouraged when you want a lot in a small space and it does not all fit. It has seemed like you imagined more than could fit in 4X6 So look at it the other way and start with what does fit. Some layout is always better than nothing.
Burlington Northern #24I'm trying to build up the steam to go back there and give another shot but your comment the other day coupled with outside pressures hit a fuse. I don't mind constructive criticism but it doesn't help when the criticism is neither constructive nor comes from a person who has not shown their work. I'm not being disrespectful or rude when I say that, but I don't believe it's fair to have my work judged by those who refuse to show theirs.
If you are blaming me, you are blaming the wrong guy. I never criticized your work, I only noted that you had not yet wired multiple cab DC and therefore were not in a good position to comment on DCC versus multiple cab DC. My exact words from that thread:
alco_fan If you want to stay DC, do that by all means. I have said that multiple times. Read my posts. But until you personally wire a layout with _multiple cab_ DC with _independent control_ of the trains _anywhere_ on the layout, you do not know what is involved, trust me. So you do not have the experience to make the assertion that DC and DCC are "the same".
If you want to stay DC, do that by all means. I have said that multiple times. Read my posts.
But until you personally wire a layout with _multiple cab_ DC with _independent control_ of the trains _anywhere_ on the layout, you do not know what is involved, trust me. So you do not have the experience to make the assertion that DC and DCC are "the same".
Then I said:
alco_fan You missed my point. I applaud your start. We all started there (except maybe Sheldon). It is better than sitting on the sidelines. All I said was that it has not, so far, given you the background to make a definitive comment about wiring multiple cab DC. Keep going!
You missed my point. I applaud your start. We all started there (except maybe Sheldon). It is better than sitting on the sidelines.
All I said was that it has not, so far, given you the background to make a definitive comment about wiring multiple cab DC.
Keep going!
Then I spent a considerable amount of time trying to help you understand multiple cab DC wiring with Atlas components, which _you_ indicated that you were not able to grasp from Atlas book. I also note that I am the _only_ person on that thread to try to help you with _DC_.
So let me recap
- I do not have any opinion at all about your work good or bad except to say (again!!!) that it is great that you have started.
- I do not think you need to go DCC if you do not want to. But I do think it is important that you understand multiple engines running with DC better so that you can achieve what you want on your layout with DC or DCC.
- I tried to help you understand multiple cab DC wiring better
- I will say (again!!!) Keep going!
- I hope you do not give up. If you do, it is not accurate to blame anyone else for it.
- Keep going!
Good luck.
ok, well it will have to sit for a little bit more. this atlas track shortage is killing me. out of curiosity which scale are you in?
the post I was referencing was when AC asked you what you personally knew of my wiring. your response to that was what hit it. No I'm not mad at you I was just a bit frustrated I'll admit my first layout wasn't the best but I only had one powerpack at that time. My apologies if it seems that this came of as an aggressive pursuit or hostile action. I didn't mean for it to be like that.
As for what I want(or wanted) I was to be honest not entirely sure.
Burlington Northern #24out of curiosity which scale are you in?
N scale back when the quality was not nearly as good as today (pre 1991). HO since then. I have some buddies doing N scale now and if it ran like it does now back in the day I would still be in N today. But I have gone too far down the HO road now
I hear from them that Atlas 55 will be arriving soon. Keep going!
alco_fan Burlington Northern #24out of curiosity which scale are you in? N scale back when the quality was not nearly as good as today (pre 1991). HO since then. I have some buddies doing N scale now and if it ran like it does now back in the day I would still be in N today. But I have gone too far down the HO road now I hear from them that Atlas 55 will be arriving soon. Keep going!
Burlington Northern #24 I don't really want to give up on it, but with outside pressures, track shortage, the instantaneous barrage of DCC info, and various other problem. It would seem that there's no point.
I don't really want to give up on it, but with outside pressures, track shortage, the instantaneous barrage of DCC info, and various other problem. It would seem that there's no point.
out of curiousity how many N scale locos could one DCC system power without booster(s) and with booster(s)? If multi cab wiring is as bad as Alco says then it would be easier and more time saving to switch to DCC but it will cost more.
I know 3-4 of my locos will need to be milled out in order to have DCC installs, I know my AC4400CW, SD70MAC, upcoming F3AB set, and some other locomotives are DCC ready? a couple of them I'd like sound in my BNSF locos atleast because I plan on getting more of them.
That's great!!! Is it 6 locos at one time with the rest shut off? I was going to try and realistically represent the SP&S on the layout so the number of locomotives on layout wasn't going to be overwhelming but just enough to show the presence. I was going to have 2 RS1's #50 and 51(needs to be bought and painted), SP&S #802 & 804(both need to be purchased and painted), #750(E7A that I will buy myself for my upcoming birthday), all three SP&S GP9's(T.T. equipped must be bought painted), an NW2(must be bought and painted), and an S2 or S4(must be bought and painted). this was part of my reason for being reluctant to switch to DCC because I have lots of locomotives that will need to be bought painted and decaled. Why? because the manufacturers don't love me and won't produce any SP&S stuff .
Come on Sharks Get us A STANLEY!
BrianinBuffalo Gary; I have enough power to run them all at once if I want. Running all six at once would be near impossible on my Scenic Ridge layout as their is really only one main line with a passing siding. I can easily run 2 trains with 3 locos in a consist no problem. BLM has the NCE Powercab for $139.00 when and if you interested. That is the best price I have seen anywhere. Cheers, Brian Go Sharks, Go Sens!
I have enough power to run them all at once if I want. Running all six at once would be near impossible on my Scenic Ridge layout as their is really only one main line with a passing siding. I can easily run 2 trains with 3 locos in a consist no problem.
BLM has the NCE Powercab for $139.00 when and if you interested. That is the best price I have seen anywhere.
Go Sharks, Go Sens!
ehhhh, I'm having second thoughts about switching to DCC. I think my layout will be built for single train operation with the ability to support switching in the yard, and alternating trains on the main. 2 people minimum, 3 people max. but It'll probably just be me running alone 95% of the time so It'll be fine.
BrianinBuffalo Gary; Sounds good to me. I would have no idea how to do straight DC (other than one loop of track) so I am of little help when it comes to that. I think Broadway Lion is a master at DC. He would be a good one to get direction from. He has many good ideas on how to do things cheaply that look great. Brian
Sounds good to me. I would have no idea how to do straight DC (other than one loop of track) so I am of little help when it comes to that.
I think Broadway Lion is a master at DC. He would be a good one to get direction from. He has many good ideas on how to do things cheaply that look great.
BrianinBuffaloI think Broadway Lion is a master at DC.
His trains cannot run backwards and cannot change speeds relative to one another. That does not seem the best choice for a general purpose layout, although it is fine for the monks very specific needs.
There are many more flexible ways to wire for DC, as described in the books Gary has already.
it's still one heck of a layout though, he can pull off the job of a train dispatcher with such ease. It's an amazing wonder that deserves to grace the pages of Model railroader in my opinion.
Burlington Northern #24I know 3-4 of my locos will need to be milled out in order to have DCC installs, I know my AC4400CW, SD70MAC, upcoming F3AB set, and some other locomotives are DCC ready? a couple of them I'd like sound in my BNSF locos atleast because I plan on getting more of them.
Milled out to have DCC, or milled out to have DCC w/sound?
I don't know much but from what I've seen it looks like the milling is to make room for speakers.
Schuylkill and SusquehannaNCE makes its own line of decoders, but I don't know if they make any "drop in" decoders for N scale.
Yes, they do.
In fact, their decoders for Atlas locos are dropped in at the factory.
kevinrr Burlington Northern #24I know 3-4 of my locos will need to be milled out in order to have DCC installs, I know my AC4400CW, SD70MAC, upcoming F3AB set, and some other locomotives are DCC ready? a couple of them I'd like sound in my BNSF locos atleast because I plan on getting more of them. Milled out to have DCC, or milled out to have DCC w/sound? I don't know much but from what I've seen it looks like the milling is to make room for speakers.
modified the track plan again, winging it at the moment the top most track is going somewhere and will have a switch for locos to reverse onto the turntable, I will try to place a coach shed or diesel shed somewhere(it could also go onto the pasco side) there might be a stub end yard on this side.
There may be a left hand turnout facing the opposite direction placed at the end of the right hand turnout not sure yet.
Working on the Vancouver side right now, A yard is not looking to be a plausible option so I'll try some industries or a town scene.
I'm watching this with interest!
Modelling HO Scale with a focus on the West and Midwest USA
Thanks Alex, I plan on doing an update tomorrow or monday.
Your plan looks and sounds good, however I would use DCC for added simplicity of wiring and ease of operation.
Just my thoughts.
Boiler-man Your plan looks and sounds good, however I would use DCC for added simplicity of wiring and ease of operation. Just my thoughts.
for the sake of my sanity I should say this here to: DCC is not a viable investment time or money at the moment.
Burlington Northern #24 this was part of my reason for being reluctant to switch to DCC because I have lots of locomotives that will need to be bought painted and decaled.
reading the above i 've the impression it's not about limited funds only that you don't want to go for DCC.
IMHO you won't need DCC on a smaller layout; for me two trains run by two operators can be very well done with Cab-control-wiring.
In the future you might be able to build your dream layout, maybe with way more engines running at the same time. Bottom line is how to invest your money. Buying another non DCC engine for your fast growing collection? Or go a bit slower on equipment and buy only stuff with DCC decoders and sound.
paul, I'd rather build the roster with the limited funds I do have. It's been 2 months since I've bought a locomotive and that loco was painted for a shortline in centralia. DCC is in my opinion, at this moment, restricted me, is not an economically viable investment in time and money.
To add to my sour luck my layout collapsed, and I'm not running to home depot til tomorrow probably.
My Opinion,Only.
I find it hard to believe,that ''Luck'',had anything to do with the collapse,of your layout..
You don't build a house,on a iffy foundation..
Good Luck To You,,,,learn to take your time,,the results,will be beneficial to you..
the legs are getting replaced soon.
Why not to build a modular or sectional layout?
a table layout is the best I'm going to be able to get for the time being, If I was older had a much better paying job and my own house I would've done a shelf style layout that runs the entirety of the house.
one day.... one day I will....
Roster update: SP&S Alco FA1/FB1 #867 & 214
Hey guys, I think I'm going to remove the Tunrtable and roundhouse from the layout plan. I think I'll put some street running or something along those lines in there.
Ok so I've worked on the plan in XtrackCAD. I've got a 6 track stub ended yard, made up of 4.25" straights 5 #7 RH turnouts, 1 LH #7 turnout.
The yard will be lead into by a turnout from the secondary track that runs parallel to the main. locomotives will go to the top track(track #1) and will await their caboose, I'm wondering if I'd be able to place a small turntable that will allow me to reverse locomotives or if I should have the track disappear into a locomotive shed that leads to the vancouver side where locomotives can approach from the other side. at the moment a turntable is looking like a very viable option. I believe I could use the atlas one that I have because it's big enough to hold an N scale Alco FA/FB set. I was also examining a peco table and I could have a couple tracks lined up that would be long enough to hold three units or one big steamer(GS-4).
sorry if the picture is terrible but it seemed to be the only way to upload it.
just a few remarks to the "plan" you show.
First, the track is way too close to the edges of the table. Better to leave 2" from the center of the track.
Second, what can one say about your plan? All we see is a stretch of mainline and something resembling a yard.
Instead of playing with XtrkCad, why not take a piece of paper and a pencil and prepare a rough sketch of what you are aiming at. This will help us to understand your layout idea and you will be able to enlist much better support here.
I can do that, I was trying to get some of the stuff scoped out to see what I can and can't do.
That's what I tried to do in the beginning of the thread and people bit my head off about it, that's why I got so stubborn and bullheaded about it. I've given up on support here, 2 pages worth of this thread was why I should switch to DCC even though I said no. I understand it was to help me in the long run but, I said no multiple times and it persisted.
at this point I'm flying solo I know I am.
Gary, I did not mean to shy you away. I just think it is more effective to ask specific questions and collect the respective answers than opening up a thread in a blog-like manner...
oh, no it wasn't you. of most of the posts your's carry a decent amount of weight when I read them(you've shown me that Japanese N scale layout you have done, 10 times more than what I can do.) I think I started it like that so people could get a feel for the ultimate goal of the layout. I do have some questions though.
I'd like to do a small grade on the right side of the layout, what would you recommend I use?
yeah,a 2% maybe though the trackage along the columbia didn't get too crazy. I'm trying to keep the grade subtle so it looks like the train is rounding the bend on elevated track. might have to go .5 to 1.5%.
I'd do a double mainline but unfortunately the SP&S line is 90% single track main with the other 10 being passing sidings. so I'll have one passing siding.
might work perfectly!
agreed brian he's a great modeler!
so I've finished it for the most part, what are your guy's thoughts? Ulrich when I get to the 1:1 layout I will move the track so that it's an even distance from the edge on all sides. there will also be panels for throttles and switches/block controls. I will use flex track in some of the awkward parts, there is a run around in the pasco yard, as well as a caboose track. On the vancouver side there's a two track area for a loco house, the small 3 track yard will be loco/coach storage. the area above it will be a lumber industry where flats and boxes will be loaded. there's a passing track that should be long enough for for a train to pass a stopped train at the station which will be on the outer track.
this represents a majority of the SP&S line where the track is at varied levels next to the highway.
Pasco yard, Pasco Wa.
On your new plan,,,at the bottom,,,could you not,shorten the two curves,at the 1ft mark and the two at the,51/2 ft mark,to get the track,further from the edge,on the bottom?? I know you said you use sectional track,,but how about a half section,to accomplish that?? Just a thought!!
probably, Sir Madog is helping me.
Alternative design plan #1, the turntable will serve a simple function by reversing locomotives so that they are facing the proper way when they pick up and/or drop off their trains. the small yard above the turntable will serve as a pick up and drop off location for cars in consist. the top three tracks above the main will serve as a point where passenger cars and locomotives will get serviced trains will reverse in. the bottom area will be a couple industries or probably just one that will most likely be a lumber yard/ piggyback trailer pick up and drop off. I've streamlined the layout plan so that there's less clutter, the obnoxiously large yard has been removed, and there's plenty of free space to represent the surrounding area. 2 #10 turnouts, 4 #7's, and the remaining turnouts are #5's.
OK, Gary, here it is, my layout idea for you!
I tried to capture some of the flavor of Stevenson, WA, where the tracks run along the northern bank of the Columbia River. Modeling a working hump yard, like the one in Pasco, does not work well in N scale, but IMHO, a regular yard will do also.
This is just a first draft - for the operations aficionados to build on.
Ulrich that looks amazing! thank you!
yep agreed, I'm naming a passenger car after him, lowell smith specialties is getting a car named after them too, I will name one after my grandma, the name cars will be run in the coumbia river cannonball consist. here's the loco and observation car for this set.
Ulrich what's the minimum radius that you used for curves?
the minimum radius is 13.75". OK, a bit larger would have been better for the passenger trains, but at 6 ft. length you won´t have enough straight track to incorporate the turnouts you need.
I feel flattered about your idea to name a car after me!
Sir Madog Gary, the minimum radius is 13.75". OK, a bit larger would have been better for the passenger trains, but at 6 ft. length you won´t have enough straight track to incorporate the turnouts you need. I feel flattered about your idea to name a car after me!
also thanks for the quick response, would I be able to do it with 15" or is 13.75" the set?
it`s a mix of 15" and 13.75" radii. I am afraid you won´t be able to increase the radii above that figure. I´ll work though.
As for the car, it´s your choice to pick the type, but how about the name "Sir Madog of Abergenolwyn". There is a story behind that name, which I will tell you, but not in public
Ok, I'll also do some checking around. also Elliots trackside diner will have a spot on my layout somewhere too!
Ok, I will put that on an SP&S dome car!
just an update on the layout or atleast the bench work part of it, I will be getting 4" x 4" x 8' boards for the legs and will get 1" x 2" x 8' for powerpack/control panels.I was also considering getting a 2' x 4' to use as an extension or something. not sure yet though, the 2' x 4' would have stored trains, and would've been unscenicked.
my sister and brother bought me a late birthday present, it is an assembled Model power building the "blue coal depot" I'm thinking of converting it to a pulpwood plant or woodchip plant so I could get some woodchip gondolas and have that as a switchable industry.
Burlington Northern #244" x 4" x 8' boards for the legs
That is way overkill, will be expensive heavy and hard to cut. Angled braces are what makes the legs sturdy. You can use 2"x2" or L Girder, just add the braces.
so at 8 bucks a piece, and simply cutting them in half is hard and expensive?
It's better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it. 2" x 2" are too flimsy, the ones that were under my layout collapsed even with bracing.
Burlington Northern #242" x 2" are too flimsy, the ones that were under my layout collapsed even with bracing.
Then they were not secured correctly.
I support 2'X8' sections on L Girder legs made of two 1X2s each. Light, cheap, stay straight.
The issue is not the size of the lumber, but how it is attached and secured.
I will admit that they weren't secured correctly but I hadn't gotten the time to reinforce them. the 4 x 4 x 8's will be attached and secured with metal L braces.
I don't want to sound like a donkey,,,,,but I agree with Alco_Fan,,,,you're setting yourself up for another,collapse...
Good Luck..
These are the kinds of braces that work best. (except for the long diagonal one across the center of the benchwork. That is superfluous.)
Not these:
.
I am out.
yes, those were my intent with the current legs but I wasn't fast enough to do that. How stable are layouts with those kinds of reinforcement.
Ok, after examining my layout I may have found a way to mount the new legs(once I get them and cut them). Also the layout will be mounted on wheels(with brakes just in case) any reccomendation for wheels/rollers?
The office will be receiving a new floor and a layout on wheels will not scuff up the new floor.
When you receive your issue of July MR,,,study the layout,,Great Northern in N-Scale,and read about his bench work,,,,He built it the same way that Alco_Fan showed you in his diagram,L-girder,braces with 2x2 legs,,that should answer your question,about how sturdy it will be,,,,,the layout is 10ftx11ft...
Good Luck
I've seen it but my layout will not be propped against the wall. I will do L braces once I have my own house and can build a massive layout. that layout will be 3 feet deep max, and there will not be a divider.
The ''Braces'' are the ones on the legs,,,,called sway braces,,,,the L,shapes,are called ''Girders'',for structural strength...and being against the wall has nothing to do with how sturdy it is ...It can be free standing,with that design also...
Brian,
Yes,Brian, that is a good start,,,,hopefully!!,,,,,someone will listen..As for me,,I QUIT...
Have A Good One,,
that now means that I have to get new lumber.... and build a whole new bench.....
Burlington Northern #24 Ok, after examining my layout I may have found a way to mount the new legs(once I get them and cut them). Also the layout will be mounted on wheels(with brakes just in case) any reccomendation for wheels/rollers? The office will be receiving a new floor and a layout on wheels will not scuff up the new floor.
Gary:
Here are some to look at: http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1vZc29f/h_d2/Navigation?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053&searchRedirect=casters&redAB=A.
Joe
BrianinBuffalo It was only a thought.....I did not mean to upset anyone.
It was only a thought.....I did not mean to upset anyone.
JoeinPA thank you!!
My credibility didn't,,,collapse,,,,Your's did,,,,Just tried to help you...nuff said on the matter.. Still i will say Good Luck TO YOU..
zstripe My credibility didn't,,,collapse,,,,Your's did,,,,Just tried to help you...nuff said on the matter.. Still i will say Good Luck TO YOU.. Cheers, Frank
my apologies.