Thanks Alex, I plan on doing an update tomorrow or monday.
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
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.
Hi Gary,
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
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.
Gary,
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..
Cheers,
Frank
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