Hi Regg05, Nice pictures! You have a lot of time and effort in your layout so far, I would hate to see you pull it apart out of track frustrations. I do have to agree with CTValleyRR's reply, it's hard to pinpoint your problem areas with these photos. From what I can see, your curves look in line, and seem to "flow", and your turn outs appear ok, but it is hard to determine exactly from the pics. I still say the best way is to get your eyes right down on the track, and watch as a loco goes over a troubled spot, and see just what is going on. I've had to do this to fine tune a couple of areas. If you have a handheld controller, it's easier, as you can run the loco right from the bad spot, and go in both directions to see how the trucks on the loco are handling the track. Sometimes, if the track off level, from side to side, even the slightest, can cause one truck to tip slightly, bringing the other truck up enough to cause a derailment. As I've mentioned to you before, the problem with your P42's, just may be truck side frame hanging up just slightly on the body details. I've had this happen on both of my blue box P42's.
Persevere, my friend, you can work this out, just takes patience. Once you figure out the track, you'll have much more satisfaction in your scenery and structure work, so far, seems to be great!
Mike.
My You Tube
I've been watching this thread with interest and really enjoyed your pics. It looks like a very nice layout with a lot going on in a pretty small area. My first layout years ago was very similar, and I also had operational problems that I think were due to the steep grades, tight radius curves, and my skill level at laying down the tracks at all the transitions. Not going to give advice since the real experts here are doing a good job at that, but please stick with it and get it fixed, and keep posting what you do and how well it works out as you go along!
Huntington Junction - Freelance based on the B&O and C&O in coal country before the merger... doing it my way. Now working on phase 3. - Walt
For photos and more: http://www.wkhobbies.com/model-railroad/
Hi,
you are probably building the Granite Gorge and Northern from an Atlas Track Plan publication.
You can't see the elevations on the trackplan; the double track bridge in the middle passes over a station at the bottom. Just before the bridge a track crosses the double track main. On the first pic provided by Regg this is clearly visible.
This layout might be looking interesting, it has some issues.
Grades are steep and have to start directly beyond turnouts to gain enough vertical distance for the overpass.
The combination of tight radii and steep grades might be to much for at least some of your equipment. The design problem of allowing space for vertical easements is NOT easily solved. One carlength for every percent of change of grade and one extra carlength between a turnout and the start of the easement. The extra required length must then be about 2 or 3 carlength's (your longest!!) At the right is a spot where you probably have to gain 1,5 inch over a 36" long run. However allowing space for two vertical easements will leave you with a 1,5 rise on a about 20" run; if you are lucky. The resulting 8% grade will need much longer easements however.
Also the use of snaptrack might add to the problem, you can't bend those pieces vertically. This is not an easy layout as a starter.
Wish you luck!
Paul
Thanks Paulus
I really appreciate that advice from you and all others on this layout as it is driving me nuts. I'm sure you've all being experienced in the hobby have been there. I thought bout kicking the crap out of the table at least 10 times. I'm now feeling alot better after posting on here as you guys give me much hope. I didnt realize when I had this table built how difficult it would be. I guess "Atlas 20 track plans to model" doesn't tell you this. They make it seem so doable but someone else told me the same thing in the very beginning Paul that you are telling me now. That the grades were steep for this layout and that flext track might work better than the sectional track the layout calls for. What you guys don't see is under the mountain scenery the curves rise pretty dramatically to come out on the double track bridge. Hence my reason for flex track and sectional track but might just convert entirely to flex track and Peco turnouts (those turnouts are pretty expensive though and will take a while to get all of them)
Amazingly my Kato Bi-level cars which are pretty long don't really derail all that much. They handle the curves fine. Those trucks move pretty freely. Its the engines more than anything. Both 4 and 6 axle engines. My derailments though seem to be at the switches more than any where else. Those Atlas snap switches aret holding up very well and since they don't lock in place they sometimes move when the engines go over them. I have alot of uncoupling problems both with the engines, passenger cars, and freight cars especially going up and down the risers. Now this may be do to the steep grade or the coupler heights aren't level with each other. Sometimes they hold up....sometimes they don't.
Regg05Those Atlas snap switches aret holding up very well and since they don't lock in place they sometimes move when the engines go over them.
There is probably one of your problems. You need something to hold the points in place ... they are not designed to be used alone. They need a manual or electric switch machine.
If things are uncoupling at the start or end of grades, the change in grade is too abrupt.
Many of the Atlas plans are hard to make operate smoothly.
The snap turnouts are powered by electric machines. The moving points though don't stay in place on several of the switces. I've bought a couple of newer ones to replace the ones that seem to be the most troublesome but I'm noticing that's it the majority of them at some time or another. And about the steep grade yes Im noticing that now but what recourse do I have at this point. The plywood is already cut so it's permanent. Don't have the funds or time to start completely over....hell maybe I'll cement the couplers together Haha!
Reggie, too bad your having such troubles. Looks like a decent plan and you do have quite a bit into it. I've looked at other pics on your flicker. It appears the "cookie-cutter" style is done w/ a 1/2" ply (which should be fine), but on a few spots it doesn't appear to be supported properly and "joists" ( I see shims and flat 3/4" stock) may be way too far apart. Also the plywood is only what appears to be a 3 ply pine, not sure of the grade/ quality ( most 3 plys are generally inferior)
This pic I can see some wave in the ply/ trackwork
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92978045@N06/8565844967/in/photostream/
Appears to be a noticable hump in this pic, right through all tracks and turnout
http://www.flickr.com/photos/92978045@N06/8566942418/in/photostream/
Try pressing down on some of these spots and see if it easily deflects, you may be able to solve many issues by reinforcing and/ or adding additional support. You could at least beef up the span by adding a glued/ screwed brace/ laminated to the underside of the ply.
I actually like cookie-cutter as well as open grid, but the subroadbed needs proper support up from the frame w/ proper risers spaced at least 16" OC.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
I had a feeling that it was an Atlas track plan. A few points on this plan not all related to your track. Of course as already suggested get the subroadbed issues worked out first.
1. This particular plan dates way back to the beginning of Atlas and was one of their first track plans. As I said in my original post these old Atlas track plans have a huge fudge factor. You need to get the whole outside loop laid down and smooth before gluing it down or in your case nailing it. Then you can lay out the next loop. I would tack the track in place before finalizing it. So nail it down but NOT through the ties just use the nails to tack it in place until you remove the fudge factor within the plan. In other words, use the nails like a spike and spike down the rail head and not the ties. Remember you are just holding the track in place until you get the loop laid out. Pushpins for this step would be better. Once the track is laid out properly you can use latex caulk to attach the track to the roadbed.
2. I saw some of the equipment you are trying to run on this layout and no matter how bullet proof you make the track you are still going to have issues. The big passenger coaches will have problems and probably derail on some of the 18" radius curves that this plan has. I think the max radius curves in this plan are 22", still problems for any equipment over 60 scale feet. Modern Amtrack as pictured in your other thread will derail. If you stick with this plan a transition era themed layout would be better with equipment that is 50 scale feet and under
3. I can see in your pics that you are using older snap switches. Newer snap switches look more prototypical and don't have those circular connections on the movable part of the switch. You CANNOT just substitute Peco for these snap switches. The Snap switch has a sharper divergent route on the turnout that a Peco or an Atlas custom line. You can use Peco but the radius will now be off and you'll need to adjust. In simple terms the Peco switch is NOT the same size as the Atlas.
4. You didn't really mention or I missed whether you where using Atlas switch machines. IMHO these switch machines tend to be a bit sloppy and coupled with a snap switch that could be out of gauge, well derailment city. I would suggest you upgrade to Tortoise switch machines. They hold the switch points very tight against the rail. The wiring is a bit more tricky but if you follow the instructions carefully they are so much better. I was once afraid of them because of the soldering involved but I thought if the Lion can do it so can I.
5. I noticed in one of the pics that a nail head that you had holding down the sectional track appeared to be a little high. The trip pins on your couplers could be catching on nail heads and causing derails. As already mentioned by others, don't use nails to permanently attach your track.
6. Except in small spaces between switches, I would get rid of all the sectional track on the layout and replace with flextrack. This will help to take the fudge factor out of the plan. The fudge factor is huge just try to redraw any of these plans with modern track layout software. You actually can't because using the track pieces as suggested in the plan don't line up into a loop.
Just saying it might help you if you learned how to post pics instead of links. It took me a while to put two and two together between the two threads. If you have trouble just ask our excellent moderator Jeffery, I'm sure he'd be more than glad to help you.
I hope this helps, Derek
UPDATE
5-13-13
Hey everyone,
I had a couple of ppl come over yesterday from the local model railroading club I'm in to take a look at my layout and it wasn't good news. These guys are well respected in the club and are supposed to be the "experts" in trackwork but anyway I definitely have some major problems.
1st the layout has alot of hidden hills and valleys in the subroadbed and cork....Apparently when the benchwork was built it was made using 1/4" inch plywood which is of inferior quality in the first place. I had asked for 1/2" plywood but since this was over a year ago, I have no recourse to get my money back. However the benchwork is sturdy and appears to be strong. But since the layout has alot of transitions they are not even or level because of this which is why the cars are uncoupling and sometimes derailing. Since I have patchwork track....(combination of flextrack and sectional) it probably is making things worse. I can run some of the engines on it if I run it slow enough under 45mph but thats about it. The F40ph only runs well if i run it without any cars attached to it. However what's strange is the Athearn RTR Amtrak P42 DCC I just bought runs extremely well even with the apparent problems. Who knew??? Lol
The switches all need to be replaced as none of them are holding that well which I suspected....out of twelve switches on this layout, I maybe have 4 or five good ones. These are the older snap electrical switches....Flex track is probably better for this layout especially since there are transitions, steep grades in a smaller space and more room to maneuver so trackwork needs to be replaced at the very least and probably roadbed as well. The bridges have cracks in them coming out of the tunnel on the lower level so the weight of the engine is whats causing the cars to uncouple there.
Since Atlast doesn't make alot of this stuff anymore I have to either go with another flextrack and turnout such as Peco which are expensive and try to find the bridges on Ebay or swap meets???
Whats a guy to do? Pray for me??? LOL
Oh btw yes this is John Armstrong's Atlas track plan 28....Granite Gorge and Northern that some of you asked about before...
My understanding is that Atlas now has, or will very shortly have, flex track available. However, there is Micro Engineering, Shinohara, and Peco. I only use Atlas or Peco, but many skilled and advanced modellers use the others...so shop around for price and make it work.
I did suspect you would have to rip it all out and fix undulations, as I replied to you in my first reply several pages back. Look at it this way...this is one huge lesson that you won't soon forget. And, you'll find ways to impress upon other newbies what not to do...you'll pass it on.
Start with at least 1/2" ply, good quality, and support it everywhere at its edges, no matter how you cut them, and on 14" centers, 12" would be great. Then get proper roadbed and sand it flat and smooth where you have butt joints. When you lay tracks over it, use the thin sheen of acrylic latex caulk and check with a 12" straightedge and a bubble level to ensure your rails are even across from each other and that you don't have longitudinal dips that make your front trucks want to get light and lift a wheel on curves as the rear truck goes through the dip.
Get this part right, and you can fiddle with what's left to complete the layout as and when you have time and energy. There's nothing like have reliable fun with the trains while you try arrangements of structures, trees, utility poles, roads, rail crossings, and so on, if you haven't already got those figured out.
Crandell
Regg05 UPDATE 5-13-13 1st the layout has alot of hidden hills and valleys in the subroadbed and cork....Apparently when the benchwork was built it was made using 1/4" inch plywood which is of inferior quality in the first place. I had asked for 1/2" plywood but since this was over a year ago, I have no recourse to get my money back. However the benchwork is sturdy and appears to be strong. But since the layout has alot of transitions they are not even or level because of this which is why the cars are uncoupling and sometimes derailing. Since I have patchwork track....(combination of flextrack and sectional) it probably is making things worse. I can run some of the engines on it if I run it slow enough under 45mph but thats about it. The F40ph only runs well if i run it without any cars attached to it. However what's strange is the Athearn RTR Amtrak P42 DCC I just bought runs extremely well even with the apparent problems. Who knew??? Lol The switches all need to be replaced as none of them are holding that well which I suspected....out of twelve switches on this layout, I maybe have 4 or five good ones. These are the older snap electrical switches....Flex track is probably better for this layout especially since there are transitions, steep grades in a smaller space and more room to maneuver so trackwork needs to be replaced at the very least and probably roadbed as well. The bridges have cracks in them coming out of the tunnel on the lower level so the weight of the engine is whats causing the cars to uncouple there. Since Atlast doesn't make alot of this stuff anymore I have to either go with another flextrack and turnout such as Peco which are expensive and try to find the bridges on Ebay or swap meets???
A few questions/comments based on things I have learned the hard way.
1. Atlas Snap Switches and Atlas Custom-Line switches/turnouts do NOT have the same geometry and do NOT substitute for one another. The Granite Gorge & Northern track plan calls for Atlas Custom-Line turnouts only. If you are using Snap Switches, things will not match up to the track plan.
2. Atlas Custom-Line #4 turnouts have a different geometry than any other manufacturer's #4 turnout. Where #4 turnouts are called for in the track plan, do not substitute or things will not fit the same as in the track plan.
3. There is nothing wrong with mixing Snap Track and flex track - especially if it's all from Atlas, and especially if it's all the same rail code (code 83 or code 100). I find flex track especially handy for replacing multiple small - 3" or less - pieces of Snap Track in the track plan. You get rid of a lot of rail joints that don't match up perfectly, and replace them with a single piece of track with a smooth curve in it. Likewise, where you have 2-4 pieces of 9" straight track joined together, replacing with a single piece of flex track makes for fewer joints and headaches. Where I do not use flex track is where there are 3 or more pieces of curved Snap Track joined together. It is actually quite difficult to bend Atlas flex track to a consistent 18" radius over 90 degrees due to the natural spring of the track.
4. Atlas bridges are nothing more than a 9" piece of straight track attached to a bridge structure - or at least they were when the GG&N was designed and test-built. Simply replace bridges with 9" sections of track, and attach the bridge section of your choice from the manufacturer of your choice.
just my thoughts and experiences, your choices
Fred W
As I had noticed in earlier post looking at the pics on flicker, noted a possible problem w/ the plywood support. It appeared to be inferior grade 1/2", at 1/4" you will have major issues. As I had mentioned, try scabbing supports under the "over spanned" subroadbed if you cannot place a riser between joists/ supports
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
Hi Reggie,
wish you luck, especially with getting all the easements working perfect.
As noted before the combination of short vertical easements close to turnouts, tight radii and steep grades might be to much for some of your equipment.
SmilePaul
Wow, seeing the plan laid out like that it is amazingly similar to the layout that I built many years ago (mentioned it a bit earlier.) Don't remember but I may even have based it on the exact same Atlas plan. Same figure 8 mainline with reversing connectors on each side. I used good ply and homasote so waves in the roadbed were not a problem. But I did not know the importance of vertical easements especially right after turnouts and once I realized the problem there wasn't enough room to put them in. And the grades were too steep for most of my engines. And though I used flex track, I also used the same Atlas snap switches which were problematic in themselves. So all of this is hauntingly familiar.
Reggie, as much as I would really like to see your layout work good I also understand the challenges at hand all too well. After trying various quick fixes with limited success I used it as an opportunity to learn hand-laying rail and custom turnouts which gave me maximum flexibility and actually worked much, much better. But I never got all the way through it. Based on my experience I suggest that you also look at this as a learning opportunity. I am sure that you can make some improvements- but the important thing is to learn as you go, relax and have fun while "on the journey", and think forward to your next layout.
(Paulas, you may remember my very conservative views on all this when we were trading notes on my new layout design a couple of months ago. Now you can see exactly the reasons behind them!)
Hey Paul,
Thanks for giving a visual analysis of the layout as that's the one I have too! So you don't think I could make the layout any better or smoother with the easements. Since I'm new at this could you explain what the numbers represent? Do they represent the changes in grade? Switching to flex track will not solve any of the current problems? I have put so much into this layout and I'm going to do the best I can to make it work. Understand that some of the engines and/or cars will have to be saved for the club layouts but I don't intend on scrapping this layout if I have anysay so.
Reggie
Regg05Since I'm new at this could you explain what the numbers represent?
They are the elevations in inches.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Regg05Switching to flex track will not solve any of the current problems?
I think it is a good idea. Any time you cut down the number of joints you lessen the number of chances to derail. However, that does not mean you shouldn't try to solve any irregularities in your roadbed and sub-roadbed.
Now that you where the problems are, it will only get better from here. Do not rush it, take your time. there is a lot to learn with this hobby and experience is the best teacher.
SpaceMouse Regg05Switching to flex track will not solve any of the current problems? I think it is a good idea. Any time you cut down the number of joints you lessen the number of chances to derail. However, that does not mean you shouldn't try to solve any irregularities in your roadbed and sub-roadbed.
Unfortunately, switching to flextrack will not in and of itself solve any of your problems. It will likely make them easier to solve, though.
I also think you should try a couple of inexpensIve switch machines and see if those will hold your points in place before you resort to ripping the snap switches out.
What we have here is a model railroad version of the old saying, give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime. I am sure someone can be hired to lay the track, but don't give up on learning how to do it better yourself.
There are books and videos, and YouTube vids, and excellent photos and postings on this very thread, all with good advice but sometimes (and with some subjects) there just is no substitute for real-time live and hands-on instruction from a person who knows. That is because you need to be told what to do, then shown what to do, do it yourself while being guided and watched, and then also be told what you have been doing wrong.
That is why I suspect our friend really would benefit more if someone could work with him live and in person for just an hour on tracklaying. Then suddenly all of the other advice would make a great deal more sense.
I feel the same way about airbrushing by the way. In some ways some wiring issues become much more clear with live and hands on instruction. Again maybe it is just me, but I found that scenery was something that I could do more or less on my own, but benefitting from prior clinics, articles, videos, layout visits, etc.
If you belong to an NMRA division or region perhaps a cry for help in that direction would motivate some person to step forward.
Dave Nelson
Thanks Dave,
Yes I was thinking the exact same thing which is why I wanted to hire someone. I felt that I could watch them and learn a little bit from them and then have them show me what mistakes I am making up close and personal. Yes the videos are good and all but since the recent flood of Chicago....i lost everything in my basement including the tv that was down there so its hard to watch something and then try and remember everything when they're not in the same room as well as the majority of my tools are gone up the river......literally. They either rusted, were slimy with raw sewage or didn't work such as my electric saw. So I will eventually figure something out....when??? Soon i hope LOL
Reggie, tracklying really doesn't require that many tools. The ones you lost wouldn't really be too useful anyway except for a handful of basic hand tools. Rail nippers, set of files, small level, staightedge, flexable putty knives, track guage, soldering gun/ iron, caulking gun and a few basic hand tools (pliers, screwdrivers knives etc) is all that's nec.. Should attempt a easily accessible piece and give it a try. Not that difficult and you could pick it up in short order. We can all give you the confidence needed and be the rooting section
Hey,
Update 5-28-13
After much heartache and working on the layout this past few weekends....it's just problem after problem....several switches are no good....and half of the switch machines are bad. Also the transitions don't seem to be even and there are dips and valleys galore....i bought a level last weekend. The cork roadbed seems to be tearing up as well. So at this point I'm not sure if I should try to save this layout or just take up what track I can and salvage the bridges etc and build a new layout....not the HO-28 by Atlas though. Lol As mentioned earlier in this thread it probably wasn't best for a novice like myself. If I go new though I want my focus to still be urban, modern and passenger with a few sidings for industries....How to accomplish that in the same 5x9' HO space is the current issue and can I have some elevation or is that asking too much?
If I do decide to go that route who can I get to build my benchwork? I'm not a builder by any chance and don't have the tools necessary for that so would definitely want that part built for me and I can probably tackle the rest.
Regg05 If I go new though I want my focus to still be urban, modern and passenger with a few sidings for industries....How to accomplish that in the same 5x9' HO space is the current issue and can I have some elevation or is that asking too much? If I do decide to go that route who can I get to build my benchwork? I'm not a builder by any chance and don't have the tools necessary for that so would definitely want that part built for me and I can probably tackle the rest.
If I go new though I want my focus to still be urban, modern and passenger with a few sidings for industries....How to accomplish that in the same 5x9' HO space is the current issue and can I have some elevation or is that asking too much?
You can get a carpenter to build a sturdy, level 5' x 9' table if that is what you want and if you have the budget to pay someone else to do it for you.
Adding elevation to the level surface can be done in a variety of ways. You could have the carpenter build elevation into the layout surface. Alternatively, you could use HO scale risers which are readily available in hobby shops. Or, you could build the elevations into the layout yourself but if you lack the talent, that may be the least preferable way to go.
Rich
Alton Junction
Regg,
Building benchwork is pretty simple. You can buy a hand saw and a screwdriver for $20, and that's all you really need. Power tools make it easier, but you can always rent those.
But if you're dead set against trying it yourself (a BAD attitude in this hobby), you can hire someone, or invest in prefab stuff. It's pricey, but everyone I know who has purchased it seems to be happy with it. Sievers, Mianne, and Woodland Scenics are 3 companies who make it, although WS modules are fixed sixes, and, at 36-1/2", too short for my taste... but they're cheaper than the others.
I am, a member of a club that the members do help sometimes and most of the time it is every man or woman for them selves. Good luck and maybe by the grace of god it all works out for you.Iam not good at laying track. I still have problems and I fix them as they come along. Ace24
You are sounding discouraged. Can I recommend you take a few days off to reconsider and settle your thoughts before taking action? Things may look better after some reflection.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com