After being out of the hobby for 20 years, 6 years ago I started on a new layout, HO Scale, 100 code atlas track and DCC, which I have since torn down twice afther doing it freehand. . It will be in the shape of the letter "E", the back part of the "E" will be 25' long with the three pininsula's coming off of the long "E" section the three sections will be approx 4' to 5' wide and 13' long, I will have 4' clearance from the walls at either end on the layout with approx 30" to 36" clearance on either side of the center pininsula. I will have a duckunder connecting the left and center pininsula's. Layout height will be approx 50' to 52' high. I am interested in a computer layout program, I have very little computer knowledge, I am thinking of using the Anyrail 5 program. How easy or difficult are these programs to use or would you recommend a different program to use.
Pencil and paper! Lots of paper.
Steve
ChoopsPencil and paper! Lots of paper.
And lots of erasers!
I have had 3rdPlanIt for quite a few years and I really like it. However, it is a bit of an investment, and there is a bit of a learning curve. I have checked details like the accuracy of the size of the turnouts (Peco in my case) and the computer drawn ones are actually a bit longer than the real thing. That means they will fit into the plan properly.
https://www.trackplanning.com/
There are free software planning programs. I am not familiar with them. Others can comment.
If you haven't done so already, read 'Track Planning for Realistic Operation' first.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I used XtrackCAD to plan mine. It took an hour or so to get used to it but after that I found it to be easy to work with. It's also FREE.
You can get it here:
http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage
I went through far more iterations than I could have done with pencil and paper without deforesting the state.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
Track planning programs are just tools helping you draw the plan, but not designing it. As Dave stated, you need to acquire the basics of track planning before you start using a CAD program to draw your plan.
Before buying a program, I´d suggest to have a go with one of the bvarious freebies, which are actually quite powerful. I am quite happy with SCARM, which even lets you do a 3D rendering of your plan. SCARM also has a number of nicely done video tutorials.
Of course, there are others. They all have in common that there is quite a learning curve. It takes some time until you master any of those programs.
you might be interested in this website Tragedy of CTS Syndrome
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
gregcyou might be interested in this website Tragedy of CTS Syndrome
Hi Greg, and Byron if you are reading this:
I totally agree with Byron's point. CAD programs do not automatically produce good track plans! I discovered the truth of that when I read 'Track Planning for Realistic Operation' AFTER I had used 3rdPlanIt to design what I thought was a great layout. The book showed me very clearly that my great plan would not allow me to do many of the things that I had envisaged it doing. In addition to things like too tight curves and 'S' curves, it showed me that my yard was pretty much useless. Fortunately I had not started construction so all I had wasted was a bunch of time.
Once I had learned how to get the layout to function properly the CAD program became very handy when it came to tweaking and adjusting the design. I could draw up several different approaches to a given situation in very little time to see which one worked the best. You can do the same thing with a pencil of course, but what the CAD program tells you instantly is whether or not things will actually fit. The radius of a curve is shown as you draw it. The size of a turnout is actually the size of the turnout, (at least with 3rdPlanIt anyhow). Calculations like grade and elevation are done automatically. The layout can be seen in 3D with the click of a button, including terrain. You can actually run trains (although personally I think that option is a bit of a gimmick).
My point, as Byron stated, is that CAD programs can be good or bad. The message that needs to be repeated over and over is to learn how a railroad works before building one. The best place to start is with 'Track Planning for Realistic Operation', and the forums of course!
https://kalmbachhobbystore.com/product/special-issue/mr5081101
this magazine put out by model railroader has many nice layouts in it for inspiration. More importantly it has 4 or 5 articles in it explaining how to design your own layout which are the same as 'Track Planning for Realistic Operation'.
kalmbach has it listed for $8.
... and one of the biggest problems with newcomers to CAD is that often they have invested so much time in learning the nuances of the program and churning out revision after revision that they can't bear to start over when potential problems are brought to light.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
I agree with the others here. Draw tons of plans on paper first because it is fast and easy. They don’t have to be to scale or anything at first, just general ideas of where the tracks are going. Once you get that stuff worked out then you can transfer your ideas to track planning software. I use the free Atlas software because it is free and I use their track.
Lone Wolf and Santa FeI use the free Atlas software because it is free and I use their track.
Atlas RTS is the same as SCARM - both are free, but RTS is limited to Atlas track, while SCARM includes Peco, Atlas, Walthers/Shinohara and many more...
cuyama ... and one of the biggest problems with newcomers to CAD is that often they have invested so much time in learning the nuances of the program and churning out revision after revision that they can't bear to start over when potential problems are brought to light.
Yeah but... It's far worse when it's been "drafted" to scale with paper and pencil. The digital copies are far easier to trash and start over.
It's not the newcomer to CAD that makes a mess as often as it is the new comer to track planning. Besides, how many pencil drawn yard ladders have you seen with what would amount to #1 turnouts? Track planning CAD programs don't do that.
carl425 Yeah but... It's far worse when it's been "drafted" to scale with paper and pencil. The digital copies are far easier to trash and start over.
I'm gonna play the curmudgeon card again and mis-quote Billy Joel when I say the good old days weren't all that good.
Back in the Stone Age when I was a draftsman, we used pencils and paper. No surprise there, but how many here know that we used electric erasers? Seriously. Revising hand-drawn engineering drawings is no small affair.
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
Lone Wolf and Santa FeI agree with the others here. Draw tons of plans on paper first because it is fast and easy. They don’t have to be to scale or anything at first, just general ideas of where the tracks are going. Once you get that stuff worked out then you can transfer your ideas to track planning software.
No disrespect intended, but if you believe this, you're not using the software correctly. Mike Tyson said "everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth". The track planning version of that punch in the mouth is taking a hand sketched track plan and laying it out to scale. If you are going to invest the time anyway in learning the program, do it upfront.
ROBERT PETRICKhow many here know that we used electric erasers?
I do! I made holes in my drawings with those a few times. I never worked as a draftsman, but I was trained as one. I also remember that the final drawings were done in ink as tracings of the originals that were no longer legible for anyone other then the person that drew them.
It's way too easy to 'cheat' when drawing on papre not to scale - curves far too sharp, turnouts far too sharp, more tracks prallel than can fit in the width you have alloted, etc. This is where John Armstrong's 'squares' method comes in - once you learn this, you can doodle freehand anywhere, with a reasonable expectation of no big surprises when you lay it out to scale.
True mechanical drawing, with the various tools is about the only kind of drawing I can actually do, but still I prefer CAD. I can take a tape measure and go measure out my space and then easily transform that into an exact scale representation in the CAD program (remember, not all line drawing in CAD is freehand! You can type in the measurements you took and get a line exactly that length long). Using the layers feature of most programs, I cna keep the room outlines fixed and try different options - like Byron says, do not become so enamoured of a design that you won't toss it out in favor of a better option. I have many files and in each of those files are multiple versions of the same sort of thing - I've started over MANY times and I'm still not done. I'm fairly set on the lower level disgn I have now (though it's not fleshed out with all the industry spots or anything yet, just the main and the main yard, and staging) but I revisit it periodically to see if I can think of a better way to do something. Since I still have a lot of work to do to get the room ready, I'm still looking to improve the plan as much as possible before putting down the first piece of track.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
My two cents.
I am in the middle of building one myself. After I rushed through and built one quickly last fall, tough on me and my billfold, now I read books mentioned in the reply line above and othe books available here at MRR. I tried to use track planning software but I had a hard time getting the feel of the pike. I bought foam for the lower level of my layout and plywood for the upper. I wound up painting it with a light flat tan base and drawing in my track layout and playing what if.
When I ran into a problem, be it storage, building scenery or operation I was able to realin my RR. once I found a setup that worked I painted in the track width with light grey paint. My track plan is based on New York Central and item/track arrangments I like from different RR. I found going slow and steady and working sections easier to plan the overall layout (a square donut 18' by 10' by 3' wide lower level 18' by 10' by 2' wide) as I go along and have time to make sure it will be as bullet proof as I can make it. If your lucky you can go to a RR club as a guest and get tips from experenced modelers, unless you're like me and work odd shifts. Any hope my two cents helped? Good Luck, Model on brother
Freelancing MCRR/NYC Northern Division - Angelo
What Randy said!!!
I have changed my design many, many times. Sometimes the modifications were minor and other times they were massive. The key point is that CAD makes it really easy to play with options. One recent example is my engine service facility. I have never been happy with my engine service facility arrangement. It was a complicated mess. Recently the light finally came on and the whole service facility was made simpler and far more efficient. It only took me a few minutes to put the new plan together, and just a few more minutes to integrate the new service facility into the larger layout. Yes, the concept could have just as easily been drawn on paper, but with CAD I knew instantly that the new plan would fit in the space available and be workable, and there were no piles of eraser crumbs in my lap either!