If guess 5x10. So narrower but deeper. Not sure without getting a tape out, but have been busy all day to do it.
It's definitely getting fixed for storage.
They do look good, bit that's more than I'm looking for. I don't need to go for that much. Idk what you'd say I'm looking for, but that's a lot. I just want a few spurs for the a few small industries, and for it to be able to run all the way around.
Oh boy!
Lots of work! How big is it?
I'd fix it for storage, and use the space you have inside.
Byron's last two plans look pretty good to me.
Mike.
My You Tube
http://imgur.com/a/Vwk3qlv
That's the shed. Could do with a new floor, and it needs the gable peice to seal it up, but I can run electrical out there and insulate it. Plan to turn it so it takes up less yard one way, so then all that worl can be done. Put my electric radiator out there too for heat in the winter. Other than electrical and heat, all the other work it going to be done to store some things out there anyways.
What would the general opinion be on a layout in there?
deleted
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
rrinkerNow that you say it, I understand what you mean. In fact I just did a quick drawing of a square and then made a random shape donut hole in the middle usig the polygon.
Yes, that adds one (irregular) polygon on top of another polygon. And that works fine to illustrate a lot of situations.
But if you want the space completely open (as in the center of the layouts I posted with the grid showing below), it is a little more involved. If you play around with the “Freehand Polygon” tool, you will likely discover it – I’ll post on it when I have time.
There are also probably ways to do it with meshes, but I work in 2-D only.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Now that you say it, I understand what you mean. In fact I just did a quick drawing of a square and then made a random shape donut hole in the middle usig the polygon.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
rrinkerAlthough now that I thinka bout it - probably can just create a polygon in the middle and cut it out, after filling the entire thing in green.
That doesn't work as one might wish in 3rd PlanIt.
Instead I use the "Freehand Polygon" tool to draw the shape of the benchwork fill. One can add and move points on the boundaries to make adjustments. Maybe on the next long conference call I'll try to work up an example that can be posted here.
Byron
SeeYou190I can't believe you can just toss these things together while on a conference call. I get so frustrated trying to draw track plans.
After you have done a couple of hundred of anything, you've made enough mistakes to work faster in the future.
rrinkertons of features in Excel I have no clue how to use.
I wonder how many people even use 5% of what Excel can do.
I just learned how to make pivot tables... very handy.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
FOr me, I thinkt he hardest point is gettign the fill ine the irregular shape to leave the donut hole and fill in under the track within the outer perimeter in green like that. But there's probably a fairly easy way to do that that I don't know, so I would do it the hard way and make various shapes around the edges.
Although now that I thinka bout it - probably can just create a polygon in the middle and cut it out, after filling the entire thing in green. There are so many things I don't use in 3rd PlanIt that I have no idea how to use them. Kind of like Office. I've done complex solutions with VBA in Excel but there are tons of features in Excel I have no clue how to use.
Byron, nice examples.
I can't believe you can just toss these things together while on a conference call. I get so frustrated trying to draw track plans.
It is certainly not my thing.
It doesn’t usually seem to help for me to draw track plans for folks on forums, but I was stuck on a long, boring conference call earlier today (is there any other kind?). So I cranked out these two quickly with the discussion on speaker and mute, but they would need more work to tailor for particular interests, industries, etc. – the solution is left to the student. They are also drawn with flextrack. It would be a significant job to do these with sectional track – although the inner oval is pretty straightforward.
Both of these assume that some industries are flats or low-relief structures against the walls. They also assume most operation from the center opening. Minimum turnouts are Atlas #4 (actually #4½), the crossovers are #6s. Track-center-to-track-center spacing is generally 2½”
This first one keeps the entire layout self-contained within the alcove. We keep the entrance area benchwork narrow, but take advantage of more depth at the back for a small yard. One would definitely need flextrack for those curves. The Atlas turntable is just plopped in there; an industry instead would be fine.
The second extends the yard out over the dresser. The yard throat and coupling/uncoupling points are within reach from the center opening.
I hope this illustrates what I have been suggesting – and perhaps these will be helpful, both to the original poster and those following along.
riogrande5761 Wdodge0912 I'd love a garage layout, Priorities man! but then I have no room to park the car. You make it sound like a bad thing. I've almost never parked my car in a garage and it's been ok. As it is wife and could fit at least one car in our two car garage, what with stuff in there, and we still both park outside. I need a lot of room in there, for my eventual workshop for my boats. N scale is a maybe, but i think i can get away with something in HO, at least I'm hoping. Maybe you just "aren't there" yet. A small circle of track with a few siding may become "meh" after a short time and if the model RR disease takes hold, and you want that Walthers steel mill, ahem ...
Wdodge0912 I'd love a garage layout,
Priorities man!
but then I have no room to park the car.
You make it sound like a bad thing. I've almost never parked my car in a garage and it's been ok. As it is wife and could fit at least one car in our two car garage, what with stuff in there, and we still both park outside.
I need a lot of room in there, for my eventual workshop for my boats. N scale is a maybe, but i think i can get away with something in HO, at least I'm hoping.
Maybe you just "aren't there" yet. A small circle of track with a few siding may become "meh" after a short time and if the model RR disease takes hold, and you want that Walthers steel mill, ahem ...
The steel mill was just to tie back into my main hobby of RC warships. That's my main hobby, and why I wont be doing a garage layout.
I do have like a 5x10 shed outside that needs some work, bit could insulate and run power out to it for heat and trains
rrinker Picture insert requires the the to be referenced as some image file format, like .JPG. Imgur appears to only give a randomized page link to the page containing your picture. If might offer more choices to you as owner of the account. You can get away with HO in that space, but it requires some decision making. There really isn't room for a lot of switching AND continuous run AND large modern locos and cars. Pick 2, basically. The donut lan Byron posted could be adpated to fit, however, it wouldn;t be practical. As he mentioned, it was designed to be accessible from the outside as well as from within the donut hole. Without that outside access, there are turnouts and crossings that could be trouble spots that would be hard to get at trying to reach from the hole. You could eliminate some of the inside sidings to make the hole bigger, allowing reach to the other track, but now you've made it a lot more of just a round and round layout without many switching opportunities. My old 8x12 donut layout was like that one - 2 sides were agains walls, but the other two sides were eacily accessible, so along the sides against the walls, all track was within easy reach of the hole, on the other two sides, there was track on both sides , so some things you coudl do from in the hole, and others you had to be on the outside. Another option if continuous run is the one of the three things you cna give up would be a U shaped switching layout. It doesn't take much benchwork width to have the main line and some industry spots on either side of it. On one leg, you could have a detachable staging yard to set up when running trains that can be easily unclipped and stored under the layout, or maybe put it on wheels so it can be wheels into the open area of the U when not in use. If really ambitious, two such removeable sections, one on each end. They don;t need to be attaced for just alittle switching around, but by attaching them, you have a place for trains to go to and come from off the layout. But I like switching - if there were no other alternatives, either this or have no layout, I would be happy with something like that. Small though ti would be, the switching moves could keep you busy for hours. Especially if you include sidings facing both ways, and one train heads around the layout clockwise and only services trailing point turnouts, and then after that train finishes up, another comes around counter clockwise and handles all the opposite sidings as trailing point moves. --Randy
Picture insert requires the the to be referenced as some image file format, like .JPG. Imgur appears to only give a randomized page link to the page containing your picture. If might offer more choices to you as owner of the account.
You can get away with HO in that space, but it requires some decision making. There really isn't room for a lot of switching AND continuous run AND large modern locos and cars. Pick 2, basically.
The donut lan Byron posted could be adpated to fit, however, it wouldn;t be practical. As he mentioned, it was designed to be accessible from the outside as well as from within the donut hole. Without that outside access, there are turnouts and crossings that could be trouble spots that would be hard to get at trying to reach from the hole. You could eliminate some of the inside sidings to make the hole bigger, allowing reach to the other track, but now you've made it a lot more of just a round and round layout without many switching opportunities.
My old 8x12 donut layout was like that one - 2 sides were agains walls, but the other two sides were eacily accessible, so along the sides against the walls, all track was within easy reach of the hole, on the other two sides, there was track on both sides , so some things you coudl do from in the hole, and others you had to be on the outside.
Another option if continuous run is the one of the three things you cna give up would be a U shaped switching layout. It doesn't take much benchwork width to have the main line and some industry spots on either side of it. On one leg, you could have a detachable staging yard to set up when running trains that can be easily unclipped and stored under the layout, or maybe put it on wheels so it can be wheels into the open area of the U when not in use. If really ambitious, two such removeable sections, one on each end. They don;t need to be attaced for just alittle switching around, but by attaching them, you have a place for trains to go to and come from off the layout.
But I like switching - if there were no other alternatives, either this or have no layout, I would be happy with something like that. Small though ti would be, the switching moves could keep you busy for hours. Especially if you include sidings facing both ways, and one train heads around the layout clockwise and only services trailing point turnouts, and then after that train finishes up, another comes around counter clockwise and handles all the opposite sidings as trailing point moves.
I'm fine with older locos, My favorite is the GP9. AMD I'm not too concerned about the size of what it pulls..the continuous running is something I'd want, as I do have an Athearn F unit and matching passanger cars, all were set to run 18" curves.
cuyama The latest seems somewhat at odds with your goals. If you intend to stand outside at the far right of the donut, most of the turnouts and locations where you would be coupling/uncoupling cars will be far out of reach. So you would be ducking under and into the center a lot -- why not just plan for that to be the primary operating position? Or if that idea doesn't work for you, most of the turnouts and spurs might be moved where they could be more easily reached from outside. It's not clear to me -- can the space over the dresser be used for a shelf to extend the layout or would you prefer not? Byron
The latest seems somewhat at odds with your goals. If you intend to stand outside at the far right of the donut, most of the turnouts and locations where you would be coupling/uncoupling cars will be far out of reach. So you would be ducking under and into the center a lot -- why not just plan for that to be the primary operating position?
Or if that idea doesn't work for you, most of the turnouts and spurs might be moved where they could be more easily reached from outside.
It's not clear to me -- can the space over the dresser be used for a shelf to extend the layout or would you prefer not?
I can add on a shelf, but it would have to be free standing on the dresser. There is a window behind it. But the whole layout will be free standing anyways. That idea I posted would be standing in the center. I also cant add that shelf on to the layout software, the bemchwork doesnt work. But pretty much I'd make that upper left corner a switch and have it come out from there.
Byron. God bless you, you ARE trying to work with the guy but ...
The garage beckons!
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
Your edited version:
Wdodge0912I'd love a garage layout,
mbinsewi OK, well, your already literally "backed in a corner" with your layout size, and now your thinking steel mill? . You MIGHT be able to do just a tiny, tiny part of steel mill operations, by using ALL of your space. Maybe you could narrow it down to a real compressed version of the armor manufacturing, with flats of steel plate going in. Mike.
OK, well, your already literally "backed in a corner" with your layout size, and now your thinking steel mill? .
You MIGHT be able to do just a tiny, tiny part of steel mill operations, by using ALL of your space.
Maybe you could narrow it down to a real compressed version of the armor manufacturing, with flats of steel plate going in.
I know nothing about steel mills, so i wasn't aware how big one would be. maybe i'll do something else if i kept with the naval theme, i could do the plant that makes the shells, or guns, torpedoes, things like that. armor was the first thing I thought since it would have a few different things coming in.
and i don't have to go naval/military themed either, just was thinking it would tie into my warships.
riogrande5761 mbinsewi OK, well, your already literally "backed in a corner" with your layout size, and now your thinking steel mill? . Mike. That garage is looking better all the time isn't it? I first saw new topic with the title, NEW HOUSE!!!! and then the wah wah trombones started up when I saw the tiny space being alotted. The title was a major wind-up for a even bigger let down. Two words: GARAGE LAYOUT! Give in to the schwartz! Or N-scale.
mbinsewi OK, well, your already literally "backed in a corner" with your layout size, and now your thinking steel mill? . Mike.
That garage is looking better all the time isn't it?
I first saw new topic with the title, NEW HOUSE!!!! and then the wah wah trombones started up when I saw the tiny space being alotted. The title was a major wind-up for a even bigger let down.
Two words: GARAGE LAYOUT! Give in to the schwartz!
Or N-scale.
I'd love a garage layout, but then I have no room to park the car. I need a lot of room in there, for my eventual workshop for my boats.
N scale is a maybe, but i think i can get away with something in HO, at least I'm hoping.
Using Atlas RTS v8. I came up with a table I think might work? i still would have to lay track around, so I could make the donut hole bigger, but this was to get some dimensions in the software and start playing around. The decimals are off on this, as i just threw down the measurements to show what I'm thinking right now. can and probably will change, but if I go to change the benchwork, to make the holw bigger, i have to input the numbers in again, so instead of having to figure it out after it erases, that'll also help me to know where to start
https://imgur.com/a/0qDsRfG
Still not sure why the image function isn't working for me. I just get the little icon of a picture. not sure what i'm doing wrong.
EDIT
https://imgur.com/a/ur3LPiF
just something i threw together. not sure if it's good or not. can't make angles with the benchwork in the software, but i can make the hole bigger
I saw that video. I'm fairly certain they do that every year, but I think WoT did something with sponsoring it one year or something like that. Looked fun.
Some of the boat guys build 1/6 scale tanks. They are like 3ft+ long. Armed with a paintball cannon for the main cannon. I was going to do that, but it's a very regional being mostly in Maryland, but it also seems like it's a dead hobby too.
Im probably going to go with one side being as big as possible (3ft?) and a narrow return track. I'll have it a duck under, but operate it from outside the track. So have the hole just bug enough for me to crawl under and get to the back.
If I make the return track 8", I'll just need to have the corners for 18" curves, but I may use my 22" ones, and just fill in what I need to keep them on wood.
I'll probably go as wide as possible for the main bench, and use 18" there to get the most room out of it. The back will also be like 2ft at least.
So one thing I was thinking of on this layout, would be a steel mill. I'd go a bit earlier than what I have for Locomotives for a main running train, do something set in the 30s, but with the RC ships in mind, the mill would be making up the Krupp armor for them, lol. (Not really, but the idea of the steel mill making the ships armor wood tie into my other hobby) Just a thought on that.
rrinker Looks like basically playing World of Tanks (one of the few video games I play) from a third person perspective (using the radio). --Randy
Looks like basically playing World of Tanks (one of the few video games I play) from a third person perspective (using the radio).
Thats cool! Finally another tank fan that plays World of Tanks on these forums! Have you made it to tier ten yet?
Ok, back to origional thread topic...
I'm beginning to realize that Windows 10 and sound decoders have a lot in common. There are so many things you have to change in order to get them to work the way you want.
Wdodge0912I have brought up the thought of a better biodegradable BB before I got into the hobby.
Hi Wdodge0912,
You have no idea how happy I am to hear that you were already aware of my concerns!! I admire you for that!
It is unfortunate that making change in our society is so difficult.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I saw a neat video where the use 1/16th scale tanks - IR sensors, they don;t actually shoot projectiles. Also very detailed scale model tanks. Looks like basically playing World of Tanks (one of the few video games I play) from a third person perspective (using the radio). It was at some tank museum in South Carolina or somewhere down that way, the playing field was a highly detailed giant diorama, scale buildings for the bombed out town, scale trees, etc. Just needed a bombed out train.
Yes, 18" is plenty wide enough for 3 or 4 tracks in a yard. In 24", I have 5 yard tracks, 2 AD tracks, and 2 mains.
hon30critter Wdodge0912 The pond here in Michigan is one of the deeper ponds of the hobby This is going to sound like I am a tree hugger! So what, I am a tree hugger!! Are you using copper BBs? I'm concerned about the BBs that miss their targets and end up on the bottom of the pond. A lot of them will be injested by waterfowl. The birds could end up with bellys full of BBs. I do see a possible solution, although getting people to support it might take some work. That would be to use projectiles that are easily biodegradeable. Maybe something like compressed flour pellets. They wouldn't exactly be healthy for the ducks (you could add vitamins), but they would pass through their systems easily without doing much harm. I'm sure it would take some work to develop a suitable bullet. I can just see a couple of damp, sticky pellets jamming up the firing mechanisms, and the pellets that do hit their targets might leave a bit of a mess in the bilges, but that's just part of the challenge! Please understand that I am not being critical of the hobby. It sounds like a blast! (pardon the pun). All I'm suggesting is that some thought be given to addressing a potential negative side effect. I believe that the hunting industry has moved away from lead shot. This would be a similar move forward. Okay, preaching over! Dave
Wdodge0912 The pond here in Michigan is one of the deeper ponds of the hobby
This is going to sound like I am a tree hugger! So what, I am a tree hugger!!
Are you using copper BBs? I'm concerned about the BBs that miss their targets and end up on the bottom of the pond. A lot of them will be injested by waterfowl. The birds could end up with bellys full of BBs.
I do see a possible solution, although getting people to support it might take some work. That would be to use projectiles that are easily biodegradeable. Maybe something like compressed flour pellets. They wouldn't exactly be healthy for the ducks (you could add vitamins), but they would pass through their systems easily without doing much harm. I'm sure it would take some work to develop a suitable bullet. I can just see a couple of damp, sticky pellets jamming up the firing mechanisms, and the pellets that do hit their targets might leave a bit of a mess in the bilges, but that's just part of the challenge!
Please understand that I am not being critical of the hobby. It sounds like a blast! (pardon the pun). All I'm suggesting is that some thought be given to addressing a potential negative side effect. I believe that the hunting industry has moved away from lead shot. This would be a similar move forward.
Okay, preaching over!
I have brought up the thought of a better biodegradable BB before I got into the hobby. I was shut down. I suggested moving to airsoft BBs that are biodegradable. Bigger. So that would require a change in guns, just the big gun combat ships use even bigger sizes of ball bearings.
Theres a little bit (read a lot) of an elitism in the hobby, pretty much if you question anything, including safety issues, if it would make the old stubborn veterans in the hobby have to make a change, you are wrong. (The contest director does a visual check of boats to ensure co2 bottle are disconnected from ships before the pits can be called cold. But the use of one way check valves hold co2 in the system still even with the co2 bottle pulled. It was my opinion that unless check valves are outlawed, or the CD visually watches every ship empty the stored co2, the CD cant, by their own written rules, call the pits cold, you couldn't tell which ships still had air in their systems . I was told it's up to the captains to ensure they empty their air systems,they weren't a safety issue, and the CD can call the pit cold with just bottles removed.)
Little bit of a tanget there, but that just shows what I am talking about. The thought about check valves making the CDs ability to call the put cold with a quick visual check impossible was a huge issue that I was told I was wrong, because that's they way they have always done it.
I personally use the hornady black anodized steel BBs, most use the cheap plain steel ones. The copper ones are used by a few people, but from testing I guess just aren't as accurate as plain steel bbs, or as fast as the anodized ones, due to too much variation on them to be consistent. Not many use them, but they do get used.
I know one thing that was said on the issue was that steel bbs "should be fine," as that is what the federal government says can be used for hunting waterfowl. I guess it kind of makes sense, that the little amount of BBs the hobby as a whole uses doesnt amount to nearly as much as waterfowl hunting, and the BBs we shoot are practically the same as what would be used for that as well. I can't speak for how good or bad the the copper ones are, but those are copper coated, it's still steel on the inside. I'd assume there's regulations for enviromental concerns, since BBs are used for more than destroying balsa on an RC boat.
If you would like to ask those more "knowledgeable" in the hobby about itz.Id have to direct you to the forums that most communications occur on.
Wdodge0912The pond here in Michigan is one of the deeper ponds of the hobby
I also watched the ship video, cool stuff! Lots of work. Trains could now be your winter hobby, kinda like what I do.
Your new plan sorta goes back to what you had before, OK, as far as height, mine is at 50", for me, for the viewing, and working on things. I do have a step that I use to reach some things, when needed.
The height is your call, the higher, the easier to duck under.
Why don't you use the track you have, make some templates, and play around with the layout and see what you can make fit.
Or at least do a scaled drawing, then you can make bench top adjustments, as you go.
Work with what you have.
I'll say it again, I'm NOT a track designer, but I do appriciate someone trying to make what they have, work. That's about the way I roll. "Lets see what I can come up with"...
You can get some ideas down, so next fall, when the MI. winter starts to blow in, you can start your layout.
rrinker I saw a different video first, and I kept wondering how much you lose if your ship sinks, and how they keep from damaging the radio gear - this video clarified all that. Certainly would be a summer-only activity around here, because if my ship sank more than ankle deep in a pond this time of year, it's staying for a while, the heck if I'm getting in water that's barely above freezing. With no ship - you could use the radio gear to make a wireless walkaround throttle for the trains. --Randy
I saw a different video first, and I kept wondering how much you lose if your ship sinks, and how they keep from damaging the radio gear - this video clarified all that. Certainly would be a summer-only activity around here, because if my ship sank more than ankle deep in a pond this time of year, it's staying for a while, the heck if I'm getting in water that's barely above freezing.
With no ship - you could use the radio gear to make a wireless walkaround throttle for the trains.
The pond here in Michigan is one of the deeper ponds of the hobby, so I'm told (only battled there, so I cant speak on the rest of the battle locations). But it definitely is a summer hobby here.
My ship has shower pan liner to keep BBs from hitting the guts. I'm using lipos, so those will get some extra protection. My last ship had fiberglass boards installed to stop the BBs.
And scoring is all on points. I still dont understand it though. I know the values, and how to calculate it all, but I'm not sure how who gets what points is determined. But I don't go for the points anyways.
I have several radios for a remote throttle. Eventually I want to make an O scale train remote controlled so I can have a backyard layout around a small flowerbed. Put a battery in a B unit or tender or something. But that's all farther down the line.
As for the layout, I have that 4x8 to work with, as well as what looks like a 4x4 table. The 4x4 has a hole cut into it, was used at the end of the 4x8 and had a track run around it, while the operator stood in the hole. I'm not sure how big the hole is, as there was stuff on the table.
Would 18" work for like a 3 or 4 spur yard? I'm really thinking of doing the layout like a shelf with an outside return path. If 2ft would be fine for one side, I could have a staging yard on the other. A 2ft and an 18" section would give me a 2ft gap. I'd probably have the front section that's 2ft skinny so I could get by easily, and then the back also have 2ft. I could also extend out the layout above the dresser, keeping it at the 18" should be fine.
The question then though is should I put it up taller so it's easier to duck under, or make the one section a lift out, and have it short and free standing. The windows is really what I am thinking free standing for, since the one is almost as wide as the 5.5ft section. The other is behind the dresser as well. They are pretty big windows.
The table would be 8ftx5.5ft, and the hole would be 2ftx5ft. If the 18" doesnt work for to much of a yard, I could cut the one side from 18" to 12", and have the hole 2.5ft
Such as this
http://imgur.com/a/LxoMk6Z