Getting a layout down on... pixels?

[jacon12]

Ok, so now I know I'm not the best in the world at getting a layout plan down on paper. Oh, I got the out line and dimensions of the bench..

but as far as doing the track, well.. you really don't want to see that. You may be eating dinner.
In my minds eye I know pretty much what I want to do I just don't have that ability to put it on paper. The main track plan is going to be simple because at this stage, for me, I need simple. Just a folded dogbone type double main line, towns at each end with turnouts going into each town. Maybe a branch line on a slight incline along the back going up to a logging operation.
I looked at 3dPlanit, the mrr software cad program. It looks great and it also looks like I'd be spending a month or two learning it. But, at least I'd have something down in pixels.
As a beginner on his first layout do I really need this, or will I be able to do things using the old trial and error method?
How did you do yours? Cad program? Pencil and paper? Trial and error? Or did you have enough experience you knew what you wanted and how to do it?
Jarrell

[Medina1128]

I designed my layout using Right Track, which is free from Atlasrr.com. It's really easy to use, but the only down side is that the largest radius is 24". I was able to cheat by moving the track and using a section of flex track, create a wider radius.

[Anonymous]

I am in the same boat as you Jacon. Trying to figure out how to design my layout. I am going into a new house and we finnally picked the right one. Going back for train room measurements tommorow so I can start brainstorming and then finalizing.

[rayhippard]

Jarrell, Buy "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" by John Armstrong. Great read about how "real" railroads do it and ways to use this for modeling. Very helpfull for any size or shape of plan. I guarranty you will like it. You will use pencil and paper instead of pixels. I think the best way to go ! And a great source for thoughts on planning your next layout or an expansion.
Ray-------------- Great Northern fan.

[MisterBeasley]

I'm a bit further along. I used the Atlas program, too, and I had to make some compromises. It doesn't support curved turnouts, but when I get down to that level of detail, I'm beyond the track plan stage anyway. I still keep a copy of the plan around for positioning tracks, and I've overlayed my roads and even my foam height diagram on it.

After I did the plan, I took old track pieces and loosely laid the whole thing out on the floor. (Another use for old brass track - someday we'll do a thread on that.) I added some old buildings, too, and got a much better sense of how things would look that way. I made a few changes to the plan, and then I was ready to build the benchwork and start laying track.

The track plan was valuable, but it was definitely not the final word. Once I started working with roadbed and flex track, I made minor changes in many places. IMHO, the Atlas program's support for grades isn't worth the effort of learning it, because you really need to see the way it comes out on your layout before you finalize it with glue. Some day, I may go back and re-draw the layout as I built it.

[Seamonster]

Despite the fact that I have a CAD program and use it a lot (mostly for drawing electronic schematics, but other things too) I found the Atlas program too fussy and painstaking to work with. I do my track planning with pencil, paper, ruler and compass. Like MisterBeasley, the track plan isn't the final word--I do the fine tuning and tweaking after I start laying track, but at least I have the concept of what I want and where I want things. I used my CAD program to print up sheets with grids at a specific scale so I could have references when I was doing the pencil work. I also used the CAD program to make a full size template for my control panel just to make sure I could fit everything in.

[jacon12]

I appreciate all the advice. Ray, I do have Armstrongs book and I'm going to MAKE myself sit down and read it over again.
I don't know why in the heck that, all my life, I've hated reading the instruction manual on anything and that is exactly what Armstrongs book is. I know it is an excellent source of information and I've already learned a lot from it.
Jon, congradulations on the new house. I know you're glad to get a train room.
Mr. Beasley I'm glad you said, "The track plan was valuable, but it was definitely not the final word", It's good for a novice like me to know there is going to be room for changes, that the plan is not ironclad.
I think part of my problem, and it may be the same with other beginners, is we want to go too fast and not take the time needed to plan it out. I do know that I'm going to try to stay away from using inclines for now, try to keep the mainline on the level. Maybe that will help. The other thing is it is difficult for me to visualize what I can do in the amount of space I've got. I look at other people pictures of their layouts and am amazed at how they worked things in. Having some buildings of different types and sizes would probably be a help, being able to sit them around and get ideas.
Anyway, thanks for the advice.
Jarrell

[electrolove]

I planned my layout in Photoshop. I used to work as a web designer so it was natural to me. I used Photoshop's layer feature. My room in one layer, my benchwork in one layer, my trackplan in one layer, my scenery in one layer and so on. The nice thing here is that you can look at only the things you want when you need them. I used a resolution of 600 ppi when I scanned the track plan from a magazine. This is importent because with the measure tool you can measure everything from track length of a siding, the angle of a track compared to another, location of a tunnel and so on. And if you scanned the picture in 600 ppi you can measure with great accuracy. I used this method when building my benchwork because it was some strange angles on the track plan. I was very impressed with the accuracy. I measured an angle in Photoshop, and used a hand saw set the to same angle. I can really recommend this. Sooooo nice [:D]

[Adelie]

I use CadRail, Jarrell. But that's easy for me to say because I've been using it for about 10 years or so. I'd like to think my learning curve on it is pretty low right now.

One advantage to a Cad program is that it is much harder to cheat and cram things into the plan that won't really fit. Same can be true for the pencil and paper route if you use templates for your curves, turnouts and easements (if you are using easements).

Another advantage is you can always fall back to a previous version of the plan when you go off on a tangent and it winds up being a mess. That assumes you name the files something different whenever you make big changes. I use the date for instance.

The Bunter Ridge is also a folded dogbone. I built the end loops, fold in the dogbone, corner curves and spirals up and down to the staging area exactly as the plan indicated, since they are space critical. Now I am connecting them. They are connected on the plan with various straightaways and sweeping curves, but I know I am going to build them by eye, inserting rivers and ravines where my eyes say they should be. Most of my spurs will wind up being ad-libbed, except for the point where they split from the main. So, it is a mixed bag.

Planning can be fun, and is necessary, but if it is taken to an extreme, it can prevent construction!

[grandeman]

I used the Atlas program but once track was being layed made many changes from the plan. It worked out well. You migt consider one of their published plans as a starting point too. Think of what it is you're after. Do you like watching trains pass on parallel tracks, switching, a continual mainline run? I went with small staging yards (some not complete yet, had to get that pesky water heater out of the way!) behind the backdrop to represent points beyond the modeled area. Hope you come up with a plan that suits your requirements.

[oleirish]

[:p]JARRELL: I think I've built many diffrent layouts over the years,and I still do It the hard way:pencel,sharpe(red and black),metal yard stick,string to figure out curves,and track parts and switches.and chaluk(because you can erase it)[:D]I tried the cad thingie[:p]but could not figure it out real well.[?]I love your back drop so far,now what color are you going to paint the table top?[;)]

OLE'IRISH
(JIM)

[IRONROOSTER]

Except for my first layout which was a 4x8 from the back of Armstrong's book, I've always used paper and pencil. But then I started in the 70's before the PC era. The book teaches you some good techniques for drawing plans. I found that as long as the plan doesn't try to crowd too much in, making minor changes as you build it, is not a problem. I've also found that the layout is never quite as big as it looked on paper. What looked like ample room for sidings and buildings on paper, looks crowded on the layout.

Each layout is a learning experience for me - I've done 7 and am going to start on no. 8 this summer.

Enjoy
Paul

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by electrolove

I planned my layout in Photoshop. I used to work as a web designer so it was natural to me. I used Photoshop's layer feature. My room in one layer, my benchwork in one layer, my trackplan in one layer, my scenery in one layer and so on. The nice thing here is that you can look at only the things you want when you need them. I used a resolution of 600 ppi when I scanned the track plan from a magazine. This is importent because with the measure tool you can measure everything from track length of a siding, the angle of a track compared to another, location of a tunnel and so on. And if you scanned the picture in 600 ppi you can measure with great accuracy. I used this method when building my benchwork because it was some strange angles on the track plan. I was very impressed with the accuracy. I measured an angle in Photoshop, and used a hand saw set the to same angle. I can really recommend this. Sooooo nice [:D]

Hmmm.... now here's an idea. I'm not bad in Photoshop![:)]
Thanks for the reminder.
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Adelie

I use CadRail, Jarrell. But that's easy for me to say because I've been using it for about 10 years or so. I'd like to think my learning curve on it is pretty low right now.

One advantage to a Cad program is that it is much harder to cheat and cram things into the plan that won't really fit. Same can be true for the pencil and paper route if you use templates for your curves, turnouts and easements (if you are using easements).

Another advantage is you can always fall back to a previous version of the plan when you go off on a tangent and it winds up being a mess. That assumes you name the files something different whenever you make big changes. I use the date for instance.

The Bunter Ridge is also a folded dogbone. I built the end loops, fold in the dogbone, corner curves and spirals up and down to the staging area exactly as the plan indicated, since they are space critical. Now I am connecting them. They are connected on the plan with various straightaways and sweeping curves, but I know I am going to build them by eye, inserting rivers and ravines where my eyes say they should be. Most of my spurs will wind up being ad-libbed, except for the point where they split from the main. So, it is a mixed bag.

Planning can be fun, and is necessary, but if it is taken to an extreme, it can prevent construction!

"Planning can be fun, and is necessary, but if it is taken to an extreme, it can prevent construction!"
Mark, how true that is. Right now I'm kinda frozen in place and I've got to break out and get going.
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by grande man

I used the Atlas program but once track was being layed made many changes from the plan. It worked out well. You migt consider one of their published plans as a starting point too. Think of what it is you're after. Do you like watching trains pass on parallel tracks, switching, a continual mainline run? I went with small staging yards (some not complete yet, had to get that pesky water heater out of the way!) behind the backdrop to represent points beyond the modeled area. Hope you come up with a plan that suits your requirements.

Grande man, I like it all... switching, watching trains run.. the whole thing. Glad you got the water heater gone! Oh, my yards are gonna be teeny tiny ones what with the space I have.
Thanks for the input!
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oleirish

[:p]JARRELL: I think I've built many diffrent layouts over the years,and I still do It the hard way:pencel,sharpe(red and black),metal yard stick,string to figure out curves,and track parts and switches.and chaluk(because you can erase it)[:D]I tried the cad thingie[:p]but could not figure it out real well.[?]I love your back drop so far,now what color are you going to paint the table top?[;)]

OLE'IRISH
(JIM)

Lol... Jim! How did you know what I've been pondering. I've been looking, really looking for a change, at what dirt looks like in my area and I'm finding it's all kinds of colors. Red clay in one area, sandy soil in another etc. So, I'm thinking about a light brown and go from there.
You must be a genius to use string to figure curves! [:D]
Thanks,
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by IRONROOSTER

Except for my first layout which was a 4x8 from the back of Armstrong's book, I've always used paper and pencil. But then I started in the 70's before the PC era. The book teaches you some good techniques for drawing plans. I found that as long as the plan doesn't try to crowd too much in, making minor changes as you build it, is not a problem. I've also found that the layout is never quite as big as it looked on paper. What looked like ample room for sidings and buildings on paper, looks crowded on the layout.

Each layout is a learning experience for me - I've done 7 and am going to start on no. 8 this summer.

Enjoy
Paul

Paul, knowing a little about it as I do, I think you need to have a good bit of experience to work ALOT into a layout. I'm going to try to keep this simple and not crowded. I need to learn all the basics first.
You've have some wise advice and I thank you for it.
Jarrell

[SpaceMouse]

Frankly, I'm surprized that you built your benchwork without a plan. But then again. I have decided on the shape of my layout without the completed plan. While the inability to decide on a plan may postpone construction, careful planning can save a great deal of grief.

A caution about the Atlas RR. I designed my layout using it and played it a little too tight. When all was said and done, I needed to add 6" to the side of my layout and now I have a 4.5 x 8 layout.

IF you are going with paper and pencil, be sure to use templates. While it is easy to see in you mind what you want your track to do. It almost never fits the way you envision it. That's why you need the templates or the computer programs. They won't let you fudge the plans.

[Anonymous]

Jarell,

Go buy a template for HO scale that they sell at most well equipped hobby shops. It has curves, switches etc all drawn to scale. I think it is 1" per foot. It saves a lot of time and can help you avoid many classic mistakes. Watch out when figuring out switches. Most people underestimate how long the are. Most are at least a foot long in HO scale. I see lots of plans that have four switches in two feet of linear space!! Another classic is curves that are too sharp. Figure your minimum radius and stick to it....Your table width has probably already set this for you.

The template has the advantage of being very easy to use (no learning curve) and pretty inexpensive..Draw your table top to scale on a page and go make a bunch of copies of it and fire away. It took me many months to figure out my track plan. My layout is 13 X 22 double decked (triple deck if you include staging), so there were issues to work out. Expect your plan to take some time. As I am building my layout I have made numerous modifications to the plan, but have had no unpleasant surprises...

[rayhippard]

Maybe building the benchwork without a trackplan is more realistic then we might think.
The ground was there long before the railroads came along and they had to adapt to what was already in place. Quite a thought, no. I believe the great John Allen made this observation long ago and even did part of his railroad this way just to add more of a challenge.
Ray--------------Great Northern fan.

[Anonymous]

Ray,

John Allen planned his railroad down to the location of signals. He built several 3 D models of the layout before he cut a board of bench work....Talk about patience and restraint. The technique you are referring to is when he would build and complete the scenery in a section before laying the track.

[rayhippard]

Guy, You are correct, but isn't this the same as I said, the ground was there before the tracks ? That's kind of what I was referring to about having the benchwork up before you have a detailed final plan. I have a good idea of the trackage I want on my new layout, but we pretty much have the outline of where the benchwork will go as we already have the overhead valances up and the backdrop and peninsula and scene divider in place.
Even with the most detailed and scale plans, there always seems to be last minute
changes made or needed to fit ideas into the finished layout. This is my ninth layout, so I do have a lot of practical experience on the subject. I guess my point is that you need to be at least a little bit flexible to have fun and enjoy our great hobby.
Ray--------------still a Great Northern fan.

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse

Frankly, I'm surprized that you built your benchwork without a plan. But then again. I have decided on the shape of my layout without the completed plan. While the inability to decide on a plan may postpone construction, careful planning can save a great deal of grief.

A caution about the Atlas RR. I designed my layout using it and played it a little too tight. When all was said and done, I needed to add 6" to the side of my layout and now I have a 4.5 x 8 layout.

IF you are going with paper and pencil, be sure to use templates. While it is easy to see in you mind what you want your track to do. It almost never fits the way you envision it. That's why you need the templates or the computer programs. They won't let you fudge the plans.

Chip,
I've always done things bassackwards. When I first set out to do this, I never intended to have a very complex trackplan. No helix, no grades (well, maybe a little one) one main line in a dogbone fashion etc.
I know what I'm going for it's just that I can't put it on paper. So, if it takes a year to lay the track, then it'll just have to take a year.. [;)]
Thanks for you input!
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Trainnut1250

Jarell,

Go buy a template for HO scale that they sell at most well equipped hobby shops. It has curves, switches etc all drawn to scale. I think it is 1" per foot. It saves a lot of time and can help you avoid many classic mistakes. Watch out when figuring out switches. Most people underestimate how long the are. Most are at least a foot long in HO scale. I see lots of plans that have four switches in two feet of linear space!! Another classic is curves that are too sharp. Figure your minimum radius and stick to it....Your table width has probably already set this for you.

The template has the advantage of being very easy to use (no learning curve) and pretty inexpensive..Draw your table top to scale on a page and go make a bunch of copies of it and fire away. It took me many months to figure out my track plan. My layout is 13 X 22 double decked (triple deck if you include staging), so there were issues to work out. Expect your plan to take some time. As I am building my layout I have made numerous modifications to the plan, but have had no unpleasant surprises...

Guy, the templates sound like a good idea, I'll check them out.
Thanks!
Jarrell

[jacon12]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rayhippard

Maybe building the benchwork without a trackplan is more realistic then we might think.
The ground was there long before the railroads came along and they had to adapt to what was already in place. Quite a thought, no. I believe the great John Allen made this observation long ago and even did part of his railroad this way just to add more of a challenge.
Ray--------------Great Northern fan.

Ray, you're mostly right on track.. about mine anyway. I designed the benchwork to give me an around the room against the wall type layout, leaving a good portion of the room for other things.
I think it'll eventually work out for me. I know I'll never have enough room, I'll always want more space here or there, but for now this will have to do.
Thanks Ray.
Jarrell

[electrolove]

No problem, just ask if you need any help with it.

QUOTE: Originally posted by jacon12

QUOTE: Originally posted by electrolove

I planned my layout in Photoshop. I used to work as a web designer so it was natural to me. I used Photoshop's layer feature. My room in one layer, my benchwork in one layer, my trackplan in one layer, my scenery in one layer and so on. The nice thing here is that you can look at only the things you want when you need them. I used a resolution of 600 ppi when I scanned the track plan from a magazine. This is importent because with the measure tool you can measure everything from track length of a siding, the angle of a track compared to another, location of a tunnel and so on. And if you scanned the picture in 600 ppi you can measure with great accuracy. I used this method when building my benchwork because it was some strange angles on the track plan. I was very impressed with the accuracy. I measured an angle in Photoshop, and used a hand saw set the to same angle. I can really recommend this. Sooooo nice [:D]

Hmmm.... now here's an idea. I'm not bad in Photoshop![:)]
Thanks for the reminder.
Jarrell

[FCnota]

I also used the free Atlas program. True, it did take some trial & error to learn how to use it, but I found it made a nice template I could follow while I laid out the track. I feel that you'll have to "cheat" here and there when you are actually laying track anyway, so if everything doesn't quite line up on the template, so what. It's just a guide and helps put your "minds eye" where everyone can see it. Don't get so caught up in getting it perfect on paper that you spend weeks pouring over a computer when you could be using the real thing. Just my opinion! Have fun!

[StillGrande]

3rd Planit has an excellent tutorial in the manual which teaches you how to use the program. I was drawing new layouts (2 levels) soon there after. It is pretty intuitive and once you play with it a bit, you can draw a giant layout in no time. Definitely work the money.

I had drawn a layout on paper with a template. They are definitely not for the larger layouts unless you love tape. You also get a better idea of what will really fit and what will fit if I fudge the drawing a bit. Changes are a breeze compared to the eraser on my pencil.

[Anonymous]

I tried the atlass software, I bought it when it was for sale and found out what a pain to work it. I bought one of those ho temples and had a better time and fun doing it. Use graph paper, the grids can be set to what ever scale. Cad programs take time to master and when time is a factor paper is the way to go.
Only you are the best judgement on this matter.

[SpaceMouse]

Just a caution about using Atlas RR then laying EZ track. It is not the same. I layed out my 4 x8 on Atlas RR then built it with EZ track and I had to add 6" to the layout to get it to fit. I now have a 4.5 x 8 layout.