New layout. Please let me hear your suggestions.

[cuyama]

Kyle,

I'm also late to this discussion. I've always thought Chris Roper's design was a decent layout plan, except for the Timesaver section. The Timesaver was originally designed as a parlor game and many people (myself very much included) find it tedious after one or two times through. A more "railroad-like" configuration would prove more engaging over time and could be made to fit in that space.

This has been discussed extensively on this and other forums., so I won't abuse that poor horse any longer. Friend Craig Bisgeier posted this on the downsides of the Timesaver:
http://www.housatonicrr.com/timesaver.htm

On another forum, I also posted a long diatribe a few weeks ago:
http://www.trainboard.com/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/33/t/000699/p/2.html

There is also a page on my website describing "fun for one" operations that may be of some interest. There are lots of ways to add challenge and fun without resorting to the puzzle nature of the traditional Timesaver.

The other challenge is that in making the plan double tracked, it now seems a bit difficult for trains on the main to enter the yard. Or for a train made up in the yard to get to the main. This can be fixed with some re-arranging of the crossovers. To see how this plays out, try working through the moves between the outside main and the yard.

Chris Roper's original single-tracked version has a double ended arrival/departure track with a switching lead. The single-track version you showed shortened this track a lot and the double tracked version changes that area even further. This is an important element of Chris' original design and you'll want to think through how you add the function back in as you change the track plan.

Double-tracking is not a bad idea for a small layout, but the necessary crossovers take some space and must be positioned thoughtfully to allow both mains access to the yard (when there is a yard). Since the original plan was for single track, some of these issues may be a "fun drain" later on in a double-track version. As noted above, one way to determine how serious these problems are (and how much they might bother you) is to "walk through" the process. Some people take a large copy or printout of the plan and move paper counters representing trains through the motions of the planned operations -- time well spent.

Regards,

Byron

[Anonymous]

Spacemouse,
I like your idea to expand the "interchange" with a second track and to lengthen it.
I'll run this through the simulation to see if that'll fit. Regarding the "Timesaver", see below.

Byron,
I too had started to wonder, if that space couldn't be used better. I can see, how
the "Timesaver" can become tedious after a while. I thank you for your heads-up
and will check out the links you supplied.
I also agree, that because of the double track layout, access to the yard from the
outer main with trains going CCW has become difficult. Thanks for pointing that
out. I will look into lengthening the A/D track as well.
I can easily simulate train operations in 3rd Planit, which I'm using to plan the
layout. I'm a newbe when it comes to MRR, but luckily an old wiz when
it comes to computers and how to use them in a case like this. [:)]
I'll run some trains around to see how this will work.

Thanks again for the help everyone! I'll keep you posted.

[Anonymous]

Update:

Here are the modifications I made from my previous plan:
I connected the yard lead to the inner main and replaced the double slip
with regular cross-overs.
I also flipped the cross-over in the lower-right to make it easier for a train
on the outer main to get into the yard.
And I extended the A/D track to the right as well.
I got rid of the "Timesaver" and replaced it with more common industry.

The diagonal area in the center was left empty, to allow for a modest slope
to raise the elevation of the upper right-hand corner and maybe have a
little downtown scenery there.

I made some simulated runs, and it all seems to work great.

Well, here it is: Plan #7. Tada! (I do enjoy the feedback here a lot!)

[dommegr]

Very nice. It's been interesting following this one and seeing the evolution of a plan.

I like how you're left the interchange and team track as well as the one just below the harbor open in case you decide to expand at some point.

[ghonz711]

Excelent work with this one! I can't belive how this one turned out. I like it so much, i wan't to build it in HO scale! Great work.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dommegr

Very nice. It's been interesting following this one and seeing the evolution of a plan.

I like how you're left the interchange and team track as well as the one just below the harbor open in case you decide to expand at some point.

This has truly been a journey for me, and a learning experience as well.
From starting out with no clue, to starting to get the picture, to getting a grasp
on what a layout should be like - thanks to all the help I found here.

Now the biggest challange is to keep the layout within the space I got.
Honey? About the livingroom.. Would you mind if I... [:)]

[SpaceMouse]

Your track is very good, it has come a long way.

Lately however, I've become convinced that staging is important in that it iincreases your operational capacity, even if it is just a one track fiddle track. So with that in mind, how about reversing your interchange track having it start from as far left as you can get it and running parallel with your team track. You can then build your outside world trains and bring them into your layout for classification and distribution. Then you send your out-going shipments the same way they came in, out the interchange track..

[dommegr]

"Now the biggest challange is to keep the layout within the space I got.
Honey? About the livingroom.. Would you mind if I... "

Heh, good luck. Wait til you see how easy it could be for 3' X 6' to grow into 12' X 18'. Right now I'm working on an N-scale doortop layout in my living room. I want to get another door to attach to it. This is an evil hobby.

Greg

[ereimer]

wow this plan is coming along very nicely . i can hardly believe all that fits on a 3' x 6' . darn you n scale people !

an interesting challenge .... now try getting rid of the double track main and going back to single track . unless your reason for the double track is that you like to watch trains run around the layout in both directions while you do some switching . in that case it's perfect as is [:)]

[selector]

It looks crisp and clean, tight, and interesting. You should get a lot of joy out of this one!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ereimer

...i can hardly believe all that fits on a 3' x 6' . darn you n scale people !

Modeling in N scale does have it's advantages when it comes to tight spaces.
On the other hand, the electron microscope that you need from time to time to
assemble small parts, does take up a lot of space on your workbench. [:)]

The original layout by Chris Roper actually is a single track layout. I toyed around
with it for a while, but it just seems that double tracks offer more in terms of
operation.

QUOTE: Originally posted by dommegr

...Heh, good luck. Wait til you see how easy it could be for 3' X 6' to grow into 12' X 18'. Right now I'm working on an N-scale doortop layout in my living room. I want to get another door to attach to it. This is an evil hobby.

I agree! [:D]

[SpaceMouse]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Kyle S.

[

The original layout by Chris Roper actually is a single track layout. I toyed around
with it for a while, but it just seems that double tracks offer more in terms of
operation.

Actually it is just the opposite. If you have trains running two directions, you have to work in your passing sidings and schedule meets.

[Anonymous]

Update:

Somehow, I knew that this would happen..
I fed this beast 8 more inches in length to "relaxe" the layout a bit.
I also made a single track version of it.

Single or double track - which one do you like better?

[SpaceMouse]

Okay,

You have a couple friends over. The first one brings a train in from the interchange track around the layout and into the yard. The second friend starts seting up his train on the interchange track. You break train number one down. While friend number one takes his engine in for fuel and service. And then yuou break down train number 2 and he takes his engine in for service. Friend number one picks up the east-bound and goes off to set off cars and pick up new ones. Friend number 2 head west with the perishables and has priority. He makes two laps and sets out his cars and makes his pick-ups.

In the one track senario, engine #1 must clear the track every time engine #2 comes through. This is a lot of interaction.

In the two track senario, it is just a matter of running around the the track on a different main. Little to no interaction.

It all depends on what you are looking for and/or what is the prototype like.