UPDATE! Need opinions

[Anonymous]

OK, some of you may remember me from a few weeks ago. I am BRAND NEW to this hobby and very eager to get going. I have been working on my benchwork thus far but I haven't been making much progress because I am still fixated on my layout.
I think I finally have something to try. I am going to post my pic here for you all to look at. PLEASE be honest and let me know what you think. Is it possible? Is it believable? Do you think it is interesting?
I am a little concerned with the pieces of flex track on the inner curves. My right track software says the minimum radius (at the red dot on my program) is about 10". I know it is only 10" at that point but is that going to be a problem? Is there anyway I can change it?



Zypher and Massey...thanks for all of your help. Can you both take a look at this again and see what you think. It is basically the same thing I started out with except the yard and a few MINOR changes. I hope to get started VERY soon! Let me know if you can help. I can post a link to my .ral file if you can take a look at it with the right track software.

Thanks!

[CNJ831]

Lava - You don't seem to indicate what scale you are working in and that makes a lot of difference (maybe you did in your earlier post but I didn't see that one). A 10" radius in N will be just fine. A 10" radius in HO will be just about impossible to manage.

Since you note that you are a newbie, may I ask if you are aware that your layout design has a double reverse loop on the interior mainline that will need some very special wiring?

Overall, the design isn't bad but I would suggest eliminating that switch and spur in the middle of the crossover at the top of the drawing. Odds are you won't be able to get it to fit in there.

CNJ831

[pcarrell]

A 10 inch radius is pretty tight, even for N scale IMHO. I don't know what scale you're in, or the overall size of the layout (4x8?), but I'll give this a crack. I think that a revision is in order, but not a big one.

On the bottom right of the plan on that inside track, you could shorten the straight track leading into the curve and that would ease it slightly. You could also shift the whole plan slightly to the right by breaking it at the bottom left hand switch and adding a short piece of straight track there. Then you could ease the curve on the left.

Those are some small fixes.

Now for a little larger one.

The short siding between the two loops on the top center, whats that for? The reason I ask is that by eliminating that you could move the inner loop up towards the top and really ease those curves.

Also, those three tracks together towards the center left, is their an industry there or is that a small yard? If it's a yard, I can think of one or two ways to increase it's functionality. If it's an industry then theirs not a lot of room for a big enough building to justify three tracks to service it.

Overall I like the plan. I think you're close.

I have RTS also and I think I'm going to recreate your layout and tweak it a little and so what I can come up with. I'll post my results if they're worth anything. My software is configured to N scale, but you should be able to convert to any scale you need.

BTW, there are a couple of layout plans on my railimages account if you're interested. Just click the link at the bottom.

[tstage]

Greetings again, Tom! [:)] I remember you originally expressed interest in a 4 x 8 HO layout. Is that still true? 10" radius, albeit tight, would be for N-scale. NO WAY on an HO layout.

At first glance, the one primary thing you ought to be concerned about is the closeness of the outer and inner curves on the lower left and right quadrants of your layout.

Your track centers for 18 or 22" radius curves should be, at a minimum, 2-1/2" CTC (center-to-center). From your layout pictures, your are much closer than that. If two locomotives ever pass by each other at those regions, I can guarantee you that one will sideswipe the other. The longer the locomotive and cars; the more swingout that occurs; the larger CTC distance needed between curved tracks.

If you kick out your layout length longways a few inches, that might help take care of that, but that may reduce the usefulness of the turnout at the lower right spur. If you were planning towns or buildings that will be erected along the right side, and it's feasible, add another foot or two to the benchwork and make it a 4 x 9 or 4 x 10. That should give you the add space you need and also increase the length of your yards for more cars.

Tom

[Anonymous]

I have just a quick comment dont know if it will fix it thou...

on the right side just after the outside turnouts top and bottom could you add a small pice of straight track to pu***he out side track more to the edge?

and then on the top inside loop turnout if your replaced that with a Curved it would pu***he edge of that loop out just a bit at the top and then with the extra space you have could you get a bigger radius circle?

I too am new to this but just an Idea...

[pcarrell]

OK, here's a few changes.

My software is configured for N scale, so you might have to fiddle with the track centers some, but you get the idea.

I skewed the layout slightly to add some visual intrest, gain some real estate, and keep the track from following the edges. I revised a few things here and there, mostly turnout placements, yard tracks (it could probably still be better), and with the gained real estate I was able to add a modest engine facility.

The tightest curve is 17.50 inches, and that's through the center cutoff. The loops are 21.5 & 20 inch curves and the lead into the engine servicing area is a whopping 70 inch curve (mostly for eye candy).

The turnouts are #7's on the loops and #5's through the middle.

What do you think?



You could even cut in a turnout in the top left to add one more industry.

The problems I see with this setup are that you may have to foul the main, and definately the cutoff in order to switch the yard sometimes. On a 4x8 like this there isn't much room for a yard lead. The yard is slightly difficult to work, but not too bad. There is no RIP track and no caboose track (if you need one). The runaround at the end of the A/D track is short indeed. All of these things are a challenge, but not impossible to work with.

Maybe someone here can improve this or the original design to make them work better. How 'bout it guy's?

[SMassey]

FOr the most part this looks good Lava but there is a little problem with the 10" radius. In HO scale 15" is about the absolute minimum you should ever consider going. at 15" only a few of the shorter cars and locos (4 axle trucks) are going ot be able to go round with out messing stuff up. I just got my track layed down and hooked up last night and my spacing was perfect so if you use what I gave you a few weeks ago your mainlines will function good. I need to run into town now but when I come back I will see if I can play with this a little more and help ya out. Oh and could you get me a link to your source files I would like to see the layout on the program.

Laters

[jecorbett]

Overall, it looks like a very good plan. Very similar to many published 4X8 plans. The reverse section is no big deal. They aren't that hard to wire and you only have one. If you run long trains, you have to be sure that the cars are insulated at some point so that the whole train will not conduct the electrical current from engine to tail. Otherwise you could have your engine leaving the reverse section while the tail is still entering which would create a short.

I don't see anywhere that a 10" radius is required. I wonder if it is a quirk in the software. It looks like the whole layout could be built with 18" an up. Even though they make 15" sectional track , I would stay away from it. 18" should be your minimum and even with that you should run short engines and cars. Stick with 4 axle diesels or short steamers like 2-8-0, 40 foot freight cars as much as possible. If you want to run passenger trains, you probably want to stick with 60 foot shorties or smaller.

One question. What is the purpose of the two short parallel tracks off the yard track. It looks like it would be hard to squeeze and industry in there.

[Anonymous]

jecorbett:
I think you may be right. I laid the flex track and when I used the right track's "Optomize" button it said the tightest radius (Or somehting like that- can't remember the exact wording) was 10".
I didn't believe that because I recreated the layout almost exactly with 18" snap track.

For those of you that didn't know from my original:
The layout is HO and it is 4' X 8'.

Massey:
Do you want me to email you my source files? If not how do I put a link to them on the forums so you can download them?

pcarrell:
All I can say is WOW! That is awesome. I wish I could fit that exact plan on 4' X 8' in HO but I doubt I would be able to.
I think it was you who asked and now that I think of it maybe I need a little explanation of the layout.

In the left side the 3 tracks are a small yard, the end of the lead will be somehting like a fuel tank and the switch back will be a shed for the switcher.
I am only going to run diesel so no caboose needed or any steam support structures.
So that takes care of the yard area to the west.
The other 4 spurs are industry.
The one off of the reversing section is going to be a small factory.
The one off of the south east with 2 stub tracks is going to be somehting a little bigger (perhaps a lumber yard) and the last two in the middle to the north are going to be somehting else...maybe meat packing or something.

That gives me 4 industries, a small yard, some engine facilities in the yard area and some nice moves to do (facing and the reverse loop).

At the very bottom right that is an interchange track. The structure will be a tower or something.

[SMassey]

Hey Glad to hear that you got the layout layed out. You would have to put the file somewhere online in order to link to it so if ya can just E-mail it to me that will work the best.

did you see the pics of my layout? I started building it right after I got home from FL and it can run trains on the mainlines now. I am going to put my buildings up before putting the spurs in. There is no updates in my website yet but I have posted most of the building pics here in the forums so just look around here or let me know I can send you a link to the pics locations.

Hope to see some pics of your layout soon. Keep up the good work and dont skimp on the benchwork or you will pay later by having to fix it. Or worst case tearing the layout down and starting over.

[pcarrell]

Well Thank You! That's high praise indeed.

Like I said, my software is set up for N scale, so this won't transfer directly to HO, but you can use some of the design concepts and apply them to your own plan. You should be able to come close. As you can see, I tried to keep the "flavor" of your plan intact. It's a good plan and there's no need to start from scratch. Heck, I like it so much I just may play with it some more!

Your ideas on industries makes more sense now, though I still think some tweaking in the yard area would be helpful in the long run.

I'd like to suggest a couple of things before you go much further.

Get a copy of the book, "Track Planning For Realistic Operation". It's by John Armstrong. It may be the best money you ever spend on your layout,.......really.

Also, check out this site on layout design, especially the parts about yards. Here's the home page;

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/%7Esmithbf/BFSpages/LDSIGprimer/TOC.html

And here's the part about the yards;

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/%7Esmithbf/BFSpages/LDSIGprimer/Yards.html

I know these can be a little heavy, but read them lightly a few times and you'll see untold ways to improve your layout. I still refer to that web site and the John Armstrong book all the time. I always come away smarter.

[pcarrell]

Two hours later,

OK, I revised my software and this is in HO.

There are no curves sharper then 18 inches and all turnouts are #4's exept the one to the interchange and that's a #8. You will notice that it's pretty close to the edges so an extra 2 or 3 inches added to two sides would help a bunch, but it's all there.



Maybe you can have your cake and eat it too.

If you'd like I can Email you the plan in an .ral file so your RTS can read it. Just let me know if you want it.

[Anonymous]

Holy crap!
That is awesome.
I would love to see the /ral file so I can get the item list from Atlas.
Funny, I never saw a #8 turnout on the library for Atlas code 100 track though.

So let me ask you a few questions:

-- Can you make the yard have 3 spurs in stead of the 2?
-- Could you maybe make the round house facility a little smaller?
-- I think it looks good without the siding in between the mainline and the short line to the north. That will give me much more room in the inner loop to extend some of that stuff out.
-- I just watched "Workin on the Railroad" last night on DIY Network and got very interested in roundhouses. My 3 year old was very excited by them too, so I might just have to add the round house to mine.
-- The bottom 2 tracks on my yard were going to be locomitive facilities, maybe fuel and an office, but with the round house I would rather add those facilities to the round house area. Could you try to fit a spur nearer the roundhouse?
-- I looked but can't imagine it. You seem to have a better imagination than me so maybe you can find a way to lower the yard a bit to the south and squeeze some locomotive facilities near the roundhouse.
I am also thinking of going 5' X 8' now. I shouldn't have much difficulty reaching into the center of a 5' wide layout. I mean that is only a 2.5' reach from either side!
Can you try to RELAY this out on 5' X 8' for me and try to make the changes I have suggested? Also, email me the .ral too (Considering that you wouldn't mind--I don't mean to ask too much!)

[e-mail]

Thanks everyone!!!!

[roadrat]

Are you really keen on keeping that reverse loop, If you did away with it you could make a larger yard and have more room for industry buildings.

bill

[pcarrell]

QUOTE: Originally posted by lava96

Holy crap!
That is awesome.
I would love to see the /ral file so I can get the item list from Atlas.
Funny, I never saw a #8 turnout on the library for Atlas code 100 track though.

I did this with the Atlas HO code 83 software. The #8's are in there. You might want to concider code 83 for it's better looks. I don't think it causes operational issues as it's still pretty beefy, it just looks a little better.

QUOTE: So let me ask you a few questions:

-- Can you make the yard have 3 spurs in stead of the 2?

Not without more real estate. And I think it needs to be on the 8 side, not the 4, but I'll goof with it.

QUOTE: -- Could you maybe make the round house facility a little smaller?

Thats what you get with the software because the Cornerstone kit is a three stall roundhouse that you can add on to three stalls at a time. You could bend one of the leads to make two run side by side into an engine house. That might save a little room, but you lose that fantastic roundhouse look.

QUOTE: -- I think it looks good without the siding in between the mainline and the short line to the north. That will give me much more room in the inner loop to extend some of that stuff out.

You mean the siding between the two main loops up in the top middle on the original plan you showed?

QUOTE: -- I just watched "Workin on the Railroad" last night on DIY Network and got very interested in roundhouses. My 3 year old was very excited by them too, so I might just have to add the round house to mine.

They're pretty cool, huh?

QUOTE: -- The bottom 2 tracks on my yard were going to be locomitive facilities, maybe fuel and an office, but with the round house I would rather add those facilities to the round house area. Could you try to fit a spur nearer the roundhouse?

I can try to wiggle something in, but I was thinking of your fuel and sand facilities being on the lead to the turntable. I'll play with it and see what I come up with.

QUOTE: -- I looked but can't imagine it. You seem to have a better imagination than me so maybe you can find a way to lower the yard a bit to the south and squeeze some locomotive facilities near the roundhouse.

5x8 should help that quite a bit. I'll be messing with it.

QUOTE: I am also thinking of going 5' X 8' now. I shouldn't have much difficulty reaching into the center of a 5' wide layout. I mean that is only a 2.5' reach from either side!
Can you try to RELAY this out on 5' X 8' for me and try to make the changes I have suggested?

This should ease things a bit. I had that 4x8 crammed about as tight as I could get it!

QUOTE: Also, email me the .ral too (Considering that you wouldn't mind--I don't mean to ask too much!)

No problem. It's at my work so I'll get it to you tomorrow, K?

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by lava96
-- Can you make the yard have 3 spurs in stead of the 2?

If you did away with the run around, then 3 tracks would fit.

QUOTE: I am also thinking of going 5' X 8' now. I shouldn't have much difficulty reaching into the center of a 5' wide layout.

That extra foot would really help and make things look much less crowded. Just don't use it to try to fit in that much more track.

Normally I would fire up RTS and see what I could do with this but seems like pcarrell has got that covered.... So this time I'll just watch.

[Anonymous]

OK...a few things
I am going to really try and just go and do 5' X 8' so if you could be so kind and try again with the extra foot I would be very appreciative!
Yes you were right about the spur in the north. If we get rid of that spur (in between the 2 loops) we should have a lot more room.
So by removing that spur and making it a foot wider how would the yard and roundhouse facility look?
I agree with not cramming too much more in. I don't want to add any more industry, just spread it all out a bit more.
So we can go 5' X 8' and get rid of the one siding. Can someone try that for me and also send me the .ra file so I can screw with it too?

Thanks everyone!!!!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by roadrat

Are you really keen on keeping that reverse loop, If you did away with it you could make a larger yard and have more room for industry buildings.

bill

I gave this question some thought...If I am going to have a roundhouse/turntable I don't necessarily NEED the reversing section. I just thought it added some unique operational qualities with running the train over a normal operating session. If anyone can come up with some better plans WITHOUT the reverse loop then I am open to suggestion. Do you think maybe a Wye could fit across the middle of the layout to be used as a turnaround? Also, now that I upped the size to 5' X 8' do you still think I should ditch the reverse loop?

[CNJ831]

The reversing loops (you have two there) are likely to be a problem unless you've wired something like them before. If you are new to the hobby and are only really comfortable with the ideas of basic layout wiring...drop at least one of the reversing loops.

CNJ831

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

The reversing loops (you have two there) are likely to be a problem unless you've wired something like them before. If you are new to the hobby and are only really comfortable with the ideas of basic layout wiring...drop at least one of the reversing loops.

CNJ831

Maybe I am too new to the hobby, I only know about one of the sections being a reversing loop. I see the reversing section as the track that runs across the center of the inner loop starting at the top right (north east) and ending in the bottm left (south west).
Am I missing another one?

[SMassey]

On both track plans I can only see one reversing section. The little single track yard in the north kinda looks like the second one but if you follow one rail it ends up in the same location on the other side. NOw you have to be careful on the second layout because the turntable can become a reversing section really fast. I dont know for sure if the Atlas turntable (the one shown in the plan) reverses the polarity on its own or not. I have a Heljen 90' turntable and it does not reverse itself so I have to wire it for auto-reversing. If you are using DCC, most manufacturers have autoreversing modules available. I know that the Digitrax DCC system has a module called the PM42 that can do power districts and autoreversing at the same time. This unit has 4 channels that can be setup as either power district or auto reversing or both at the same time. On my layout (which is similar as you know) I use 2 channels for power district (inner and outer loops) and then one channel for auto reversing in the reversing loop. I have one channel still free and currently programed for a power district. If you go with a system like I have talked about having 2 reversing sections is as easy as reading some instructions and isolating a few rails.

Good luck!

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by lava96

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

The reversing loops (you have two there)

I only know about one of the sections being a reversing loop. I see the reversing section as the track that runs across the center of the inner loop starting at the top right (north east) and ending in the bottm left (south west).
Am I missing another one?

The turn table proper can be considered a reversing section. But other than that I don't see a second one either.

QUOTE: Also, now that I upped the size to 5' X 8' do you still think I should ditch the reverse loop?

I think the other issues should determine the reversing loop, not the size of the layout. The 5x8 would handle the reversing loop better.

[pcarrell]

The Atlas turntable reverses polarity on it's own. It doesn't need and special wiring. The only drawbacks to it are that it stops at every track for a moment as it turns and if you're running sound and lights you get a blip in them as the polarity reverses, but that's it.

Now, I know I Emailed you earlier and said I wouldn't get to this in a couple of day's, but I got to it, so here it is.

First, I just opened it up to 5x8 and redid the turnout in the center to work a little better.



Then I redid the yard and engine facility to include 1 more yard track and 2 RIP/car repair tracks next to the engine house. I added a scenic divider down the middle diagonally to give you two different scenes which would make the layout feel bigger. One side could be the engine facilities and yard with the city in the background and the other side could be some businesses in a small town out in the country.



This last one is similar, but I flipped the yard and the RIP track and added a switcher pocket to the runaround in the yard. I think I like this one best.



The biggest drawback to the last two is the tail on the runaround in the bottom corner of the yard is pretty short. It's about 8 inches, so a small switcher like a plymouth or something should do dedicated yard service.

It's all still pretty tight and it runs close to the edges (a few more inches on both sides would help to insure against trains taking the tumble into the giant canyon, i.e. the floor, and being put into the scrap heap), but it all fits.

I'll Email you the .ral files tomorrow.

What do you guy's think? Yea? Nay? Ideas?

[CNJ831]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Texas Zepher

QUOTE: Originally posted by lava96

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831

The reversing loops (you have two there)

I only know about one of the sections being a reversing loop. I see the reversing section as the track that runs across the center of the inner loop starting at the top right (north east) and ending in the bottm left (south west).
Am I missing another one?

The turn table proper can be considered a reversing section. But other than that I don't see a second one either.

Any time a train doubles back on itself using the same track you have a reversing loop/reversing of track polarity. Look at the trackplan and trace the route starting with the inner loop at the righthand side of the layout and go counter clockwise past the turntable and follow the crossover in the layout's center. You've doubled back on yourself. Now, start on the inner loop at the lefthand side of the layout. Go clockwise using the crossover at the center of the layout and continue around on the inner loop. You've ended up doubled back on yourself again. These two reversing loops are essentially mirror images of each other sharing the same central section of track.

CNJ831

[pcarrell]

Just for giggles I changed the curves from 22 on the outside loop to 24 and did the a likewise change to the inside loop. I also changed one industrial siding to make it a switchback. I also made the interchange into a small yard. Lastly, I expanded the table a few inches to give it some realestate on the edges.



Admittedly, this is a bit bigger then you wanted, but I wanted to explore the possibilities. You could shrink the curves back down a little to save a few inches overall.

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CNJ831
Any time a train doubles back on itself using the same track you have a reversing loop/reversing of track polarity. Look at the trackplan and trace the route starting with the inner loop at the righthand side of the layout and go counter clockwise past the turntable and follow the crossover in the layout's center. You've doubled back on yourself. Now, start on the inner loop at the lefthand side of the layout. Go clockwise using the crossover at the center of the layout and continue around on the inner loop. You've ended up doubled back on yourself again. These two reversing loops are essentially mirror images of each other sharing the same central section of track.

Oh I see what you mean, we just count differently. While there might be two physically different ways to "loop" around to the center section, they both go through the same center section. The "loop" in my reconning is the piece of track that requires the electricity to be futzed with. Hence remove the center crossover and you have removed "the loop". If there were two electrical loops one would have to remove two pieces of track to get rid of them. So in my counting only one "loop".

This is why we confuse people when we talk about these things [;)]

[Anonymous]

OK...I don't want to upset you pcarrell but I went ahead and made a totally new layout. It has nothing at all to do with me not liking the one you emailed me. On the contrary, the one you sent me is my new inspiration. As you will see I pretty much kept a lot of it the way you layed it out. I decided to stay with 5' X 8' and go with 24" on the mainline and 22" on the short line. I also layed the yeard at the north end. Now this is my first yard so PLEASE PICK IT APART. I read the website about yard laying and I think I got it right. I have runaround and a dedicated lead so I won't foul the main. I also squeezed in a few extra spurs to use as staging on the right. (Main yard on the left for running sessions-- staging on the right for some extra stuff.) Thanks to pcarrell I am addicted to the turntable idea. I just don't know if I did it right. I kept the 2 RIP tracks in there and ran 4 tracks off of the table section for the roundhouse. I just wanted to make sure I had it right. I cannot find the roundhouse in the righttrack library.
Can you all pleasel look at this. I am not sure if I like the crossovers. I did manage to squeeze in a decent yard, a good size locomotive facility (RIP tracks and roundhouse) and I got 7 industrial areas (One nice big one with 2 spurs).
I also like how the one spur in the bottom left (inner loop) goes "across" the other 2 spurs. I like the crossover action. I managed a switchback or two and kept it from being too crowded.
I wanted MAXIMUM interest here so I think I covered everything.
Any comments you all have, PLEASE LET ME KNOW (good or bad)!
My main concern is that it is realistic. I am concerned with the yard, any ideas on how to improve it? I am concerned with the turntable area. Please let em know what you all think.

Thanks

[SMassey]

Everything looks good to me except the yard (more on that one sec) It is a really buisy layout and will take some tricky track laying with the crossovers but measure twice and cut once you should be OK.

Now the Yard. It is backwards. You will have to pull into the yard then back down the runaround(if your train is short enough). The way the yard is you sould enter it from the track at the very north of the layout then it would be fine. See if you can somehow flip it around to get what you want.

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SMassey
Now the Yard. It is backwards. You will have to pull into the yard then back down the runaround(if your train is short enough). The way the yard is you sould enter it from the track at the very north of the layout then it would be fine. See if you can somehow flip it around to get what you want.

[#ditto] the "longest" track in the yard should be the arrival track. In yours it is the shortest. It is actually quite close to the yard on my son's RAT layout.

[Anonymous]

Just when I thought I was getting this stuff. I am confused. Do you mean the lead and the runaround should go from the south east towards the north west?
The way it looks to me now I would go off of the mainline in a northwest direction via the turnout. Then I see what you mean, the locomotive would need to back down the runaround.
I was thinking that the yard engine would not be coming in from the mainline...but I guess that is wrong. If the class 1 engine leaves the freight consist out on the mainline while the yard engine goes out to pick it up I can see how I am backwards. And if the class 1 actually entered the yard to drop off freight it would have to uncouple on the lead, and back up then go forward down the runaround and back back out on the mainline.
I will mess with it to try and get it the other way, but my skills are not that good. This took me 3 days the way it is now. I have been trying and trying and trying.
Can you think of anything else?
What can I do to make the crossovers better? And how about flipping this yard? Any suggestions on how?