UPDATE! Need opinions

[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!!!!

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[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?

[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...

[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

[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.

[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

[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!