HP and Sackville Railroad


Rico said:
Unless you’re set on having the double crossover in the yard think about using a single.
Railways don’t like them on the main let alone off.
A single crossover still lets you run around the cars and you will gain more storage in that you won’t need to run a loco on to that track.
Click to expand...
Normally I agree, but in this case used the double because it lets either track be the Arrival/Departure track.

boatwrench said:
Iron Horseman that's a nice edition. Do you think there is enough room on reversing loop besides being between two towns possibly used as a paired loads in / empties out industry?
Click to expand...
Actually now that you mention it, yes. One could come off where the red turnout is to the left. Curve down, cross the industry track, then curve back the other way to join where the back at the wye. Shoot. A lot easier just to draw...... Obviously the re-connection with the crossover area (in black circle) would need to be reworked a bit. Possibly just moving a little further up. And to get rid of the S-curve I was too lazy to figure out how to straighten. All kinds of possibilities to use that center of the layout space

1616685154934.png
 
BigGRacing said:
Flex track is not working for me, would love any help with this using the yard above with iron Horses plan but with Kato switches? any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think the best approximations would be the Kato 2850 & 2851 #4 Turnouts, if you can find them. I understand they have been discontinued.
For the double crossover, it appears Kato does not make one, nor do they seem to make any crossings, so you would have to decide to have a crossover one way or the other.

​

 
Last edited:
BigGRacing said:
Iron Horseman,
Are you able to add Kato switches (with your program) into the last plan here and confirm everything matches up by chance?
Importantly also without the use of flex track if possible.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm, I replied to this two days ago. Don't know where my post went? !!?? Anyway, no the software I use is "Atlas Right Track" and obviously only has Atlas brand track in it. Yes, any plan can be redrawn without the use of flex track, it just takes much more time to figure out.

Trying to figure out Atlas track segments that would emulate a Kato turnout. Then I could substitute that configuration each place a kato is used on your plan. Unfortunately I am probably least familiar with Kato track than any of the others. I know I mentioned a few Kato part numbers above. Do you have the actual part numbers of the ones you want to use?
 
Last edited:
OK, apparently cannot put images into PM, so I am adding it to this thread.

Yes, you can fit that layout in 10x10 as double track with 24" and 22" curves. Here is a first proof of concept draft. Lost one yard track and the industry on the left side. I do not recommend as drawn because it has only 2" between rails. Cars greater than 60' in length will want to sideswipe. Can be increased with tiny straight tracks or just some shifting. A few 2 & 3 degree kinks I didn't work out for a draft version that would need to be worked on. Could shift lots of things to make it closer to the original, for example, the crossings could be "twisted" further clockwise for a steeper angle into that bottom track.

BigGRacing.jpg
 
BigGRacing said:
It looks perfect! I plan on using paint to remove some yard tracks on the left side and build my yard Down the right once I start getting some more track. I think this looks way better than my basic l oval, your original layout was similar to this you said earlier? Would you recommend anything else and do you still have elevated track in your layout?
Click to expand...
I don't have a layout anymore. All lost to space considerations. "My" latest layout is the one I built for my office. It has elevations just because I don't like flat things. Very few places on the earth are flat. Maybe the glacier scrapped area of Canada where they say you can see your dog running away for a week, but other than that slight hills, bumps, stream flood plains, etc.


Just a bit of up and down and of course below grade (track) scenery.
roadbed.jpg


A more finished version.
LouisvilleRailroad.jpg
 
Last edited:
Iron Horseman said:
I don't have a layout anymore. All lost to space considerations. "My" latest layout is the one I built for my office. It has elevations just because I don't like flat things. Very few places on the earth are flat. Maybe the glacier scrapped area of Canada where they say you can see your dog running away for a week.


Just a bit of up and down and of course below track scenery.
View attachment 137889

A more finished version.
View attachment 137891
Click to expand...
Really like the layout👍 My grades will be same thing, nothing serious but enough to show some terrain differences
 
BigGRacing said:
... Would you recommend anything else ...?
Click to expand...
There needs to be at least one more crossover, probably 3.
As I said before some short straights to increase the track spacing to 2.25".
Changing the curve beginning on the south so the crossings are at a steeper angle, that will make the usable track down that branch longer.
Would be very helpful if we could find some curved turnouts. They save so much space.

СHRISTIAN said:
Wonderful layout. Love it !
-Could you post a track plan ?
-Is there a thread about your layout somewhere ?
Click to expand...
Since it was for display in the office it was a simple design. Small town, small mine, industrial area (in the back), one corner is a mountain river pass, one open farm country, one corner desert southwest. And as usual far from being finished.

I will see if I can find the track plan.

No, thread on it. Don't know if I have enough pictures to create one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top