Hutch's Conway Scenic Railroad Layout


Hutch said:
Another idea popped into my head after watching a video. I'm not going to install any switches, initially anyway. I'm going to have 2 separate loops and get right into scenery. Scenery is going to be king on my railroad. I plan to build mock up structures to fill it all and get an idea of what I want and then get to the details which will take the rest of my life. I want to have place holders throughout the layout probably made of wood blocks.

All of the traditional industries won't exist either. Just cities and rural towns, bridges and tunnels and mountains. Though I like the Conway Scenic Railway, I'm having second thoughts on the roundhouse. I have a TT but it will take up too much space and add too much mechanics. It's from the estate sale and looks home made with no electronics. We'll see.

Well, that's todays thoughts on my scenic railroad.
Click to expand...

Good thought!

Getting rid of the TT, roundhouse, and supporting trackage will free up a ton of real estate to do other thing that are important to you.
 
David_B said:
You may wish you had a siding or two especially where there are industries. You may also want to consider a crossing track to join the two loops or even a double crossover.
Click to expand...
No industries, just cities, bridges and rural area's but a passing slip would be an idea
 
Crossover and slips are certainly not out of the question but Scenery first and the lay extra track where it doesn't mess up the scenery. The track will be easy to maneuver after the fact, at least that's my plan. No ballasting until I have my scenery and routing complete in my head.

I almost wish I hadn't found that estate sale, I'd be using some kind of snap track. But I have a ton of track and I haven't even counted all the switches.
 
Hutch said:
Crossover and slips are certainly not out of the question but Scenery first and the lay extra track where it doesn't mess up the scenery. The track will be easy to maneuver after the fact, at least that's my plan. No ballasting until I have my scenery and routing complete in my head.

I almost wish I hadn't found that estate sale, I'd be using some kind of snap track. But I have a ton of track and I haven't even counted all the switches.
Click to expand...
OK, not sure I'd be brave enough to do it that way round.
 
It could be interesting! I don't want to get buried in planning, it takes a lot of time and what if I decide to change it anyway after all the planning. I did a ton of planning on my first layout and added a bunch of switches and just got so bogged down that I lost interest before any scenery hit the table. So, I'm a little gun shy on the planning and complexity. KISS is my motto for this one. Complexity will come later after I've fully enjoyed trains running through my scenery.
 
Hutch said:
It could be interesting! I don't want to get buried in planning, it takes a lot of time and what if I decide to change it anyway after all the planning. I did a ton of planning on my first layout and added a bunch of switches and just got so bogged down that I lost interest before any scenery hit the table. So, I'm a little gun shy on the planning and complexity. KISS is my motto for this one. Complexity will come later after I've fully enjoyed trains running through my scenery.
Click to expand...
Are you intending just to lay some track to get a feel of what you want and roughly what scenery and where you think it will look good.?
 
Hutch: You kinda think the way I do. Scenery was there way before the railroad. So, need to juggle stuff to make it look like the scenery came first, while planning the railroad first. Put mountains here and/or there, river/streams/valleys/canyons here and/or there; don't forget about those long bridges/trestles either.

In my case: Figure out where 30" wide benchwork will fit with 36" walkways. Place the one big classification yard with appropriate yard leads somewhere and the helix somewhere else. Then tentatively draw in a single loop of track on the lower and upper level. Draw in the transition track between levels. All tentative track is either 3" from benchwork front/back edge, or right down the middle. Oh, and do all of that with a 36" minimum radii. Doing this should give me an idea of where stuff *could* fit, then I can fudge stuff left/right up/down when I can see it in 3D and 1:1 to make room for shoe-horning any industry, house tracks, overhead clearance .. keeping mini-scene's or LDE's/views in mind.

Been working on getting tentative stuff placed and so far I have over 4000" of single track main line that does not include the helix, or the class yard and leads. Am currently working on elevations to provide less than 2% grade anywhere. Once the elevations get in, I will then go back and figure where 22ft minimum passing sidings need to go. Although I still am on the fence of double tracking all or most on the upper/lower level, with sidings on the transition level.

Time will tell and we will see how close it is kept to the tentative design.

Later
 
Hutch said:
"22ft minimum passing sidings" Yikes, that would take my whole layout. I have no plans for long trains, probably 6" at best.
My max curves will be 24" with some scabs at the tangents. The mainline bench is only 18" wide but I plan to bump that out as needed and create a bit of wobble.
Click to expand...
Wonder what type of track you are using? I read your posts in the ballast thread you started and maybe you should consider using the track with ballast attached, the Bachman or Kato type track. Also, if you are using foam as a base, I think you said earlier you were, you will have a much more robust setup with that type of track.

My personal experience is: foam with flex track most appropriate with wide radius curves, as the flex track will want to go back straight and put pressure on your tacking system. If I were doing a foam base, I would go with the hard radius track.

A friend of mine built a layout using flex track with grades and foam, could never get his stuff to stay in place. This was over a period of several years time. Even with nails and caulk. My personal preference is WOOD for strength and holding ability.

If you are not using flex track, you will not have to hold any curves in place like with flex.
 
logandsawman said:
Wonder what type of track you are using? I read your posts in the ballast thread you started and maybe you should consider using the track with ballast attached, the Bachman or Kato type track. Also, if you are using foam as a base, I think you said earlier you were, you will have a much more robust setup with that type of track.

My personal experience is: foam with flex track most appropriate with wide radius curves, as the flex track will want to go back straight and put pressure on your tacking system. If I were doing a foam base, I would go with the hard radius track.

A friend of mine built a layout using flex track with grades and foam, could never get his stuff to stay in place. This was over a period of several years time. Even with nails and caulk. My personal preference is WOOD for strength and holding ability.

If you are not using flex track, you will not have to hold any curves in place like with flex.
Click to expand...
I have a mix of flex and curve sections. I would love to run all snap track if I could afford it. I wonder what I could get for the unused track and turnouts I have. If I sold them, I may be able to purchase a bunch of used snap track or EZ track whatever.
 
I think I found my layout. This was on the SCARM website and the benchwork pretty much mirrors mine. The folded loop is exactly what I've been looking for. This will do for a start, I'll change a few things but the bridges and tunnels work.
FoldeLoop.jpg
 
I took the above idea and started a layout in Scarm. I'm pretty sure I'm going to flip it to have the tunnel at the other end. I also want this to be a double track layout with a crossover. I know, I said no turnouts but dang, there's got to be a couple, I own about 30 at least. The Scarm layout won't be printed out, it's only a suggestion but I think I'm going to go into detail on it anyway.
TrainTable.jpg
Scarm3D.jpg
 
Hutch said:
I took the above idea and started a layout in Scarm. I'm pretty sure I'm going to flip it to have the tunnel at the other end. I also want this to be a double track layout with a crossover. I know, I said no turnouts but dang, there's got to be a couple, I own about 30 at least. The Scarm layout won't be printed out, it's only a suggestion but I think I'm going to go into detail on it anyway.View attachment 166184View attachment 166185
Click to expand...
Looks like a good plan.
 
I like that except for the yard. I don't want to go down that path yet. I need space for buildings, roads and steams.

Back when I did my first layout, I used Xtrakcad initially. I'm not sure why I moved away from it, probably just curiosity. I used to have it and Scarm on my work computer. Can't do that anymore. I'd be using all my spare time to draw tracks if I could. Oh well, those were the days my friend.
 
Hutch said:
I like that except for the yard. I don't want to go down that path yet. I need space for buildings, roads and steams.

Back when I did my first layout, I used Xtrakcad initially. I'm not sure why I moved away from it, probably just curiosity. I used to have it and Scarm on my work computer. Can't do that anymore. I'd be using all my spare time to draw tracks if I could. Oh well, those were the days my friend.
Click to expand...
I ended up scrapping the TT and roundhouse to free up a ton of space. That was the initial plan, and as you will find out it will evolve as you build. But I think you are on the right path!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top