Layout Design Help Needed


> I'm concerned with the branch, which is higher, being on the
> *inside* of the main, which means that you won't be able to
> see the mainline from inside as easily.

I don't think that will be a problem for a couple of reasons. First of all, I'm only talking 5 or 6 inches higher, maybe a foot max, counting scenery. I've run modules with backdrops much higher and since the main is at the front, you can usually get a good view.

Also, bear in mind that the main viewing location will be from the bottom of the page. That means the switching area and mainline will easily visible. On the downside, it means that the station won't be nearly as visible. :(

> I also suggest installing a pair of scissors between the two mains.
> Then, instead of running two mainlines, you could run a single line
> twice around by setting both scissors to crossover alignment.[/QUOTE]

That's a good idea. It would probably work well on the right side, allowing engines access to the roundhouse from either track, as well as directly to the branchline.
 
OK! I'll try again, computer acting up,IE explorer shutting down because it did something illegal or something like that.
I also suggest installing a pair of scissors between the two mains
Click to expand...
Yipes! :eek: new one on me. What's scissors? Crossovers? :confused:
As far as the branch being higher and *inside* the main, it would be great from the observers area view :) , however if Murphy's Law pervailed it could be a P.I.T.A. for the operator if he was on the inside aisles :eek: . As Alex says it might be worthwhile reconsidering, unless you've thought this out already. OK I'll accept Bob's faith in 3rd Planit on the distances and fitting, although I see only six or at most seven feet for the mine lead. But then again this is only a JPG representation.
That sure is a handsome turntable, and if it wasn't for the steep price, I'd be downstairs tearing out a wall to make room for my 6 stall roundhouse :D As it is I'll have to scratch build one or wait for ebay.
Well Bob I guess I've nit picked it all I can for now
Cheers Willis
 
> What's scissors? Crossovers?

While I've not heard them called that either, I'm pretty sure he's referring to what us railroad guys call a 'universal crossover', four switches and a diamond, so that either track can switch to the other or stay on the same track.

> however if Murphy's Law pervailed it could be a P.I.T.A. for
> the operator if he was on the inside aisles :eek: .

Not a problem, the layout will have walkaround throttles, in fact I've already got a primitive one set up.

> I'll accept Bob's faith in 3rd Planit on the distances and fitting
> although I see only six or at most seven feet for the mine lead.
> But then again this is only a JPG representation.

No, you're right, the way it's drawn I do only have 6 or 7 feet. Once again, 3rd Planit is showing me the accurate design, not what I THINK will fit. I was thinking "OK, 10 feet total, allow 2 for the curve, that leaves 8 feet, right?"
Well it does, if you have the curve near the edge.

> That sure is a handsome turntable, and if it wasn't for the steep price,
> I'd be downstairs tearing out a wall to make room for my 6 stall roundhouse

I'm hoping actual price is less than list. Much less... :)
 
Hmmm! thought I was finished, Guess Not :D
four switches and a diamond,
Click to expand...
Heck isn't that like the photo I uploaded in post #18 ? I thought it was something elaborite. I used #6 turnouts so with the filler pieces that are required you are looking at using up another two feet of space and if you use two of them that's four feet of space gone.

Bob think about it, even if you have radio control and walkaround throttles, and Murphy's law exists on the layout, you will still have to crawl under the the benchwork, depending on which side you are operating from, and you can be sure the problem will always be on the opposite side

What size turnouts does 3rd Planit have for you on the mine lead and sidings? I'm seeing a bit of a problem there, especially if you have 3 tracks. :eek:

On the turntable, I'm afraid unless they have a dumping sale, the price will still be way too high for me. The current price of $300US would cost me $371Cd. plus 15% tax plus shipping lets say about $440Cd,. scratch build would be doable and a lot more affordable in my case.
 
> Heck isn't that like the photo I uploaded in post #18 ?

Yes, that's the one.

> you are looking at using up another two feet of space

Yep... I don't think it will fit near the roundhouse like I thought it would. Oh well...

> and if you use two of them that's four feet of space gone.

No, just one. If you line it for the crossover both ways, you end up with a sort of folded figure arrangement. Kind of like those tracks they had on slot car sets where they would change sides. By using just one, you can run on almost all of both loops. Really not that useful unless you want to clean the track or something. Still, it's fun to do, and when I was younger I used to design my layouts so that the train could cover as much of the track as possible with one route.

> On the turntable, I'm afraid unless they have a dumping sale, the
> price will still be way too high for me. The current price of $300US

That's Walther's list price, so you'll find them for $250 or so most likely. $200 would be even better, but probably not as likely.

OK, so $250 is a lot of bucks. But it comes with the turntable, motor AND indexing system for the tracks. Considering all 3 of those, it sounds like a decent deal to me. Oh, and it's pre-weathered too, a nice added touch. (or is it? What if I don't want tracks in all the spots they've 'pre-rusted'? Hmm.... )
 
I don't think it will fit near the roundhouse like I thought it would. Oh well...
Click to expand...
Well it just might, but the roundhouse would have to be just on the edge of the bench work. If the RH is similar to the Heljan one, then from the edge to the center of the turntable would be about 32.5 inches plus another 10" (1/2) of the turn table) for a total of 42 1/2". From the edge to the yard's first turn out is about 7 1/2 ft, so there should be enough room to connect the RH & TT to the mains including the scissors.
 
Yeah, a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond. I don't know if it's a model term, or a prototype term. They are so rare these days anyway, although theya re frequent on commuter/transit lines.

Viola:
maxtracks.jpg


As Bob says, you can get more length of run for a given train this way. I recall a John Armstrong layout design based on local switching, with a twice-around, so that you could run a "through" train on the main, and have it interfere with the switcher crew often, but still with enough time to actually get some work done.

But Bob... GG1? Double Track? You need quad! :D
 
a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond
Click to expand...
AH! now modeling that wouldn't take as much room as the 4 Atlas #6's and a crossover and the tracks could be closer together. Probably would have to be handlaid trackage though.
Still would like to see what 3rd Planit has for the mine, still concerned about that one.
Cheers Willis
 
abcraghead said:
Yeah, a scissors is a double crossover using a diamond. I don't know if it's a model term, or a prototype term.
Click to expand...

ABC, it may be both. These things tend to have different names in different places. The last one I worked on (real life) was called a "universal crossover" by both the designer and manufacturer. They're also commonly called "double crossovers". But I immediately knew what you meant when you used that term.

abcraghead said:
But Bob... GG1? Double Track? You need quad! :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, and overhead catenary and a large station and a steel mill and a mine and, and... and a building the size of a barn to build the layout in! (Along with a baggage car load of money) I'm going to have some sections of triple track, but not much, since the more track you have the smaller the layout looks and feels..

Meanwhile, no matter how you slice it, my layout is going to be unprototypical. I have two passenger trains, a Sounder and the SP daylight consist. Now maybe, just maybe, I could model Seattle and call it a fan trip. But sneaking the GG1 and K4 in is going to be tough no matter what. :)

So, I'm not even going to try. I'm just going to build a nice looking generic layout and run trains, whatever train suits my fancy that day...
 
Bob: simple solution. Make the roundhouse a museum complex, ala Brooklyn, Steamtown, etc.... Viola. You now can have anything there.
 
abcraghead said:
Bob: simple solution. Make the roundhouse a museum complex, ala Brooklyn, Steamtown, etc.... Viola. You now can have anything there.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the story, if anyone is silly enough to ask "what's the prototype?".

To be honest, I'm a "lone wolf" model railroader, though I do have a neighbor who shares the hobby. I rarely show the layout to anyone, since the garage is a mess. When I do, it's generally just to friends, and they're usually of the "hey, model trains, cool!" persausion rather than nitpickers.
 
Another acquaintance of mine is an engineer at TacoRail, and has a layout in his garage in a similar state of disrepair. Last I ran it, we were using 80's BN power on the mainline, and a P2K 0-6-0 on the branchline. There is no scenery and the branch is right above the main yard on a piece of plywood.

However, operations were quite challenging due to a really stiff branchline gradient, and the use of accurate TR style switchlists. I thought it was rather cool, even if it would never win style points.
 
Mine's still in the "foamboard central" stage. Track just lies on top of it, not really spiked or anything. Mainly so I can make sure the trackplan works OK. Of course, parts of it have not changed in 3-4 years....

The only scenery is buildings. Trains seem to run OK, the only uncoupling problem I have was due to mismatched coupler heights (#58s). No derailments caused by trackwork, it's usually due to freight cars being way too light (as in, empty plastic well car....).

Kennedy
 
Hi Bob, I noticed you posted your track plan in the photo gallery. Did you give up on the spur to the mine? It would be a shame if you did as it looks quite interesting.
Cheers Willis
 
CBCNSfan said:
Hi Bob, I noticed you posted your track plan in the photo gallery. Did you give up on the spur to the mine? It would be a shame if you did as it looks quite interesting.
Cheers Willis
Click to expand...

No, not really. I asked the same question I did here over at the LDSIG on Yahoo. I wanted to see if anyone there has any additional suggestions or ideas.

Even if they don't have any suggestions, just drawing it up gave me an idea for revisions to the staging yard area. I'd already thought of part of them before, and realized that with a minor change at the other end, I can have 4 usable staging tracks instead of 3. That will be helpful.

As for the spur, I won't really design it until I've got the main tracks, staging yard and station areas designed. The spur will take off and gain elevation as it twists back and forth over the main a few times (good excuse to build a few bridges that way).

So the concept is still there but the exact location may change.
 
As for the spur, I won't really design it until I've got the main tracks, staging yard and station areas designed.
Click to expand...
Ok good enough that does make sense, so it's back to some points to ponder about the mainline.
I guess this is good as any time to discuss the passenger service. In a previous post you mentioned the full size passenger cars. Also the max radius will be about 22". There is also a chance you will be running passenger cars around curves of less than 22" radius. That is going to leave a lot passenger car floor overhanging the inside of the track, which is not going to look quite prototypical. Have you considered the shorter passenger cars that are (I believe) made by Roundhouse?
Cheers Willis
 
> the max radius will be about 22".

Actually, if I use the design I've shown now, the visible curves will be more like 24 or 26. I may even widen the one on the left out to 30 inches, if space is available.

That's one advantage of the "giant oval" design, I can use nice wide radius curves.
 
That's one advantage of the "giant oval" design, I can use nice wide radius curves.
Click to expand...
Well I could be wrong, but from the plan you posted, the curve in the upper left appears to be around a 15" Radius if the lines are 12" apart. Now if you broaden that out even to a respectable 22" r it appears to me you will have to make some drastic changes to trackage for entry to the terminal. Questionable area in attachement

Cheers Willis
 
That is the one sharp curve on the plan. It's at least 18 inch radius though, not 15 inch. I say "at least" since that's what 3rd Planit says it is as shown. I may be able to swing it towards the top of the layout a bit, as well as cheat a bit on the edge of the layout at that point. My goal would be to make that a 20 inch radius.

Unfortunately, that section may be used for backing trains into the station from staging. Not sure if it will work, or if I can only use it for pulling out.

One other point/problem. The diamonds shown would be in the curve if it's built as shown. That means custom built. I'm hoping to avoid that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top