Why I chose the atlas scenic ridge track set

[railfan]

I don't like the scenic ridge layout so much. The reverse loop over in the middle of it isn't my favorite thing but I understand there's only so much you can do in a small space.

Still think it's a good starter set because it comes with a decent amount of track for less than $68......has many different lengths of straight sections......at least two different radius curves......a few switches (the crappy ones )....and one bridge. I also ordered one of the custom line switches to see how those work.

So I can get an idea of how these various sections can fit together on a layout and which to order more of if I end up expanding with this type track. If I decide code 55 or a different brand might be better I don't have much invested yet. Plus I could still mate or weld this code 80 in with other nine millimeter N scale track.

 

[railfan]

After studying up on N scale model RR stuff for a couple months, searching and finding decent prices on starter equipment, I finally ordered track and 2 locomotives yesterday. Got two intermountain EMD FT A/B loco sets. One is boston-maine rr and the other is the FT demonstrator. Got them for $85 each from TNT trains in henderson iowa. They must have both been the last ones though because they disappeared from the page after I ordered them.

This vendor seems to have good prices and I spoke with Larry the owner or manager on the phone and he was real helpful and nice.

I took a long time thinking about power packs and finally decided to go cheap for now with an athearn trainpak for $28 shipped from my old standby AMAIN HOBBIES in chico california. When I decide on a better one I'll have the athearn as an extra or backup unit.

 

[tooter]

I like that folded loop layout design because the train goes in the opposite direction instead of just round and round.

 

[railfan]

Yeah, it's not that bad.......it just inspires me to add another door module soon to spread out and have some room to roam free.

 

[LoudMusic]

I read in a Model Railroader magazine years ago something like, "A train should never go through the same scene twice. It's unrealistic."

Now, that's a lovely idea and would be great if we all had the space to accomplish that, but it's very impractical. I think avoiding a spaghetti bowl of track-work is important, but there's no reason the train shouldn't run through the same forest two or even three times.

 

[railfan]

Ha ha!! Even real trains running coast to coast travel through the same scene hundreds of times......so no problem there I figure. I found a web page about an EMD F series loco that was restored and retired after logging more than one million miles.

 

[otiscnj]

The layout has its merrits. I wouldn't try and 'weld' the track though-you'd probably melt the ties, and maybe the rails, too. Soldiering, is a different story, maybe.

Model Railroader has great pictures, but not everybody thinks like they do, or has the space to implement their ideas.

If you position the track carefully on the roadbed, from what I've seen, it may be possible to include some double track in places. And depending upon your tastes, you can always, also consider replacing the bridge, with a different one.

 

[railfan]

I meant solder.....but welding sounds more dramatic. I'm just weird that way.

 

[SilverBlade]

...I think avoiding a spaghetti bowl of track-work is important...

I'm a little curious about this statement. Is this just an esthetic objection (more track means less scenery)? I would love to spread out but just don't have the space. But I am dead set against a simple blahsey track plan. I want to have something to do while I'm playing with my toys! The result, I'm afraid, has been an Italian noodle fest of spagetti.

This started out as a 36 x 80 door plan but I've had to stretch it an extra 2 ft to accomodate the grades. It has 7 industries most of which will have to be kept very small but the main reason for the dense track plan (the spagetti if you will) is the inner loop:

As loops go I think this is one of the most novel designs I've seen for a confined retangular table (copied in principle from Mike's Mad Track Planner page http://www.cke1st.com/m_train2.htm )

It's all about trade offs. Space vs interesting tran plan vs scenery. The main complaint I have is that my industries will be little more than small isolated structures dropped down where ever I can fit them. I can't connect them with any kind of meaningful road system, etc. Yes, that's very unrealistic. But my answer to that is simple.:Show me the most expansive rail empire you like and I can spend hours pointing out all the areas in which it's unrealistic. How many 10,000 square foot warehouses have you seen with parking for 3 cars and 6 trucks being serviced by a rail spur!?

My layout plan isn't big enough but takes up more space than I wanted. It's way too crowded. The sloops are still problematic (even with the expansion). And the cost per sq ft is outragious. And these are just the problems I can see without having actually laid any perminate track yet.

But.

It gives me lots of things to do, gives my trains room to run, and still let's me do landscape scenery which is my favorite kind anyway.

Anyway, the point, as I said, is that it's all about the trade offs.

 

[railfan]

Silverblade, I really like your trackplan and its inner loop. Gives me some ideas. Personally I like alot of rows and loops of track, lots of switches, crossings, and bridges. Tunnels are not huge on my list but likely will have an underpass/overpass or two and a long trestle above a roadway. Complexity of track features speaks to me. I'll be satisfied with a few structures in occasional trackless spots......smaller outback outposts of humanity. A container distribution center......coal mine.....gold mine......lumber mill are industries I like. A large vehicle and/or railroad salvage yard would be cool too.