Track plan for interesting scenery

ModelRailroadForums.com is a free Model Railroad Discussion Forum and photo gallery. We cover all scales and sizes of model railroads. Online since 2002, it's one of the oldest and largest model railroad forums on the web. Whether you're a master model railroader or just getting started, you'll find something of interest here.


Some good information for me to consider as I plan my layout, especially double track. Thanks for the link, also visited your website
Wilis
 
Good stuff! Thanks for posting that here. I don't go to the tube much anymore and miss your videos!
 


putting the tracks dangerously close to the edges. I have lost many a engine and car to the floor (tears). Also it looks like the railroad surrounds the towns and not passes through the town
 
djstrains said:
putting the tracks dangerously close to the edges. I have lost many a engine and car to the floor (tears). Also it looks like the railroad surrounds the towns and not passes through the town
Click to expand...



LOL! That's bad track work and too much speed! I have had it like this for a while and nobody has bounced yet

WIN_20151022_102140.JPG A 30 foot run along the canyon lip and as long as I "keep it under 90" I'm ok.
 
Very good point. I do have some tracks near the edge of my layout in one town due to space limitations, but for the most part, the tracks are not at the edge. I think you are totall correct.
 
One thing I always try to get people away from is straight tracks parallel along the straight edges of the space (bench work). Doing so just emphasizes that it is artificial.
 
I don't know about that. The front edge was the only place for a switch yard on mine.... Just saying...
 


The biggest mistake I see people making is going for the roundy round. Trains come from some where and go somewhere, otherwise the tracks never get laid.
 
Ive been subscribed to your youtube for a long time, this is another of your good videos.
 
WTF????

A "mistake" is doing something WRONG, there IS NO WAY to make a 'mistake' in MRR other than letting someone tell you 'you are doing it wrong'! And TELLING someone they are 'doing it wrong' is WRONG! If YOU want to watch a loco go back and forth on a 6 foot plank on one line with NO switches THAT is your layout and that is what YOU want, how can it be "wrong"??? If YOU want to make two complete small towns with yards and industries, farms in between and maybe a lake HOW can that be "wrong"??? If YOU make a layout that is unlike every single other layout ever built, how can that be 'wrong'???

Again I respectfully submit to you, WTF????
 
Well said New Guy! Very well said and done with respect! You get my vote for "comment of the day!" Had I listened to everyone telling me I was doing it wrong I would've never made it out of the first grade!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks!! I apologize to anyone that may have taken issue with the way I said that. We did not com here to 'piss' on each others campfires! I realize there are strong opinions on every aspect of this pastime from table material to wall color and all else in between and on the rails. I postulate that both NONE and ALL of them are 'right'!

LOL! Have you SEEN the 'abortion' I claim is a "layout"??? It's a steaming pile from the dog run!
 
It is impossible to do it wrong if you like it A roundy round when you look at it is actually coming from someplace and going somewhere.
 
new guy said:
Again I respectfully submit to you, WTF????
Click to expand...
Well, one cannot forget the comments are made with idea of the topic of the thread. The topic is layout track plans designed for scenic interest. If one is specifically making a plan to have scenic interest things are done differently than if one is designing for rail fanning, way freight operations, unit trains, dispatching, etc. And, "yes", I say there are things that can be "wrong" if one is going for one of those specific design goals. Example, if one is designing a layout to go around a Christmas tree then it is wrong to have a figure-8] track plan as there would be a crossing where the tree needs to be. A figure-8 Christmas layout would be screaming for two trees.

I'm just a bit disappointed this topic ended up in the N-scale section rather than the more general layout design area. It might get some more comments over there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Technically the ATSF was partly a roundy-round. South from Kansas through Oklahoma into Texas and than west to New Mexico, north to Colorado and back east to Kansas. I'm sure that there are examples on other lines as well. There ain't nothing wrong with roundy-rounds, even though that's not what I model.
Willie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Affiliate Disclosure: We may receive a commision from some of the links and ads shown on this website (Learn More Here)

Back
Top