another concept plan

[Trolleyfan]

Then I suppose suggesting handlaid track is out of the question?

[Wiredup]

I've been playing with translating both your concepts into winrail9 and not liking what I'm coming up with...

I'm gonna lay out some sections physically with unitrack and see if I can visualize it a bit better.... I seem to not actually have enough room with your medium sized terminal design to put it onto the layout... but might be also trying to expand on it too much (ie: double ladder stub ended freight track with team track and caboose tracks. 5-6 stall roundhouse instead of 3...)

Both - you can't fit in as much when you use sectional track as when you use flextrack.

And you (like all of us, including me) need to work on learning that "less is more".

Look at Dr Wayne's layout - not so many tracks in each town, but excellent operations and realism.

If you want sectional track - go for fewer tracks than in my sketch. And you will be forced to use the given radii etc.

Here is an attempt to draw out the main part of the yard in my plan using Kato sectional N scale track, medium turnouts, mostly 19" radius curve sections, and a selection of various length straight track - I have a couple of fudge connections at the lower end of the sidings in front of the RR station - I ran out of patience coming up with the totally correct track sections for a perfect fit.



Here is the plan using Peco N scale flextrack:



I think it would be pretty hard to fit anything more into the yard area using sectional track.

Grin,
Stein

This concept and the words you've given me are very inspiring. I think I have something in the works that takes some of the ideas you've put down, and puts my own mix on it.

I'll post it this weekend

[Sumpter250]

oh I know all about flextrack, and have attempted 3 layouts with it. My first nscale layout actually kinda worked too. but I was using sectional for my curves.

My last two have just been terrible! I've even tried some of them tips like soldering while the rail straight, then forming the curve and caulking it down to let it drive overnight.

My reason for going to unitrack is the reliability and because it's more resuable than flex. If I screw up, I can just pull it up without blowing what feels like hundreds of dollars on flextrack....

You "been there, done that", and found it lacking. Sectional track seems to be working best for you, I see no reason to go back and try again.

I've done flex, sectional, even hand laid an 8' X 10' layout. I have found flex to be the most compatible.........for me.
Although, I'm quite willing to hand lay, if the need arises.

[MountainMan]

Can you tell I am never done fixing my plans?

My last plan was something I really could of done things with, but ran intoa few problems: lack of experience with laying flex made my layout incredibly unreliable. Nothing could get around the layout with derailing at least 3 times. Not to mention I put in an Sbend that really messed up passenger traffic.... Then, I started getting sick of the duck under to get into the room.

So the above plan is how I combat it.

This is currently in the concept stages. And the track is pretty much all gonna be Kato Unitrack due to the reliability.


blue = mainline
green = coach yard
red = freight yard
yellow = engine mtc

I'm finding Winrail9 to be a real pain in the arse... What has been laid out physically (coach yard, mainline) does not work properly in Winrail9.... ITS SNAP TRACK!!!!!!


Anyways, it will give you a decent idea of what I'm doing here.


The engine mtc facility is largely incomplete. There is one track off the main line that is the "coal" track for the coaling tower. There will be a separate track off the turntable that will switch into a pair of running tracks into the coal tower that does not connect to the rest of the layout.... for space reasons unfortunately.


The green coach yard is where Winrail9 does its dirty dead and really messes things up. There should be two tracks that are connected on both ends, then a stub end track as well.

The mainline is going to lead to a helix that will take it to a second level. But I got this awesome 2x9 area that I wanna put a town in, some hills, and even have the track cross over itself. So I'm thinking a branch line... but I'm at a loss of how to get there... the white tracks is where i'm starting my concept.

The freight section is going to be peco turnouts and atlas flex track, code 80 all the way around. Being straight and level track, I should have no problems with the flex. But it should also give me enough room to put down most of my rolling stock or all of it.


The orange section is the benchwork as its constructed currently. I can squeeze the north section to a 30" depth if I need too... but right now I'm pretty happy with the reaches.

First comment: Wow! :o How hard was it to sell this to your wife?

Second comment: there is also a "white line. Purpose?

Third comment: The white line enters a tunnel, but I'm not sure why or to go where. Exit to hidden staging?

General comment: What scale is this in?

Final comment: How soon can we see photos of this?

[Wiredup]

selling the wife isn't the hard part. Making the money for all the unitrack is.


but this concept was incomplete and not revised... see later on page 1 for what my second phase of this concept entailed.

I'll post concept revision 3 later this weekend.

[Wiredup]

k, so heres some photos of the track laid out for the terminal in my original concept posted:

[MountainMan]

oh I know all about flextrack, and have attempted 3 layouts with it. My first nscale layout actually kinda worked too. but I was using sectional for my curves.

My last two have just been terrible! I've even tried some of them tips like soldering while the rail straight, then forming the curve and caulking it down to let it drive overnight.

My reason for going to unitrack is the reliability and because it's more resuable than flex. If I screw up, I can just pull it up without blowing what feels like hundreds of dollars on flextrack....

You have a very significant point there! Sectional track is also especially useful when you are trying to work out a layout problem and get that essential "feel" for whether the whole idea is going to work or not. And, it's vry useful in hidden staging areas - pretty much problem free.

[Wiredup]

the cost of unitrack will whip my but so bad it's not even funny... which is why I plan on doing the yard and engine terminal with flex/peco. With no curves to screw up, I have high hopes for the reliability of that yard. While not as functional as I would like... it should do its job just fine! And with the engine mtc facility hiding in the corner there it should start to come together really well...

as you can tell the mainlines overlap... well I'm creating scenes here. I plan on having three total scenes, the huge terminal scene, a smaller mountain pass, and then a medium tow. The lower mainline tracks that lead into the terminal from the North will stay at ground level and will travel through a mountain town. Entering a tunnel @ the 3ft depth mark from the north wall, and exiting again near the terminal, giving the upper mainlne the ability to climb and wind through a mountain scenery with viaducts that will cross over a water fall that will trickle into the town.

I still gotta plan that part out....

While it looks double tracked, it will be really be one huge continous single track loop, with the Y of the terminal being the "turnaround"

So.... of what I got so far... comments please?

[MountainMan]

Your plans seem to be growing more complex as you go. Will this cause any problems for you either in terms of construction, operation or maintenance?

[Wiredup]

Your plans seem to be growing more complex as you go. Will this cause any problems for you either in terms of construction, operation or maintenance?

more complex?

would that plan be simpler than my other posted ones?

[MountainMan]

Would it? The latest plan is more complex that the previous ones. You asked for comments...

[steinjr]

While it looks double tracked, it will be really be one huge continous single track loop, with the Y of the terminal being the "turnaround"

So.... of what I got so far... comments please?

Pretty similar to your first plan.

You claimed that your main goal was to watch trains run through mountain scenery. Is your true main goal really to build a layout that basically just is one big yard ?

This layout shows no track of attempts to build sincere/believable railroad scenes (ie scenes where the track pass just once through each scene). What you have here seems to be a basic toy train type layout - where the point is to cram in as much track as possible, and where the layout is intended to be watched from above.

If those are your true design goals, then it's fine. If your goal is still to watch trains pass through realistic looking mountain scenes, you need to make your layout higher and concentrate on "less is more".

My advice, your choice.

Smile,
Stein

[Sumpter250]

OK.........All stop...Rudder amidships...when forward motion stops, take visual bearings to confirm ship's position, and set course to get her back in the channel.

Otherwise known as... when in doubt, stop and make sure you know where you are.

I would offer this:
Design whatever you want, when that design is done,and you think "that's it!", (if you have enough sectional track) lay it out in full size, and ask yourself....."is this what I want??" If the answer is yes, build it.
If the answer is no, add-remove-move-play with the full size until you can answer the question with a definite yes. Then.......transfer that full size to your design program, to keep as a guide to where everything is supposed to be, and build that.

I don't know if your design software allows "topogragphy" "elevation lines", but if it does, add them as you complete scenery, this will allow you to safely make changes later on, after construction is well along. You might also want to record in the drawing where all the roadbed support structure is....just in case, and on that subject, make all your attachment points accessible from under the layout, so change can be done with minimal "destruction".

Course plotted to center of channel, come right to 075 degrees, all ahead one third, turns for 12 knots,

When center of channel is reached, stop planning, and start building....

"We always learn more from our own mistakes than we will ever learn from another's advice" It's not that I'm not afraid of making mistakes, I simply do not let that fear stop me...........and I do learn.
Pete

[Wiredup]

While it looks double tracked, it will be really be one huge continous single track loop, with the Y of the terminal being the "turnaround"

So.... of what I got so far... comments please?

Pretty similar to your first plan.

You claimed that your main goal was to watch trains run through mountain scenery. Is your true main goal really to build a layout that basically just is one big yard ?

This layout shows no track of attempts to build sincere/believable railroad scenes (ie scenes where the track pass just once through each scene). What you have here seems to be a basic toy train type layout - where the point is to cram in as much track as possible, and where the layout is intended to be watched from above.

If those are your true design goals, then it's fine. If your goal is still to watch trains pass through realistic looking mountain scenes, you need to make your layout higher and concentrate on "less is more".

My advice, your choice.

Smile,
Stein

well it's not done yet I still got the whole left and lower side of the room to work with, which is where I'd put the scenes you speak of. I guess I should complete the plan first.

I do wanna watch trains go through mountain scenes, but I still wanna play in the yard. I got enough room to do both...as you showed.

I just don't wanna outright and copy thats all.


Mountainman:
I don't see how this one is more complicated. In fact I think it's a bit simpler. I know construction so far when I look at the room and the plan looks easier thats for sure.

[MountainMan]

You have the advantage of knowing what your physical area is like, and what your personal "vision" is. I do agree with the previous poster, however, that without a sense of elevation it looks like a large switching layout at this point.

Having tried repeatedly to get anything coherent out of track-panning software myself, I understand all too well how hard it is to get it to look the way you "see" it. Another nice thing abut sectional track - it allows you to produce a physical layout concept and give it a good looking over in very little time and with minimal effort.

I'm looking forward to seeing how your plan develops.