Input on a "Temporary" Shelf Track Plan

[Brakie]

shortliner,Your layout looks better in picture then it does as a drawing.

I like it.

[Fluesheet]

Matt- when Stein was helping me with my layout design,I started with a 6' long layout. I soon found out that no matter how the track was configured it was too confining. I found that I was able to add a full 2'
Bob

I'm finding this is a slippery slope! I started with 8' by 7 3/4" - now I'm looking for ways to make it longer (not much of a problem to the left) and deeper - which compromises workbench area. I think if I plan too long, my "shelf" will turn into the wall, then another wall...



Seriously, I'm going to see what's realistic using Stein's, shortliner's and Brakie's feedback and stretch a little if that will allow me to incorporate all of the cool ideas.

[shortliner]

Brakie - thanks for your comment
Matt - look forward to seeing what you do with it - If you need any more help, just ask
Cheers
Jack

[Russ Bellinis]

Matt- when Stein was helping me with my layout design,I started with a 6' long layout. I soon found out that no matter how the track was configured it was too confining. I found that I was able to add a full 2'
Bob

I'm finding this is a slippery slope! I started with 8' by 7 3/4" - now I'm looking for ways to make it longer (not much of a problem to the left) and deeper - which compromises workbench area. I think if I plan too long, my "shelf" will turn into the wall, then another wall...



Seriously, I'm going to see what's realistic using Stein's, shortliner's and Brakie's feedback and stretch a little if that will allow me to incorporate all of the cool ideas.

I would suggest an alternative plan. Instead of doing a track plan that would eventually be incorporated in your layout when it gets built, just do a small switching layout that can be used to play with when you want to, can be used to test equipment to make sure it will traverse turnouts without derailing issues, and for storage as a "rip" track. That way, you can define your space for the shelf layout to coexist with the work bench without needing to make it fit future layout plans.

[foulrift]

I agree with Russ. Although I do not intend on incorporating mine into a larger layout.When I was designing it,I had a few specific criteria:
1.Small
2.Portable
3.Easy to run and work on.
These arose from the fact that I live in a small house(half a double) and the only space I had was in my bedroom but it is also small but given it's size,2'x8' it fits nicely on top of my dresser.
But as Russ suggested I also did a lot of track and switch testing before any ballast or scenery was added. When everything worked to my satisfaction I proceeded with the rest of it. This paid off because now I have something that runs good and is fun to run.The only thing that needs some work aside from the obvious detail work is I have to refine the way that I am going to operate the layout.
Let me just add this-I have gotten a lot of useful input from the guys on this forum.Many of them have been doing this a lot longer than I have and the tips,suggestions,comments,etc were a great help. I learned a lot from these guys and I'm still learning.
Have fun with it.
Bob

[Brakie]

Matt,I was wondering if you operated the layout yet? Judging the amount of "work" that needs a' doing I suspect it could take at least 30-40 mintues at scale switching speed and allowing time for the switchmen to throw switches and open/close derails at the industries.

[foulrift]

Larry makes a good point. I had an issue with derailments involving a couple of switches.I knew they worked good and could not figure out what had happened.Upon a closer look I noticed that i the process of cleaning the track I had bent a couple of closure rails.So yes run your train and make sure all is i order.
Bob

[Fluesheet]

I would suggest an alternative plan. Instead of doing a track plan that would eventually be incorporated in your layout when it gets built, just do a small switching layout that can be used to play with when you want to, can be used to test equipment to make sure it will traverse turnouts without derailing issues, and for storage as a "rip" track. That way, you can define your space for the shelf layout to coexist with the work bench without needing to make it fit future layout plans.

Thanks for the observation regarding the incorporation of the shelf into the larger layout. When first conceived, the shelf was going to be simply a RIP track on bare wood, with a connection to (but not true incorporation into) the main line. The acquisition of several turnout building kits expanded it's purpose to a turnout testbed, which prompted this thread. These guys on this forum (and listening to discussions about small layouts on the ModelRailRadio podcast) have indeed sparked an interest in making this a design that can stand alone. Now I'm thinking using it as a scenery testbed as well -and my wife is wondering why!

A lead to the main is still one of my goals (albeit a ways down the line). Your comment has also got me thinking about the permanency of any connection I may make. I'd be nice to be able to carry this thing out of the layout room if I wanted.

Let me just add this-I have gotten a lot of useful input from the guys on this forum.Many of them have been doing this a lot longer than I have and the tips,suggestions,comments,etc were a great help. I learned a lot from these guys and I'm still learning.

This has, by far, been the most personally educational thread I've ever started. The quantity and quality of suggestions and well thought challenges to my plans have had an immediate impact onto the design and has completely changed my thought process, operationally and even aesthetically. I'm still circling back to and learning from earlier posts in this topic. I honestly thought that my first plan was pretty slick. And it was, if you count the number of turnouts used in that space!

Matt,I was wondering if you operated the layout yet?

No - I laid two switches based on Stein's first design, then you and shortliner went and started giving interesting input...
I have, however, really started studying how cars would be moved around and even walked this discussion past my wife (she smiled and nodded politely). I've been involved in model railroading for a long time, but as I'm planning this and the big layout, I'm finding that when it gets down to the details of track planning (and I'm sure a host of other issues), what I know is pretty shallow!

Updated plans this weekend.

Matt

[Brakie]

Matt,For what this is worth I see a lot of potential switching enjoyment in that layout and I was wondering how long it took to switch the industries.

You may recall I am a big fan of ISLs(90% of my layouts has been ISLs) and I'm a tad excited on how that plan works in reality..I switched "cars" using my finger and am quite impress.

[Fluesheet]

Here's the latest iterations, all in one image.

The first is Stein's plan that I re-drew in CadRail and is the same one posted earlier. Of the variations of this plan that Larry and Stein discussed, I still prefer the original. This doesn't include some of the scenic recomendations that Stein recommended yet.

The second is simply a redraw of Shortliner's with #6 turnouts and sized to the dimensions that I have available. Because of the lack of shelf depth and those relatively wide turnouts, it doesn't have quite the same "turn right to go left" feel for the one spur that Stein has a penchant for.
The challenge with this and the next two is that I would have to hand-lay the crossovers with no jig to guide me. That's a minus for getting started quickly, but a plus from a challenge / new opportunity standpoint.

The third feels a little busy. My thinking was this: Stein has made a good point about disguising or hiding the fact that the "main" doesn't go anywhere. Shortliner's puts the interchange track right up front, so I experimented with ways to hide it, in this case with another turnout and spur in front of it. It required that I make a concession on space; on this end, the layout is 2" wider than my original spec (a little over 9"). I mitigated the intrusion into my workbench by limiting the width increase to one side.
In addition, all the track on this end is not running parallel with the shelf, for interest's sake.

The fourth is a variation on the theme above, though with the main swinging toward the edge then back toward the back enough so that some type of building can disguise the exit. The other big change on this one is that I brought the right / left spur into the new land area so that I could cross over the main at a sharper angle. The concessions to doing this were losing slightly more workspace area and and it cut the length of the track servicing the business on the other side of the crossober approximately in half. The track on the backside of the crossover is just over 7" deep - doesn't leave much room for error, and decreases operational possibilities that a spur that could hold two cars would provide.

My apologies for not providing place names - that makes discussing this quite a bit more difficult!

Is the runaround of sufficient length on these? I haven't spent a lot of time mentally running switching scenarios through this. Thoughts?

   

[tetters]

There is something about Mod 2 that I like. I would avoid the use of the double slip. It makes things too easy.

[Fluesheet]

There is something about Mod 2 that I like. I would avoid the use of the double slip. It makes things too easy.

Don't worry, that's just a regular crossover - just a very long one!

The crossovers will both have to be handlaid. Believe it or not, it was your finding, way back in Zealot days, that using the Fast Tracks jig made you willing to try (and successfully complete) more complex work that has me looking forward to that challenge.

By the way, your advice re: Fast Tracks Jigs back then to get a double crossover instead of a turnout only jig was sound. Unfortunately, I didn't follow it

Matt

[tetters]

Oh well then in that case, I like Mod 1 better.

Too true about the x-over jigs. I myself, only wish I had figured that out sooner which is why I impart that advice to anyone thinking about purchasing a turnout jig from them.

[Fluesheet]

Slight tweaks to the the fourth plan (Shortliner Mod2)
- Buildings have place names and other minor clarifications
- The right runaround turnout was flopped over to move the approach to Sedam Lumber & Tool closer to the front edge. This allows the spotting location for Angle & Son to have a little more breathing room.

   

Matt

[steinjr]

Hi Matt --

I like no 4, too. It is a good adaptation of Jack's plan - just turning that one turnout at the left end of the runaround and letting both tracks on the far right curve gently down and up again makes it look even better, at the cost of making the layout slightly deeper, but still not very deep, at the right end.

Excellent work!

Grin,
Stein