Hey all, I've been lurking here for a few days now and since I finally got myself some gear I figured it would be a good time to step up and introduce myself. I'm a member of the Canadian Armed Forces currently awaiting a medical release due to an on the job injury. I'm also heavily tattooed. Now with that out of the way, here's a quick layout that I'm thinking of building. Tomorrow I start with the benchwork. My layout will be in the basement so I'm not really too limited with size, but my wife and I are not sure if we are going to remain here for much longer so I'd like to stay with a 4'x8' for now, although I have made allotments for expansion. I will be able to move around the complete layout to reach things. The inside oval will be 36" and the outside will be 44". HO scale. Any advice/comments welcome. Hopefully tomorrow I can grab a cheap digital camera to get some pictures of the work as it progresses.
Welcome to TB Corv, your layout design has possibilities. I would definately go with the two "proposed" extensions as they add numerous switching opportunities. If you look at your design from a grid standpoint, using A through I along the bottom columns and 1-5 from lower left for each row, I might suggest that you bring the lower left extension off of your inside passing siding at D2, rather than the outside main at D1. If you were to add a reversed right hand turnout in D2 just before your branch (E2), you could easily add track that would go under the lefthand bridge and up into the B3/B4 area. My only concern off hand is in I5, where depending on your square dimensions, there may be insufficient space for a switching opportunity. Either way, good luck, and again welcome. Michael
Corvin, First let me welcome you to TrainBoard. There are many knowledgeable people here who can provide an excellent sounding board for your thoughts, ideas and model railroad problems. Second, lets hope your injury while certainly significant enough to cause your separation from service, will prove to be completely insignificant in your life and especially your Model Railroad 'career' Now, lets get to building bench work! You got trains to run! Best to you, and Happy New year too!
My main issue is the curve to the left that goes into the tunnel is right beside the inclined track that stays visible. This requires a pretty steep slope between them. I'd recommend getting some track, laying it - even temporarily - in the right shape, and checking that cars or better still an NMRA guage doesn't hit the scenery. Or turned around, where the scenery can go and not hit the trains. Steep slope = rocks and retaining walls, pretty cliffs and even bluffs. Electrically it looks fine, and HO should give you plenty of space for scenery. Actually, how steep is that incline? To get enough clearance for over-and-under can take a bit more track than you'd first expect; or a steeper grade and thus shorter trains. I allow 8' to get me 2" of clearance for N-scale at 2%, which about halves the level pulling power of an engine. A 4% grade will do the same clearance in 4' of track, but the cost is only a sixth or an eight the pulling power verses flat track. 2% grade for 4" of clearance in HO would be 16' of track... If you make one track slope down and the other slope up, you can halve that. I dunno. small layout, short trains anyway; and HO have room for bigger motors than N
If you are looking for: Running Car Storage Switching: Expand this to your space and add track as needed. I don't know much about HO but that _should_ work.
As for your design: Given that the clearance on an HO layout is about 4" the grade came out around 8 percent - can HO locos do that? I don't see how the diagonal I removed could be built using off the self track Add as much length to the other spurs as you like
Grade capabilities are similar in all scales - this is one case where the physics do scale down proportionately. 8% is way too steep for almost all applications.
Welcome Corvin Welcome to Trainboard, you will find many thoughts, many ideas and lots of problem solving help. Above all though , you will find a most gracious, talented, knowledgable and patient group of folks that support each other in ypur MRR experience. Again, welcome. Cheers.
Corvin, As I look at your design I notice some operational challenges. If you run a train counterclockwise from the bottom, you can get in to service one siding on the upper level (the 'upper' one on the layout), but you can't service the other one (sketched in gray) without a major run-around move. The only way to service the siding on the lower level is to cut off your engine and the car you want to place inside the tunnel, then leave the car on the outer loop while you do a long run-around move with the engine using the outer and inner loop to get on the right side of the car, then pull it back, throw the switch, and push it into the siding. Cutting off a train inside a tunnel is not something you'll find easy or enjoyable. Running a train clockwise from the bottom would force you to back a long way onto the upper level to service the lower of the two upper level sidings (the one in gray). To service the upper of the two upper level sidings would require another long run-around move and leaving your train in the tunnel again. Traveling in this direction, you could service the lower level siding more easily. Perhaps you already have thought about this, but if not, I'd recommend you rethink how this is laid out. I cannot see you enjoying operating this design for long. My personal goal would be to create a plan that would allow a train moving in one preferred direction easy access to most of the sidings and some access to all of them. Part of that would mean not cutting my train off inside a tunnel. On a larger note, I wonder how long you'll enjoy a double oval? I know you are concerned about moving, but it is possible that you will get bored with this design. If you are set on this size layout, perhaps instead of a mountain you might think of a scene divider crossing at an angle to the layout board with a 'town' on one side and another 'town' on the second. That way the train disappears for a while or requires you to follow it around. In the space you have I'd think single track, small yard on one side and a few industries on the other. Even that will be tough to do in the space, but might be more interesting to operate.
Thanks for the input all. I'm still working on the plans and the benchwork. The benchwork is on hold for food. I'm working on revising the plans and I'm also attempting to fix the grade issues by keeping the inner track on an incline until almost the point of the bridge (should be around a 3% incline if I've done the calculations right). I'd prefer a continuous run with some mild switching to keep things interesting. Something that I could leave the trains running while I moved around the layout or I could take the trains on different sections with switching. I know that's a little much on a 4x8 but that's all the room I have right now. Anyway, thanks for the advice and help, hopefully tomorrow I'll have an updated version of the layout and maybe some pictures of the benchwork.
Corvin- Welcome to Trainboard. I have one suggestion. It is nice to plan. Lay out your track without permanent affixing to the board. Run your trains. See if it works for you. If not, no problem, just lift off and modify.
I built an N scale layout with almost those exact track arrangments. I had a fairly sharp grade on the loop up to the top, but it worked and looked cool. Plus I made the inner loop do sort of a figure eight so it crossed over itself. It was a good spot for a canyon with a trestle.
Another attempt... After taking the advice of everyone here into consideration and looking around at more simple layouts on various sites, I have come up with a second version of my layout. Again, comments and input is welcome, I figure that by this time tomorrow I'll have my benchwork finished and be ready to test lay track. I'm back to work on the 3rd so that will slow things down a bit, but most of my evenings will be dedicated to working on my layout since my wife works evenings.
Much less operational trouble and the slight curving of the upper track is nice. Two suggestions: 1. have you tried eliminating the crossing on the two upper sidings, moving the turnouts back to back in the middle of that section of track they are in? It seems from eyballing it you could get as much if not more siding space through you might have to change the orientation of the sidings a bit. 2.
Sorry, hit the wrong key. 2. Lengthen the siding for at the bottom of the layout. It even looks like you have room to but in another turnout after the one you already have to create a two track siding. That would make for some nice staging tracks, a small yard, or a bigger industry.
