Hey all, I have been away for a while, and it seems to me that there has been a lot of smaller layouts being posted, and that got me to start over on mine, make it a little less complicated, and maybe something I'll finish. The details of my new attempt are an N scale 8' x 6' u shaped space, with a single main line with reversing loops at either end, running on DCC. The main will serpintine up about a 2% grade to the Trinity creek mine in the hills. As far as operations go, or at least what I have planned so far, is a load of hoppers will pull in to the arrival track, a switcher will come from the loco storage area pull out cars and stick them on the mine tracks. Then the consist will pull into the loco servicing area while the switcher reassembles the cars on the departure track, and then it's back down the hill. I will be adding other industries as well. So there are some things that I don't want to change, the reversing loops because I have the electronics, and the serpinetine track I think I have most of that ready in my present layout. So what do you think? Thanks
botz, are you okay with different levels of track...maybe some over/under action...simple cookie-cutter sub-roadbed? I've never planned a coal-hauler based layout before and would like to give it a shot. I have a CadRail program that I really enjoy using. Think I'll toy with the idea over the weekend and see what I come up with. I'll post somthing for you in a few days. A couple examples of my work are over in the Layout Planning Trainboard group in Community if you're interested in seeing a them. Smooth rails!
I think your: Radius is far too tight The reach across the diagonals is far too great You have not provided era Use of DCC is great but you have only planned for one person operation which obviates the need for DCC Track plan needs passing tracks Track plan needs staging I strongly encourage you to start over. Print out your table space to fit on an 8.5x11 sheet Make lots of photo copies of your space Sketch with a pencil lots, (10s), of variations Do a few of the "finals" up in the cad program Post results here.
Steve makes a very good point about the diagonal reach. Even with 2' wide legs, the diagonal reach into the corner is 34". I actually had to change my layout plan when I realized that the reach into the corner was going to be far too much with a 36" top leg (of the 'U').
What size engines and cars you will be using or may buy in the future will determine the radius of the curves. I started with 4 axle diesels and mostly 40ft and some 50ft cars. Then went to 6 axle engines and many 50ft plus cars. I had to redo many of my curves to eliminate derailing. If nothing else model railroading is a learning experience.
Ziggy, I haven't really thought of different levels, but I would certainly like to see any ideas. Grey and Ken, I have 3 older Kato SD45s, and one Atlas GP7 that are already fitted with decoders which I've run on the 11" radius track without any problem, and yes the reach is a little far to the corners, but not too bad. And yes a passing siding would need to be included, and I was thinking about a yard inside the bottom reversing loop. Thanks for all the ideas
Botz, here's an idea I have been working on. Lemmeknow what you think. The leg widths allow manageable reach in to the corners. Two coal mines are serviced at the upper part of the layout, with a passing siding and yard track to help manage inbound & outbound loads. 3 track yard and engine service / storage and coal destination industry...coal dock?...'off-layout' power plant?... I used mostly sectional track w/ some flex track. You could easily do the whole concept of course with all flex track. Smooth rails!
Hey I really like that, thanks! The image is being blocked at my work, so I had to wait til I got home to check it out, I'm having a little trouble seeing all the detail would you mind sending me a larger image? Did you make that in Xtrackcad?
I have a CadRail program and I really like using it. I has numerous track libraries in all gauges. I'll send you the jpeg so you can zoom in using your picture-manager program. Smooth rails!
So any way, ZiggySpaz was kind enough to send me a larger image of the layout he designed, so I had a look at it to see what I would change, at first I was having trouble applying my operational concept to it, but then I thought maybe I should change my operations to suit the layout. I doubt if I'll have two mines because I have some other industries I want to use. so looks like it's time to start tearing down the old layout and changing my benchwork. Hopefully I will be able to get my camera working and post some photos
This was supposed to be a before and after, but I got hung up on some other junk and was unable to post Here is the above area torn out, boy it sure comes down faster than it goes up!
Hope you're able to salvage some of the track and all the buildings & such. September MR has an article on effective ways to do just such. Looking forward to seeing the progress to and on the new layout!
Thanks PW&NJ, and yes ZiggySpaz I have become pretty good at salvaging track, I think I used mostly caulk on this last round so it's comming up pretty good. So, how things change, I have been rebuilding one of the rooms in our house to try to make the wife a nice living room, and she says I can use the old living room for a layout, Sweet! So I have planned on doing an L shaped layout that is eight feet on each side and maybe thirty inches deep, like this I may have to come in a little on the thirty inch sides, and the back corner will be a curved backdrop so it won't go all the way to the corner. Now I have been looking at some L-shaped designs to see what I like and try to figure out what to build
There was an incredible HO L-shaped switching layout that I adapted into N-scale (on paper...). It even had hidden staging behind a building-flats backdrop in an issue of MR several years ago. It was sweet. I'll have to see if I can find it...or maybe I can just reproduce it from memory...
Thanks, I'm looking forward to seeing it. One thing I was wanting to do this time is put some staging on a lower level, what is a good rule of thumb for the clearance between the two levels? I was thinking 5 inches.
One of my personal space layout plans included hidden staging underneath the main yard, and I had an elevation difference of 7.5". Figure 1.75" from top of plywood to top of car + thickness of plywood, roadbed and track (measuring distance top of rail to top of rail) and the difference is how much space you have to stick your hands in and fiddle with cars. if you figure 3/8" or 1/2" for the plywood and another 1/4" for the roadbed & track, that was gonna leave me with about 5" of working space. I was wanting more but figured I'd be able to live with it.
