A Collection of Track Plans - Page 3 - Model Train Forum - the complete model train resource
Model Train Forum - the complete model train resource

Go Back   Model Train Forum - the complete model train resource > Model Train Workshop > Layout Design Forum
Forgotten your password?

Layout Design Forum Discussion resource for planning your dream layout, large, small or micro!

 

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-20-2016, 09:48 AM   #21
CTValleyRR
Train Master
 
CTValleyRR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: East Haddam, CT
Posts: 8,531
Scales Modeled: HO
Quote:
Originally Posted by bristolman2012 View Post
I plan on doing that . what bothers me the most about ho is that you can buy a ho engine but you may not be able to run it on your track because of radius restrictions . its kind of not fun . I have 3 ho engines that are 9 inches long . does that mean 18 in radius not big enough ?
I think you've missed the big picture. HO is a scale -- that is, a proportion to the size of the real thing. NRMA standards are there to ensure interoperability of equipment from different manufacturers, but it's unrealistic to suggest that everything in 1/87.1 scale (HO) HAS to work on a given layout. Especially in a hobby where there is total freedom to design a track plan to whatever specifications you like. This isn't a toy system where everything sold for the system works with it; it's a scale and a collection of standards to assist a hobbyist.

HO track is produced in standard curves down to 15". Using flex track, you can get down to about 9". Our scale equipment is produced with much more swing in the trucks and couplers, and longer distances between cars, to be able to handle these "abrupt" curves. On real railroads, "tight" turns are much broader -- they'd probably scale down to about 33" or so. A lot of hobby products are engineered to be able to use 18" curves because that's what train sets usually come with, but many these days are opting for greater realism and requiring larger radii. Also, grades work the same way. A 1% grade is huge for a real train; we hobbyists routinely use 2-3 times that. On our models, grade itself isn't a factor as much as the transition onto and off of them, where equipment can dig in its nose or become uncoupled or derailed.

The only way to be ABSOLUTELY certain whether your equipment will run is to lay some track and test it. Some locos that say 18" minimum don't do very well with it, and some that recommend broader curves can be coaxed through 18" ones. While a good thumb rule says your curves should be a minimum of 2.5 times the radius of your longest equipment; like all thumb rules, it's meant as a general guide and not a substitute for empirical evidence.

If I had to guess, I would say that if your locos have 2 axle trucks, they will work; 3 axle ones probably not. Since the truck doesn't bend, the cord across the curve can't exceed the distance between the contact patches of the front and back wheels, or they will bind against the rails and cause problems. That's the REAL limit, followed closely by whether there is enough distance between cars to enable them to round the curves without bumping.

If your locos (and trains) are close to making it, but can't quite, there are some tricks that you can use to improve their ability -- all at the price of realism (and only you can say how much of a problem that is).
__________________
Connecticut Valley Railroad -- A Branch of the New York, New Haven, And Hartford

"We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing." --George Bernard Shaw
CTValleyRR is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-21-2016, 05:28 PM   #22
HOTrainNut
Brakeman
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 166
Scales Modeled: HO
Hey guys need some help with my track plan. My old layout was Kato Unitrack and had minimum 22" radius. Im needing some assistance with planning my layout this time as I plan on using flex track and doing minimum 24" radius with the only full 18" and 15" radius in switching areas and car storage. Can anyone give me some tips to be able to maintain 2.5" track centers and be able to use double crossovers and 4 mainlines on a u shaped layout.
HOTrainNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2016, 01:20 PM   #23
CTValleyRR
Train Master
 
CTValleyRR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: East Haddam, CT
Posts: 8,531
Scales Modeled: HO
Quote:
Originally Posted by HOTrainNut View Post
Hey guys need some help with my track plan. My old layout was Kato Unitrack and had minimum 22" radius. Im needing some assistance with planning my layout this time as I plan on using flex track and doing minimum 24" radius with the only full 18" and 15" radius in switching areas and car storage. Can anyone give me some tips to be able to maintain 2.5" track centers and be able to use double crossovers and 4 mainlines on a u shaped layout.
Well, we've certainly lost the OP's vision of maintaining a thread of track plans without feedback or discussion. And yes, I know I'm not helping the problem by responding. Perhaps one of the mods would move the extraneous stuff to another thread or two.

To your question, I have several observations.

First of all, are you planning on a point to point layout? Because if you try to turn 4 parallel tracks 180 degrees, maintaining 2-1/2" centers, it's going to be a bare minimum of 65" wide (and that's with track right at the edge of the layout) where those big curves are at the ends of your "U". Even with access on 3 sides, that's a tough reach. So you would need access panels, or better still close the loop and go around the room.

Second, I would not use double crossovers. If nothing else, they will limit your space between tracks to the separation designed into the turnout. If space is no object (and it doesn't sound like it is, if you're planning something that big), a series of turnouts butted together works better, looks more prototypical, and is easier to wire.

As far as maintaining spacing, build yourself a jig, or buy one. A piece of wood or styrene with two slots to fit over the inside rails on adjacent tracks will do it.
__________________
Connecticut Valley Railroad -- A Branch of the New York, New Haven, And Hartford

"We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing." --George Bernard Shaw
CTValleyRR is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 02-23-2016, 05:32 PM   #24
/6 matt
Conductor
 
/6 matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Burke County, NC
Posts: 359
Scales Modeled: Ho scale, O gauge packed away.
Thanks for the contribution folks, let's keep it rolling. I know more people have track plans. Post em up, even if they don't quite work. Your plan may be somebody else's inspiration.

I guess it's time to put my top of the page header.

Just a reminder though, this thread is for track plans. For pictures and plans of layouts that have been actually built go here: https://www.modeltrainforum.com/showthread.php?t=66578

Again, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM COMMENTING IN THIS THREAD and instead send pm's if you have questions or comments. Also, after you upload pictures of your plans, please click the paperclip and choose insert all so that your pictures appear in thread like mine do. Following these guidelines will make viewing easier for everybody and reduce clutter.
/6 matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2016, 06:35 PM   #25
/6 matt
Conductor
 
/6 matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Burke County, NC
Posts: 359
Scales Modeled: Ho scale, O gauge packed away.
While I'm in here I have another plan that I cooked up today, this is one that I actually hope to build someday so look forward to me developing it some more.

This plan is an odd size coming in at 30"x52" cause it is designed to fit in a very specific area. As usual this is all Peco code 55 flex and small radius turnouts. Minimum radius is 11.25" with 9.75" on the spurs. There is no grade.

First N Scale Layout.jpg
/6 matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2016, 11:28 AM   #26
CTValleyRR
Train Master
 
CTValleyRR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: East Haddam, CT
Posts: 8,531
Scales Modeled: HO
Cramped Quarters Ideas

Here is a layout I worked on with a forum member. He had some very ambitious plans and ideas, but when all was said and done, he was trying to shoehorn a layout in around two sides of his living room, with a wall mounted TV and shelving protruding into the layout space.

The member also had the benchwork already built before design began. Although he was able to get some minor expansion, this further limited the number of potential designs. The amount of space available is deceptive -- the area on the right is only 4x6, and the long wall, while expansive, has too many obstructions to really be used.

The final plan is dead flat (with the TV in the center, grades in this area were out, and that made them impractical). The initial desire was for large Peco turnouts and 22" radius curves, but because of space limitations, we had to use Atlas turnouts with their 18" curve segment on the diverging leg and 18" minimum radius (while the 22" FIT on the right side, they take up too much of the available 6 foot dimension to make a loop -- 44" of 62", not counting track width and a safety margin at the layouts edge). The ability to turn trains with a wye ended up being a primary design consideration.

Note that I post all this stuff, not to criticize the member (who was actually a very good sport about the limitations his area imposed), but to try to help beginners get some sense of the amount of real estate required for even simple geometry, without using overly tight curves and steep grades.

Here is the "finished" track plan.

Option #2, Atlas Flex, Atlas Turnout, One Level.jpg

Here was my first idea, before I understood the true space limitations. It has quite a bit more to do, but with the chief drawback that there is no way to turn trains, especially on the right lobe -- trains have to be backed a lot. This might be overcome with some fiddling, or the use of Atlas Snap Switches with the curved diverging leg, but there really isn't room to add another turnout (unless you can expand the right side further in the up and down dimension, which wasn't an option for the member).

Option #1 - Bilevel, Atlas Flex, Peco.jpg
__________________
Connecticut Valley Railroad -- A Branch of the New York, New Haven, And Hartford

"We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing." --George Bernard Shaw
CTValleyRR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2016, 11:36 AM   #27
CTValleyRR
Train Master
 
CTValleyRR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: East Haddam, CT
Posts: 8,531
Scales Modeled: HO
Tommy Boy, Revisited

In another project for a forum member, here is a re-imagining of the so-called "Tommy Boy" layout above. It actually reflects more of the original plan for that layout, before I got frustrated with the limitations imposed by the steep grades required. This layout actually provides a fair bit of switching interest in a layout only slightly bigger than a 4x8 (finished plan is 4x10).

Note that although there is a 14% grade shown, this is actually mitigated in practice by continuing that grade into the upper loop. It met the members requirements for over / under operations, room for more than one (short) train, and lots of bridges. It uses Code 83 flex track and Atlas turnouts, minimum radius 18".

Tommy Boy 4x10, ver 1.0.jpg
__________________
Connecticut Valley Railroad -- A Branch of the New York, New Haven, And Hartford

"We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing." --George Bernard Shaw
CTValleyRR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2016, 12:35 PM   #28
/6 matt
Conductor
 
/6 matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Burke County, NC
Posts: 359
Scales Modeled: Ho scale, O gauge packed away.
Talking

First off, thanks to the admins for the sticky! Here's to hoping somebody finds something inspiring in these pages. Once again, if anybody has any plans to post, please do. Your collection may inspire the next beginner.

Now on to the newest creation. After seeing CTValley's last post I suddenly became inspired by that layout. So much so that I decided to do a loosely based N-scale Door adaption I even finished this one to completion since I am getting better at SCARM. What I came up with is a fairly expansive N-scale layout with a good balance between mountain scenery and operations.

This one is designed for a 32"x80" door and as usual uses PECO code 55 flex track. Minimum radius is 11.25" and the entire layout uses small radius switches. Max grade on the mainlines is 2.5% and 3% on the track leading up to the logging spur that cuts diagonally across the layout. This layout is designed for medium length trains in the transition era and uses narrow dirt roads in all but the town in the upper left corner. The layout is also modeling two very small towns connected by a railroad that mostly focuses upon lumber although a team track and an interchange has been included in the upper left hand corner to introduce a little variety. Also Z scale trees are used to the rear of the layout for forced perspective.

I'm currently working on an extended version using a 33"x96" table so stay tuned for that.

Tommy Boy.jpg

Tommy Boy 3D-1.jpg

Tommy Boy 3D-2.jpg

Tommy Boy 3D-3.jpg
/6 matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 08:29 PM   #29
/6 matt
Conductor
 
/6 matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Burke County, NC
Posts: 359
Scales Modeled: Ho scale, O gauge packed away.
So I got sidetracked and came up with a new one. I have a fairly large area coming open to me so I designed a 7'x13' L shaped table layout in HO. This one uses Peco code 83 flex with #5 turnouts in the yard, #6 on spurs and #8 on mainline runs. The maximum grade is 2% and the minimum radius is 22" This layout was designed with a transition era lumber operation in mind.

Cabin Fever .jpg

Cabin Fever 3D .jpg

Cabin Fever 3D2 .jpg

Cabin Fever 3D3 .jpg

Last edited by /6 matt; 03-19-2016 at 10:24 PM..
/6 matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2016, 12:32 PM   #30
Nuttin But Flyer
Dispatcher
 
Nuttin But Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hellertown, PA
Posts: 2,068
Scales Modeled: S, HO
Thank you to all who have contributed to this posting. There are many track plans here that inspire. My only regret though, I'm an American Flyer modeler and only have the old Flyer sectional track. There are so little choices available to create some of these more realistic plans. We have two radius curves to use and only one type of turnout. Unless some big money is spent on new track from Gargraves or MTH S Gauge, we Flyer guys are stuck trying to build realism into our layouts.
__________________
Don M.
TCA #12-67705
Nuttin But Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


» Visit These Sites:
LGB World

Or Our European Train Website ModelRailForum




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.