[cv_acr]

Our previous gate, which that lift-up arrangement replaced, was a big heavy swinging thing that:
a) had to be overbuilt to keep things from twisting
b) was difficult to get & keep perfectly aligned so you really had to watch your train which crossing it.

With the new lift-up you can run full speed across it without worry.

 

[slivesay]

I'll probably leave out the liftout for now and re-examine it later. I do like the thought of a longer continues run than what a loop will provide but not sure yet if the effort/hassle is worth it yet. I had anticipated using a tongue and groove type fitting but I like the height adjustment screw you use.
The left side of the layout is accessible as this is in the corner of the garage with the widest area towards the center of the garage. The longest reach will be at the top centered on the table addition. This is about 38in but can be reached by climbing on top of the existing bench to the left. Not something I'm anticipating having to do often but doable if i need to.

 

[slivesay]

Layout Update

Ok so here is the latest update to my layout, grid is 12". The space i have is about 25% of the garage but it was not readily apparent from the pic so I included a portion of the garage area so the layout location is easier to see.
I'll build this in phases starting with the inner loop, then the outer loop and finally the interchange/extension.

I tried to reduce the amount of track but didn't really succeed, so I'm looking for suggestions.
These are not set in stone but here are my thoughts on industries, suggestions are welcome (era mid-late 50's, loop = small/mid-size town, extension = rural area)
Industry-1: Oil & fuel depot/dealer or freight house(is this redundant with a team track?)
Industry-2: food processor/cannery or cement manufacturer
Industry-3: dairy/creamery or small mining
Industry-4: rural mill or co-op

A few questions..
1. The interchange has 2 tracks, my thought was A/D for the interchange. Is this overkill?
2. This layout runs counter-clockwise, staging on the extension would be for departing off layout or would i be able to run arriving as well? If arriving is possible should i have it arrive via the same route or try to connect at the top right of the oval with a wye?
3. Is the three line crossover section by the interchange and yard overly complex?
4. Should I remove the inner loop and attach spurs to the outer loop? 1 train continuously running(unattended) is required to keep my son happy so I can run operations, this is why having a longer continuous run and the lift-out was and still is attractive.
5. Where exactly does the yard lead here start? If it starts at 'A' then its about an inch short, if it starts at 'B' than its too long.

 

[joed2323]

Is it just me or does your yard tracks seem small, can you add length to those?

 

[sstlaure]

What length trains do you want to run? Your sidings and yard tracks will limit your ability to operate this layout realistically (sounds like you do want to do this.) Your A/D track (between the inner and middle loops) looks to only have a length of about 2ft. Is this correct?

If you're modelling the 50's, then you're dealing with mostly smaller 40' or less boxcars, etc, so it's not necessarily a problem, but you're looking at 4 car trains running. Even your staging tracks are fairly short.

I use my staging both entering and leaving the layout. Just set them up for departure out of staging, run them around and then back in. If you double head the trains (2 engines) you can just run the engines around the train for the return trip rather than turning them around.

For something a little different - The Eagle Creek Northern fits in a similar sized footprint.

http://mrr.trains.com/How To/Track Plan Database/2011/12/Eaglecreek Northern Ry.aspx

I think you're trying to cram in too much track if you're still trying to run operations. If you want operations, plan those out first, then just make sure you have a continuous run for the kiddos. Multiple parallel loops running through the same scenes doesn't lend itself well to operations.

Just my opinion

 

[NIMT]

I have to agree too much track and way too many turnouts / switches in too small an area! While it looks cool on paper, on the layout it will be too cramped and complicated to run smoothly.
That many turn outs in that small a space will also be a logistical nightmare to maintain and keep clean and in good working order, witch will lead to may a frustration from you and any kiddo's!

 

[Big Ed]

Water is colourless. Lakes are blue because the sky is blue.

Different stuff suspended in the water (silt, algae, etc.) also adjusts the colour and visibility. Clean water is perfectly clear.

Do some research, you are wrong...."sir".....you don't know "sheet" about the color of water.

We been all through that in another thread, no need to go through it all over again.:smokin:

 

[xrunner]

Do some research, you are wrong...."sir".....you don't know "sheet" about the color of water.

We been all through that in another thread, no need to go through it all over again.:smokin:

Oh dear ...

 

[joed2323]

I really think your layout has alot of potential after you clean it up alittle bit.
Add some length to.your yard tracks as well for staging tracks

If you tone your track down to say a single main line that adds alot more to your layout alone.

One good thing you did was post your layout plan on this forum. This forum is probably the best for gaining help from alot of very smart and knowledgeable railroad modelers

 

[mr_x_ite_ment]

slive...I feel you can still incorporate a duckunder or liftout if you like. I see two ways you could do it. You could have a duckunder that would connect the "southeast" corner of the left side (by "Team Track") with the slanted track "north" of Industry 4 on the right side. The duckunder would be at about a 45 deg. angle to the layout or so.

The second possibility that you could maybe do would be some kind of liftout that connects a track coming off a turnout on the southernmost point of the left side and joins up with the southern end of one of the tracks on Industry 4. In that case, it would probably have to be a "triangle-shaped" liftout to give you a curve connecting the two sides. You would need a "leg" or support for the corner of the liftout not connecting the two sides. A triangle-shaped liftout would be heavier, and would end up right in front of the door too.

I don't know if my ideas are any good, but it is possible to "connect" the two sides if you choose to. I look forward to your future progress!

Chad

 

[slivesay]

Thanks all,
I've removed the innermost loop and have extended the yard & staging tracks. I'm tweaking here and there and will post a pic of the layout when i feel better about it.

I have not really thought about how how long I want my trains to be, I would imagine between 6-12 cars as long as it doesn't look like the engine is chasing the caboose. Or more if I can get away with it.

The temptation to add 'one more thing' is really strong and thanks to you guys to for telling me I'm going overboard

Chad
My thought on a duck under/liftout is similar to your first suggestion and more than likely how i would do this if I do have one.

 

[slivesay]

Ok so here are two updated versions one is with a liftout/duckunder and the other is without. I wanted to ensure that the addition was doable without major mods if I did add the liftout at a later point.

I've simplified the layout, removed the innermost loop, extended the yard and staging tracks, and reduced the turnouts from 39 to 26/27.

I'm wondering if i should put something in the open space at the top of the loop but not sure how i'll get there barring elevation which I don't think I can do or want to do. Perhaps an engine facility coming from the yard? Also not sure how to connect it.

Anyways thoughts?

 

[mr_x_ite_ment]

slive...what about coming straight north from one of the yard tracks to an engine facility? You could have back-to-back turnouts on the farthest right track of the yard that would shoot straight north to an engine facility. It could even be a turntable with a small roundhouse or something too.

Chad

 

[slivesay]

I thought about that but wasn't sure about if that would work operationally. So the engine would travel up/down the ladder to get to the engine facility? Would it make sense to add a runaround on the ladder to allow for the traffic?

 

[mr_x_ite_ment]

Well, I am not sure what works best. I imagine one has to be able to reach easily any area where locomotives are kept. Maybe the area just north of where your aisle ends would be a good spot for any engine facility. As far as a runaround goes, do you even have room for something like that? I really like your layout plan. Perhaps other guys on here have better ideas than me. I think you have a good solid plan, and any improvements to it would only be minor things. I am at a loss right now to come up with anything really better than what you have. Looking good!

Chad

 

[joed2323]

wow big improvement from your last plan. i see possible reach issues on the far north sections of north west and north east. in the center of the big section. Are you going to have a pop up hatch for access or?? Are you planning on building from the wall out to the aisle?

I like the run around idea

Did you think of or plan on maybe dividing the big section in half so you have 2 different sides for different scenes? Then you wouldnt have to fill that section up, instead have 2 scenes on both sides of scenic divider

Did you state what kind of industries you have planned for all those spurs? if so i missed it.

You could maybe even put the yard on the outside, but it works where its at i guess
Maybe you can run the main at the yard to the middle so your yard tracks are on the west side instead of being stuck in the middle of the loop which would allow for even longer yard tracks, just a suggestion

 

[ckw]

about that lift out

Welcome to the forum. Lots of knowledgable and helpful people here...

My only observation would be that the original lift-out had angled tracks at either end, which could make realignment more complicated that if they were straight at the seam (between sections), which I know isn't always possible. It looks like you eliminated this problem by going to a single track for the lift-out. BUT,...

...if you use a curved turnout to the left of the lift-out and adjust trackage to the right of the lift-out, you can probably make this a more manageable lift-out than what you've got on paper right now, and still have double track the full length of the lift-out. Those few feet of double track might get you some additional interest and/or operational flexibility.

Best, Ken

modeling Norfolk Southern in HO (1995-2005)

 

[Nikola]

Personally, and this is my personal opinion, it seems incorrect to only have one continuous-running loop on a layout that huge.

 

[CTValleyRR]

Ckw resurrected a 6-1/2 year old thread. The OP hasn't visited in almost as long. Probably not worth giving advice or feedback at this point.

 

[Chops]

I have to agree too much track and way too many turnouts / switches in too small an area! While it looks cool on paper, on the layout it will be too cramped and complicated to run smoothly.
That many turn outs in that small a space will also be a logistical nightmare to maintain and keep clean and in good working order, witch will lead to may a frustration from you and any kiddo's!

Upon the wall of our train club is a sign proclaiming: "Never Start Vast Projects with Half Vast Ideas." What did we do? Exactly that. The original designers tried to jam as much track into a thousand square foot area as humanly possible.

That being said, my chief concern with your most interesting, and elaborate track plan, is the large number of turnouts. They are very close to each other, and any given train traversing them will be subject to lateral force which invites derailment.

The electrical challenges of many facing power routing frogs will also keep you tied up in knots, for many a good hour, I assure you. It can be done, but it can be the devil's own to parse it out. I speak from long experience, both on my own layouts and from helping friends with theirs.

Lastly, consider well the ballast question. Turnouts generally hate ballast, and ballast hates turnouts. Grains will foul switch points and frogs, glue water will find its way into mechanisms.

It is NOT my intention to rain on your parade, I LIKE parades, but speaking strictly for myself, RELIABILITY is essential to my enjoyment of any given layout.

I have a video posted in the "Model Train Video" section under the title of "PC Expresso." You might sneak a peek there.

If you have the time and resources to build an elaborate track plan, I rather would favor the suggestion to go with a published track plan- but with any track plan, think about how you are going to ballast it, and beware of sharp lateral transitions caused by too many turnouts and S curves in general.

Best of luck! Hope to see more progress reports. (Addendum: never mind that, just saw CTVRR's notation. This guy probably has a pile of unused stuff piled into a corner of the garage by now. Seen it all too many times).