I'm not one for double-track mains usually, but I think that is a really sweet plan, I look forward to you getting more Unitrack. One little detail that seems to be missing from the plan however are the S60L and S60R straights that must be attached to one of the divergent routes of #4 turnouts. I see a few crossovers at the very least that will need to be modified.
Thanks Chris. I am also looking forward to getting the final track pieces and doing some test runs! I understand what you're saying about needing S60L or S60R pieces, and have considered that. Instead I plan to cut/sand the 'wedge section' out of longer track pieces as specified in the plan. I also have plenty of spare smaller sections to use w/ S60L and/or S60R if I don't feel like modifying the longer track pieces. I won't, however, cut/sand the wedge section out of any turnouts. I don't even know if that's possible without messing with the turnout mechanism? I think I just need 12 turnouts now -I have the rest of the needed track. Out of curiosity, why are you not a fan of double mains? I liked this track plan because it allows for running two trains and switching at the same time. I credit Paul and DKS for helping to come up with the design.
Hi Noah, some remarks on your scenery plan. *IMHO the roads are way to narrow and the grade over the tracks to industry 2 to steep. (or is this a level crossing?) *You'll find that due to all those buildings along the road the towncentre will take much more space then drawn. *The mountain between the front edge and most of the tracks should better be a tiny undulation. *It could be semantics; what you call a station (passenger train stop) could better be a freighthouse. A team track (car-truck transloading) is missing *Boxcars are loaded from the side, so an industry at the head of 4 tracks is uncommon. Alongside the tracks would be more typical. You will need a few free yardtracks for parking cars during switching operations. Having industries only along the upper track wouldn't be bad. *To have a farm on the tiny area of land between the towncentre and a tripple track railroad is weird. A couple of rundown residences could be an alternative *I did like the extended shore line all the way along the edge to the right very much. IMHO a "shame" it's gone in this rendering. *The road underpass at the upper left might not be the best choice. Here I would choose for an road-overpass, if possible at all, due to lack of length to get the road 2" up. I would like to have a longer stretch of tracks hidden from view, to allow trains to be out of sight. Having to cope with the very same trains every 10 second will become a nuisance during switching, besides being unprototypical. When switching industry 2 you will have to foul both mains. Also for run-around moves for other switching chores the inner main will be used by the local switcher. Occasionally holding your trains will be part of your show anyway. Long trains and multi-track plans seem to dwarf a layout. This layout is to small to anable interesting mainline railroading like slow drags being overtaken by fast running hotshots. Or setting up meets between trains going into different directions. When the emphasis is on switching and a more natural looking rail environment, a lot of folks will choose for a single track main. Keep in mind the radii used on your layout are very very small. So a single track backwoods RR could be more appropriate in your space then a well groomed double tracked main of a huge first class RR-empire. Since no-one is alike every model railroad is different; which is the beauty of it. In the end it's up to you to decide what you prefer. Smile Paul
In addition, there is only one place where the road exits the layout; you've essentially created a "dead end" for the traffic. Remember, realism is enhanced by the logical arrangement of features, and so the road really needs to go from one place to another, and not just dead-end at an industry or in a town. Indeed, you have identified every area that is raised above track level as a "mountain," when in fact none of them are; in real life, mountains are enormous, and almost impossible to model; at best we can model low hills. In your case, they are simply areas that rise above track level. Agreed, that's much too small an area for a farm. And Paul already noted that the town structures will take up much more space than you've drawn. I suspect the farm area will become consumed by town buildings once you start to see how much space they require. As Paul indicated, this would not be a logical place for a passenger station; a passenger station would be located along the mainline, not on a dead-end siding. If you wanted to feature a passenger station, a good spot would be just above Industry 1, between the road and the tracks. I would also relocate Industry 1 next to the track where you show the wharf; the top-most siding needs to be clear in order to switch the track for Industry 3. Also, moving the wharf as you have creates the problem that boats cannot reach it, since the railroad bridge is not movable (lift or swing). The wharf is now "land locked." Here are my suggestions: Note the logical treatment of roads, and that there's more than one, in order to suggest a believable highway system. Also note the depressed area behind the bridges; in real life, there will be land forms both above and below track grade; not all open areas are raised.
Sorry guys, I should have emphasized that drawing was very very conceptual. More of a design for fun and out of boredom. Also, my Photoshop skills are much more photograph-oriented, not graphics of this nature so I was limited in that aspect. I have since added more of the needed track [to my physical layout] and realized how little space is available. Until I have all of my track (should happen next week), I don't want to commit to any of the layout environments. I figure I will rotate/shift the track as needed to see what works best. My responses/comments/notes: - What I called mountains, were actually any above-grade earth. Could be a bump or small hill. - I didn't figure the roads were to scale in my drawing - Roads were mostly planned to be at-grade - I like David's road configuration much better. No question about it. - Paul, I like your suggestion of more hidden track. Perhaps I can extend the hill/tunnel at the top left. - What I labeled a station was more of a random yard utility building. Not sure why I called it a 'station' - What I called a farm, was more like a house with a barn and garden/some animals -not a commercial farm - The industry at the end of the four spurs was just a place holder as I figured I'd attached some industry around those tracks - When planning the wharf 'inside' of the bridge, I hadn't considered boats being able to access it. Partially because the scale height of the lowest beam will be ~40 feet (possibly large enough for the largest boat that might use this tiny wharf?), however I am considering modifying the benchwork for the outer-facing wharf - The depression that David added already exists on the layout. I actually planned other depressions as well. - As for Paul's suggestion for a single line main, you're probably right. However, this is my first layout. I'm not going trying to pretend I'm some advanced modeler. At this point, the double mainlines add interest for me. Even if it's not prototypical. - Finally, I've decided to only focus on the wharf area (kinda making that the 'town center' if you will). I see amateur layouts that are so cluttered with mediocre structures. I will still have the few small(ish) industries. Then, I will have a roadside amenities like a gas station, cafe, and motel. Think, Bodega Bay (north of San Francisco) if you've ever been there. I plan to then have everything else nicely/cleanly landscaped -maybe throw in a campground, and house w/ small farm. One of my biggest concerns is that I really don't want the layout to look cluttered/sloppy! All of that being said, I like just about all of your guys' suggestions. More importantly, they are very appreciated. I think some are a bit over my head as far as my newbie approach to model railroading. But it definitely adds to my knowledge and perspective of the expert methods. Cheers Noah
Tunnels are hard when a derailment occurs. A line of trees, houses, an elevated road or a low hill can also keep a train out of sight sufficiently enough. Paul
Hmm, good point. Didn't think of that. Ehh, earlier I re-analyzed adding more tunnel, and it didn't seem to work anyways. Paul- Above you said my radii are "very very small." The outer-most curves are one of the largest radii Kato offers (348mm). The left side curves also have 186mm straights at ninety degrees which widen the curve. The next smallest radii are 315mm and innermost runaround is 282mm. You can't seem to fit much bigger on a HCD-size layout? So relatively speaking, are the curves really that small?
Double track mainlines in my country do have a minimum radius of about 700 yards. Even then severe speed limits are used. More normal is the use of radii from 1000 yards and up to a mile for high speed lines. In N-scale we are talking about radii larger then 13 feet at least. Branch lines were usually built single track with smaller radii. In coach yards about 250 feet is the abosolute minimum (about 5 ft in N-scale). On all model railroads radii are very small, it's called selective compression. (more compression then allowed by the scale only, without selective compression no model railroad can ever be built; unless you own a warehouse) The question remains is always how far do you go? What is acceptable in your eyes? A tight radius might be more acceptable when viewing a branch-line. Smile Paul
Ahh, well yes. I was more comparing the radii of my layout to other layouts of similar size. It's always interesting to learn the details about real railroading and model railroading alike. But if I start worrying too much about how non-prototypical my first real layout is, the joy will get sucked out the hobby. I used to race motocross & downhill mountain bikes, then I skimboarded professionally for 8 years, and now I'm married and working a career job full time. I took on model railroading to provide an escape that I can no longer get from those sports. Keeping the fun and interest in this 'escape' is what's most important. Don't me wrong, I want the layout to have a logical arrangement, but I'm not going to overly sweat the small stuff. Fortunately, I'm surrounded by an abundance of railroading history. From my office I can walk to the Sacramento Railyards site which was the largest locomotive manufacturing facility west of the Mississippi. It was where the Transcontinental Railroad began! There are plans for the new railroad technology museum at this site -which I was recently asked to be on the board for (related to my real estate development background, not railroading). We also have the amazing California State Railroad Museum and the Roseville Railyards (largest active railyard in the Western United States). Growing up here, it's no wonder why I was drawn to trains by age 3! But I mention all of this because I will have tons of resources for prototyping for when I get to that point in my model railroading abilities. Where are you from, Paulus?
Noah, Being born and raised in the Bay area, and having lived in the Point Reyes/Inverness/Bodega Bay area I can see a small resembelence to Bodega Bay now that you mention it. I am anxious to see your layout develope. Good luck with it. Bill.
Bill- right on! Surprisingly, I don't find many other guys from my area on these boards. And not many places have more railroading history than Sacramento! I was originally going to model a mountain town like Truckee, CA but have since decided to do a coastal town since i am putting a lot of focus on the marina/wharf. I'd love to capture the area's green rolling hills with exposed rock (like on the way to Dillon Beach), some agriculture, cool little roadside cafe, etc. - - - I was trying to decide what type of switch controls I'd use with this Unitrack layout. I narrowed my options to either using NCE Switch-kats or the standard Kato blue box mess. But recently I found these custom switch controls: http://www3.sympatico.ca/kstapleton3/751D.HTM The 751K toggles are designed for Kato (or Rokuhan). They are sold individually assembled for $12.50, or ten pack of them for $79.50 (only 1 comes assembled in the 10 pack). They seem to make it very simple to build a Unitrack switch control panel with LED indicator lights. After speaking with Ken, the owner, I felt that he would be very helpful and provide great customer service. I'm leaning towards this route for my layout's switch controls. Has anyone had any experience with these?
I've been bothered by the S-turn on the end of the passing siding, so I straightened it out. A bit too anal for my own good, sometimes...
When I first read that, I was about to freak because I just placed the order for the rest of my track earlier this week! However, I saw that I still have the necessary pieces It looks like you took out the one spur [just below the yard ladder] from your previous design? I suppose you noticed that I had done that on my conceptual illustration? I just made the revision on my AnyRail layout file and I do like it better. Thanks again, David! David, above I was debating on what switch controls to go with: 1.) DCC using NCE Switch-kats ~$220 2.) Kato's bulky blue setup ~$120 or 3.) The 751K, Kato-specific toggles ~$130 that include LED indicators for routing. Seen here: http://www3.sympatico.ca/kstapleton3/751D.HTM I'm leaning towards the switch control panel (option 3). The idea of controlling switches with the Powercab seems weird to me. The Kato setup looks very beginner-toy-like (even though that may be appropriate for me). I like the look of a [well-made] control panel with LED indicators the best and it seems like it'd have the best functionality. But I'd appreciate your advice on what you think would be the ideal setup for a guy like me.
I'm afraid I'm not of much help here, since I "roll my own." But I would personally lean toward the 751s, even though they're a bit pricey. Not only would they result in a better-looking panel, but a more compact one. And I'm also a DC guy, so the the Powercab is not an option for me.
I would go with a standard DC control panel for the switches also. I do run DCC, but I just don't see any advantage to spending lots of money just to have DCC controlled turnouts. Just my opinion......Mike
Very stoked to say that I got the rest of my track today! I couldn't help it, I had to set it up right away. I had to create a few notched out pieces (similar to S60L/S60R pieces) to make certain sections fit. Although, this is very easy to do. As you may notice, I took out the interchange which was previously on the left side of the layout. So I may make the Spur on the right the interchange, or do with out one (feel free to comment on this decision). Obviously, I'll need to modify some of the previously done foam work, and maybe even some of the benchwork as well. Nevertheless, I am very excited to see it all laid out. I have plenty of work on my plate now! In this first image, you see that I shifted the layout to the back of the foam, creating less room for hills/landscape in the rear and more room for an industry at the front right. OR.... this way would create enough room for the extended water/wharf as DKS' recommended. In this image, I have shifted the track forward, which creates more room for hills/landscape in the rear right, but less room for the industry in the front right. Here's another angle of switches and yard. All of the track seems to link up nicely. I'm not really finding the gaps/high spots that existed before. As you can see, I have some reclamation work to do to re-route the river under the bridge No big deal, of course. And this is all of the track I have purchased over the last few months. I re-packaged some of the track that I won't be using. Lots of revisions created lots of leftover track! If any of you need some Unitrack, I'd be happy to barter a bit. The little old lady doggie in the picture is Kaya. She loves to help with trains!
Please...Please...Please! Put the layout into the angled Version (Photo #1). If you like to but more Hill into the rear, then take a tunnel but do pleeeaaaase not lay your track parallel to the front edge. The angle avoids the impression of a toy train arangement. Greetings from germany scopewime PS:We germans are called to be "straights", but that is a prejudice, we also can do angled )
