Just a thought... If you bring that large curve down closer to the inside curve of the layout (where the pen is) you would have a ton of space for all kinds of Cool trackage up and around that corner on the inside of the layout...JMO
I kind of like the Horseshoe Curve look as @country joe has it, but I'm kind of prejudiced. [April 1989. I think it as overcast and/or raining my whole week there. ]
I like the curve as well-are you planning on building up the terrain or digging down? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m considering 4 options, 2 building up and 2 digging down. The first option is to build a mountain with both sets of tracks going through tunnels. This would visually separate the 2 legs of the layout and allow trains to disappear for a bit of their journey. The second option is to build up the area some but not enough to require a tunnel. This would still visually separate the 2 sides of the layout but would allow me to watch the trains snaking through the curves. It also creates a reason for the tracks to curve as they do. The third option is to dig down inside the 180 degree curves for either a body of water or just lower terrain. The fourth option is a river that runs from the back right toward the front and curves toward the back left requiring 4 double track bridges. The bridges and water create visual interest and as the other options a reason for the tracks to curve as they do. Right now I’m not sure which option I like best.
I hadn’t noticed but I looked again and you’re right, no graffiti. My how things have changed and, in this case, not for the better.
I like the idea of this layout (even if it no longer has a flyover.) You've got what I would call a bent oval, that is "pinched" in the corner (bringing the front tracks closer to the rear tracks). Nice! What do you want to do in the middle, in front of that pinch? Maybe there's not much room to do anything as is, but a simple modification could enlarge that area (at some expense to the right hand side interior of the layout.) What if you started "pinching" further back from the corner on the right hand side? Simply take some straight track out of the front of the left side of the layout, and put it back in where the front and back tracks are close together and parallel, near the right side of the corner? Then you have some room to add a switch leading into the (now expanded) foreground in the corner. I often used to play with different track plans (even before I had track planning SW) by sliding an area of track one way or the other, to create room on the other side of the tracks for an industry or scene in a new location. Note: I have a dislike for too much symmetry in a layout, so YMMV. Regardless of whether you want to try this or not, I would definitely sprinkle in some crossovers (in complementary pairs, but not necessarily close together.) This provides additional interest and the ability of both inner and outer track traffic to access industries, stations, yards, etc. sprinkled around the layout, inside and outside the (bent) loop. Just remember, all this excellent advice is worth every penny you paid for it!
Thanks for the advice, Andy. I am going to add a couple of crossovers/double crossovers. I don’t have them right now but they are on my shopping list. I’ll look into moving the track as you suggested. It’s a good suggestion. I’m not sure I’ll do it but I will consider it.
Me likes it without the grades but it's up to you since it's your layout. I guess you went with DC for now as I see power packs, me thinks? Are your locomotives DCC Ready? If they are I think you might change to DCC at some point. It's amazing even on my tiny 2' x 4' layout, The reason I got really interested in the hobby again, but that's just me. Keep us posted, enjoying watching a layout come to life, and how are you liking N Scale for now. O and N is a very big change BTW, when I was reading your post I was confused till I found this thread. I was like, there is another Country Joe on here with an O layout. Turns out, it's the same person Welcome to N Scale, hope you enjoy it.
The ability to make changes, both big ones like I did here and smaller tweaks that I’m sure I will do, is one of the things I love about Unitrack. I also like that the switch motors are in the roadbed, the molded roadbed gives the track a finished look right away, though it can be improved by adding ballast, and it’s super reliable. I am the same Country Joe. I’m not new to N but haven’t been involved since we moved to Florida in 2016. I had both N and O when we lived in NY, O at home and N at the club. My 4 locomotives are new production Kato and are easy to convert to DCC. I have a Lenz system and will probably switch to DCC at some point. Right now I’m having fun running DC (you did see 2 power packs).
I’ve neglected this thread since I’ve been posting updates in the Layout Party. I should have kept this up to date. This post will bring this thread to the current state of the A&JB. There are 3 industrial buildings so far. They don’t have a permanent location yet. There’s also a few detail items by the Bachmann factory. And 2 Model Power industries. 2 double crossovers have been added so the track is pretty much done, however I need to add some feeders between the double crossovers. I’ve started working on the backdrop. I found a 4’x12’ sky with clouds paper roll at Michael’s Craft Store. I cut 20”x30” foam core down to 12”x30”, I’ll cut the backdrop to 12” and attach it to the foam core with double sided tape. The foam core sections are taped together. The foam core is shown in this photo but it’s hard to see since it’s white foam core against a white wall. That’s the layout as it is right now.
Be really careful with that sky from Michaels. I tried it and let's just say the results were... suboptimal. Double sided tape may work better than what I tried. Currently trying out new backdrop ideas... I need at least two curves so straight foam core might not work. Pondering...
That may be a fairly nasty S-curve when crossing between right outer & left inner track at the right end of the double-crossover, in that next-to-last pic. I use a formula to estimate the severity of an S curve by comparing it to an equivalent transition from tangent to some Req. 1/Req = 1/R1 + 1/R2 The double-crossover uses #8 frogs, with R = 28", and your adjacent curve to the near right is at best R = 11" Thus Req = 1/(1/28 + 1/11) = 7.9" R. Using that formula, the minimum adjacent radius is 15" to achieve Req of at least 9.75". Alternatively, you can insert a short (~railcar length) tangent piece between x-over and curve. Of course, factors like body- or truck-mounted couplers, overhangs from truck pivots to coupler faces, allowable coupler swings, car lengths, and whether you are pushing or pulling cars through the S-curve, grade and train weight, all make a difference.
I always thought it would be funny to have a dumpster over-stuffed with mannequins, with limbs hanging out over the edges.
Thanks for the input. I thought about that when I put the double crossover there. I plan on running various trains through it in both directions to see if it’s a problem. If it does cause problems I can move the crossover to the back of the layout where it’s not an issue. That is an inconvenient location so I’m hoping trains have no issues with the current location. Once I install the extra feeders I’ll spend lots of time running trains.
That would be both funny and cool. I like them too and plan to buy a few more. They are reasonably priced and make my life much easier. I have shaky hands so building kits is difficult at best. I used to enjoy building kits but now they are more frustrating than fun.
