N Scale Track Plan - Comments Welcome I built but never sceniced an 8'x4' layout last year - it's still running. However, we have re-arranged the house and I now have an 8'x12' room to set up in. There are limitations due to doorway and existing furniture which leaves me with an area into which I can build a 6'x8'x12' "J" shaped N scale layout. I'll be disassembling the old 8'x4' to save as much track and turnouts as possible to use on the new plan. A draft outline of the plan is shown below. It's a folded dog-bone. The idea is to get maximum run and fun with minimum scenery. The scenery covers over the end loops will be removable for track cleaning. I like to use visible staging (the through yards) but will hide some of the climbing track with scenery and building flats (shown in blue on the 12' leg) I like to run longish trains with some operation. It will be one operator with no DCC at this stage and maybe cab control later. Reversing sections have been avoided for simplicity but could be created at a later stage if deemed useful. Minimum visible radius is 15" with minimum hidden radius of 13". Max grade is 1%. The wardrobe is a "no go" area. Your valued comments would be greatly appreciated.
Wish I could look at it , but train board has been strange for me since it moved. It keeps asking me to log in when I click the image, but i'm already logged in. After I log in again it goes back to the log in page. Frustrating, But i'm sure the TB admins have their hands full tweaking things on this board. Perhaps later I can look and see it.
JBT, nice looking, classic layout!! If you have not thought about it yet you might consider access to your hidden track in case of derailments etc. Hey Geeky, have you asked Charlie about this problem?? JOhn
Thanks for the input folks. I've been doing some fine tuning of the siding and staging track arrangements. I hope to start disassembly of the current 8' x 4' layout this weekend and start construction of the new one next week. Cheers.
One thing that I have seen and really liked were slight curves on the long mainline runs. Kind of breakes up the monotony of just straight runs. I saw that you wanted minimal scenery so perhaps you could just do small hills and imply larger ones on your backdrop to justify the curves. Eric
Never did like reading Yep, there it is in black and white. Guess I should actually read the text instead of just looking at the cool layout plan
JBT: Nice plan. I like the way you've set up little switching areas along your main(s). From the number of switchback sidings without run-arounds, I'm assuming you'll work trailing point stations only (i.e., Towns A, C, and E when eastbound from the main yard and B, D, and F when westbound. With the same number of turnouts, you could make some or all towns have a run-around. For me, a run-around implies the RR believes the town is far enough away from a convenient yard, that they don't want to push a car "all that distance" to serve an industry on a facing point siding. It also fosters the illusion that the industry is big enough to be served by traffic from 2 directions instead of just one. You could still elect to only work the town/industry from one direction, but viewers are left with a subliminal suggestion that other trains will be coming from the other direction to serve this busy industry/town, soon. If I'm reading the red and blue(?) tracks hidden under the town scene by the wardrobe correctly, trains proceed from the big yard by the town scene to the left, loop across the back of the layout left to right mostly hidden, hit the turnback loop hidden under the town scene, return right to left mostly hidden, then go through the scenic-ed area in the middle of the shelving from left to right. That seems like an awfully long time to be mostly hidden, plus every train is seen to proceed through the scenery left to right and then right to left (or else right to left and then left to right). Would it be possible to adjust the loops so trains proceed from the big yard right to left (like above), through partially hidden tracks from left to right (like above), BUT then, instead of looping to return to hidden track, the loop connects with the towns/industries in the middle of the shelf and moves through them right to left, just like it did when it was on the front tracks. The train could then return left to right through the mostly hidden track to the turnback loop under the town scene to enter the main yard again. Each train will still be looping around the layout twice, to end where it began, but (for me anyway...) it seems like it is traveling to someplace farther away instead of doing an "out and back" or turn job. I suppose the long time spent mostly hidden can make some operators feel they've traveled a long distance, but time between action could be prolonged by slowing or stopping in a hidden area too. By making this change in the loops, you will break up the long time mostly hidden into 2 periods that are half as long, but you will gain the sense of moving a greater distance in one direction instead of running a turn job out and back to the point of origin. With careful planning, you could probably arrange tracks so you could do both. Dave H. Modeling the 1970s era Peoria and Pekin Union Railway in N-Scale
JBT: You might be able to eke out a few more moments of trains being visible by changing the hidden area at the bottom of the layout plan to an area that is separated by a view block. For example, if you ran a highway overpass from the front of the layout where the tracks currently enter the hidden track area, along a ridge that runs toward the lower left corner of the layout, the train would be hidden from an operator standing in the middle of the room, but would be fully visible to someone standing by the file cabinet. Careful positioning of hills, trees or buildings could also make it difficult for the person standing by the file cabinet to see the train until it comes under the bridge. If the train appears and disappears often on a layout (especially if it always seems to be going in the same direction ;>D shameless plug for my idea in the previous post!!!), it makes people think it is traveling farther. Also, when it is not possible to see all cars in a train at one time, then it makes the trains seem longer. Laying track in gentle curves (as Colorado50 suggested) instead of ruler straight also contributes to the impression of longer trains and greater distance covered. Some people use staging tracks to give their layouts a sense of being connected to the larger world, actually moving commodities from one part of the country to another, and covering some distance to do so. [The train leaves staging from Track 1 (also known as Sydney), proceeds to several towns along the way (including Brisbane), and then ends up back in staging on Track 2 (AKA Melbourne).] If you wanted to incorporate this idea in your layout plan, putting 2 or 3 staging tracks in the hidden portions of the mostly hidden tracks, would be one way to do so. It would even be possible to do staging out in the open, scenic-ed portions of the layout (maybe a siding along that part of the layout that is only visible from the filing cabinet) by having the train "staged" waiting for a signal to turn green so it can proceed from staging to the main yard, perhaps switching towns/industries along the way or maybe just running straight to the big yard. Dave H.
Thanks for your particular thoughts on the track plan ppuinn. I've done a couple of versions in XTrkCad now and one (the current most likely) is attached to this post. You'll notice changes I made to the siding arrangements which has evened things up a bit and provided some long run arounds. Yes, you're reading the plan correctly. However, trains would normally go west from the north staging yard under the lower scene TBD (to hide the tight radius turn) out around the wall track on a gradual (< 1%) climb, under the wardrobe town scene to hide the tightish curves (this may yet become a mountain scene), back on the parallel wall track on a (< 1%) descent under the TBD scene and into the south staging yard. Trains from the south staging yard would normally head out in the opposite direction ending in the north yard. So in both normal situations the trains go out, travel away somewhere and then return to a different yard. It's a point to point system with a hidden connecting track (the short one to the east of the north yard) to take trains back to the starting point/staging/yard or to allow continuous running. The "wall track" provides some vertical interest to the run and could be sceniced as track on an embankment or partly hidden or totally obscured by building flats or shallow scenery or all of these. The other idea of the wall run was to provide a long interesting run off the main yard/staging/switching scenes. I can't figure out how to link the wall track to the staging yards (by deleting the returning loop) as you have suggested without the tracks crossing over each other and thus requiring a steep grade which I specifically want to avoid. Could you draw out your suggestion to show me what you had in mind? I take the point about using curves to break up a long straight run but, as the layout will be viewed mostly from the centre area, it would probably be largely unnoticed. I'm probably going to be the only one viewing it anyway until grand children appear on the scene I'm hoping to achieve the length/distance illusion on the "wall track" with scenery (buildings, trees etc.) to obscure parts of the train. I figure that there is a lot of curved track in the foreground areas already. Thanks for your valued thoughts and looking forward to a drawing of your suggestion. John
John: My misunderstanding came about from some assumptions I made in error: I thought the area at the front of the shelving was your main yard with 2 northbound tracks and 2 southbound tracks, and the tracks in the middle of the shelving represented a series of small towns served by roadswitchers leaving at one end of the big yard and returning to the other end. Interpreting the mid-shelving tracks as a single town instead of multiple towns and working the layout as a point to point layout between the two towns instead of as a loop, definitely changes my suggestions. There IS a sense of moving from one place to another across the layout so my suggestion about changing the turnback loop configuration is unnecessary. The need for run-around tracks is greatly reduced too, but I'd encourage you to keep them anyhow. I like how you added a fifth track as a run-around in the town at the front of the layout and cut out the switchbacks. That whole area could have as many or as few sidings and industries as you prefer, making a relatively large industrial area for the front town at the right end of the yard. What would you think of moving the Engine Servicing Area to a point about where the four tanks are located between the two towns? When viewed from the center of the room, locos from the front town could access a 2 or 3-track service area in front of and to the right of the tanks from a 5th track at the left end of their yard; and locos in the mid-shelf town would access the service area to the left of and behind the tanks from a turnout on the yard lead. There would only need to be a single forward move out of the service area, and a single backing move for locos to couple with cars in their respective yards. The tracks from the two towns would NOT connect in the service area (reversing loop situation). You would only model one larger engine facility on your layout instead of 2 smaller, but it would serve 2 towns. In the former engine service area you could put as many or as few industries as you wanted to provide an industrial district at the left end of the yard for the mid-shelf town that balances the front town industrial district at the right side of its yard on the other side of the layout. You could still leave a few tracks at the opposite end of either yard (closer to the business/industrial area associated with the other town), so the density of businesses/industries is set at a level that you are most comfortable with. With the two towns positioned so conveniently close to each other, if you wanted, you could probably find a way of setting up a loads in-empties out scenario with coal or gravel hoppers (but watch out for the reverse loop issue). I'll try to draw up some sketches of what I'm talking about. Dave H.
Thanks for taking the time to study my plan and for the suggestion(s) again Dave. Have a look at the attached modified plan to see if I've followed your ideas. I've added engine service areas at A an B but changed the orientation around from what you suggested - I think. I tried it the other way but it didn't look right. It also extended the 5th track run around for the south yard. The area at C is now industry and I've added a siding at D which could be extended to the right (and down slightly) or have another siding added to it to become part of a loads in/empties out thing at E as you suggested. I quite like the changes, even though my head hurts now , which allow better operation with little extra clutter. I can still store all my locos on the layout too. John
Version 4 is attached now with an extra approach track at the west end of north yard (above the area at C) giving even more flexibility.
John: I had trouble with space around the engine servicing area, too...to make it work, the shortest Northtown track is now only 7 feet long (1st turnout for the ladder tracks is located in the middle of the wall) . I also set up 2 Northtown tracks for the coal loads and empties scenario from the Northtown yard to a powerplant by the wardrobe in Southtown. Also a Northtown track for freight and one for run-around. The empties track will get opened when the empties are pushed into the mine and that will leave a track to receive the empties train from Southtown, but they'll get pushed into the mine again for the remainder of an operating session so you'll have a 3rd track to work with at Northtown after the coal train (or the gravel train... or the limestone train) gets run. At C (Northtown industries), I put a 4 foot run-around with the tail of the run-around extending into the hidden track area by going behind a building. All facing point turnouts are on one side of the run-around and all trailing points are on the other. That way, the Northtown 1st shift local switcher can pull all of the trailing point industries, run around them and then pull all of the facing point industries, then pull all the cars to the yard. When traffic for the local industries comes in, the Northtown 2nd shift local will push a string of cars from the yard and sort them into their designated facing point industries or onto the trailing point side of the run-around, then run around them to work all the trailing point industries. Your 3-track plan for this area will be a very efficient arrangement. My run-around is less so, but is MUCH more efficient than having trailing and facing point turnouts on both sides of the run-around. Even an efficient run-around will be pretty challenging to work if you have a lot of cars. Pick the level of complexity/challenge that you are most comfortable with. To make the loads in-empties out scenario work, I put a siding extending from the 5th track at Southtown into the hidden track area by the wardrobe. The siding passes behind a power plant and actually connects back with the turnback loop to Northtown inside the hidden track area. The radius for the lower level hidden track will be 13.25 inches and for the upper level track it will be 14.5 inches (certainly "tightish", as you put it...;>D). My thought was to use the locos that bring the loads or empties to town, to also push the loaded cars around the turnback loop and park them back on the tracks at Northtown or park the empties at the power plant. But, if 13.35 inches is too tight a radius for the larger locos, then the pushing could be done by a smaller local switcher. We have a house guest tonight who is sleeping in the computer room/bedroom that has the scanner, so I'll scan and post my drawing tomorrow morning. Dave H.
Thanks Dave. I'll wait till I see your drawing to make sense of it all. The furniture is being arranged to fit the plan on Saturday and I'll be starting to pull up track and turnouts from the 8 x 4 on Sunday. I hoped to start on the bench work this coming week, but it's filling up fast with things like golf and car stuff. John
Overall a very nice track plan. Biggest on my list is the engine facility not being connected to the yard. It should be right next to it along with a caboose and MOW track. (I know you modern guys don't use cabooses, but short locals still use them from time to time. ) ...I read the more recent post and see you've fixed this issue DOH You have all this parrallel track and no cross overs. You could add some switches and create a inner passing siding for dual directional running and turning trains. I would be tempted to put long passing sidings on the back main and store trains back there. Atleast one siding for a nice run through like an passenger train that doesn't need to be on the layout 247. As Colorado50 mentioned, long sweeping curves instead of long ruler straight sections. I did this on my doorpanel layout and it really added alot. The lower hidden curve by the engine service area ( original plan, I wrote this before reading everything) would benfit from being daylight to allow a larger engine service area. It would allow you to extend the engine tracks. If you must separate them visually. A highway overpass or tree line should do the trick. One of the guys has used tree lines to great effect on his layout, and his are removable. I personally am not so kean on hidden track. I like to see all my trains even if they are just sitting still. Once again, I like the overall look of it. there was a BN proto type layout in MR back in the 80's?,it was similar in some ways to what you have on your plan, but it was an oval layout. If you can find old issues it might be a good modelling reference for you. What prototype are you modelling? You could almost have one yard be one railroad and the other be another railroad. It would allow transfer runs between yards and more loco color schemes.
John: Here’s the scan of my drawing… ‘t ain’t pretty, but it’s functional. As you narrow in on your preferred track plan, the scenery considerations (both landscape and structures) start to have more impact on which track arrangements are most desirable. What are your givens and druthers for any of the hidden track areas and for scenery in general? Desert or forests; mountains or plains, urban or rural, big city or small town? As you can guess from my postings on other threads, I’m a big fan of low hills and trees in front of hidden trackage when space is available, and easily removable short view blocks made of trees or buildings when real estate is limited and access is more difficult. On this layout, the track to be hidden is mostly at the back of the shelving so easy access for cleaning and repairs is going to be a big factor. There isn’t too much space between the different areas of interest on this layout. Even though it is set up as two towns for operations, the overall visual appearance of the layout might be of one town with two areas of concentrated industries separated by an engine servicing facility. You can make the two industrial areas look the same or pick types of industries and size, style, or detailing of buildings that are more contrasting. The contrast (or similarity) can also be enhanced by carefully choosing your colors, tones, shades, and textures. What sort of industries/businesses would you like in the two major industrial areas? Selection of industries will have an effect on track planning and scenery, too: loads/empties scenarios, types of cars serving an industry (if you already have 20 tank cars and 3 covered hoppers, do you may not want to model a grain elevator or a tank farm?), preferred type of operations (switching industries vs. mainline running), or a few big industries vs. many smaller industries? Dave H. Modeling the 1970s era Peoria and Pekin Union Railway in N-Scale
Geeky: Take a look at the more recent versions with the service area between the two yards. I like the idea of providing for hacks and MOW, and it might be possible to squeeze a track in between the mid-shelf tracks and the front tracks. On the other hand, space is already pretty tight and adding more tracks could ratchet up the Spaghetti Bowl Factor another notch. Another consideration: The plan is basically a giant dogbone loop but is operated as a point to point, so electrically (at this early stage of the planning, anyhow) the mid-shelf yard is electrically opposite of the front yard tracks. Let's put together some plans of how the engine service area, caboose, and MOW tracks could go in the relocated service area space available between the two yards and still keep the operation of the two yards separate (point to point). Maybe generate some plans that don't need to be wired for a reversing loop and others that do? John, in one of your previous postings, you said you wanted to follow the KISS principle and avoid the electrical arrangements for reversing loops if possible, but you also indicated you might consider them, if needed. What are your thoughts on this? I like this idea, too. It could work if the reversing loop issue is addressed. Space issues would probably interfere with adding a 3rd track anywhere along the back mains. Dave H
