Here's my track plan. Disregard most of the inner loop in the upper left. Suggestions for improving it before doing scenery are gratefully accepted. Andre'
Wow! That will be HUGE! Will you be keeping the layout flat, or are you going to add some slight grade to the set?
currently its all flat with just a slight grade difference between a couple bench sections due to different window sill heights. I am looking to tweek this layout possible in a mjor fashion before I start doing scenery Andre'
Whiskey, Not only is that a huge layout, but it already exists and is very nice looking to boot. http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?t=79571 Andre, We really do need more photos to look at
A variation...For What It's Worth Andre': Since no one has offered any comments on your track plan, yet (except to note the size, which certainly caught my attention too!), I thought I'd give it a try. I model in N-scale and have drawn up plans for N and HO layouts, but this is the first time I've had to contend with loops where the MINIMUM diameters are almost 4 feet across. Here is my variation on your plan. I really liked how the plan had 2 major areas of interest...which I've labeled Towns A and B in the upper and lower loops, respectively. I tried to keep the "flavor" of the A-Town yard, but put in a rail yard in B-Town instead of what seemed to be an industrial (coal mine??) yard. I enjoy operations and long runs between towns, so I tried to add some more length between the two towns without changing the basic track configuration you already have. Essentially, the loop around the outside of the layout is still there. But I've adjusted track a little so that the 2 towns could be operated as the ends of a point-to-point layout. With this new arrangement, you will be able to go from A-Town to B-Town without going over the same track twice, yet you will be making a complete loop and a half around the layout. It will also be possible to travel the opposite direction out of both towns, although the run in the other direction is only 1/2 loop (however, like the longer run, it will NOT be necessary to go over any track a second time during this shorter run). One other point...it will be possible to set up for continuous running by activating the two turnouts by the crossing on the right hand side of the track plan, so trains go straight through instead of taking the diverging track over the crossing and into each town. [Edit: I noticed that the words got cut off at the bottom of the scan...the last line just talks about not needing to go over any piece of track twice.] I envisioned putting a relatively short view block down the center of the lower peninsula--one that was made of trees on low hills or maybe buildings instead of a tall sky backdrop that went up to your eye level--so I kept the B-Town trackage on 1/2 of the peninsula. I think there is enough space on the other half for a slightly narrower version of the industry (coal mine) tracks you had on your plan. I haven't talked with you yet about your preferences on the Spaghetti Bowl Factor (whether you want a lot (high SB Factor) or less track per square foot of layout(low SB Factor), but the plan I drew up would have a higher SB Factor than yours; so, of course, you need to pick the plan that comes closest to your personal preferences. If you think my plan is too crowded, I think you'd be able to use your plan for the industrial yard without reducing the length of the overall run or losing the option of going either East or West, provided you include the crossover from B-Town to the outside loop near the end of the lower peninsula. I set up a yard lead for both towns. Some people prefer saving the space, and they set up their yards so the yard lead is unnecessary. Your choice. I momentarily played with the idea of establishing a loads in/empties out scenario. I opted to simply label areas where industries might be able to go and just let you decide what sort of industries should go where. Let folks know what aspects of my plan (and of your plan) you like and what you dislike or don't prefer as much, so their future comments/suggestions can be tailored to addressing precisely what you want for your layout.
I think the problem here is that Andres drawing is not exactly to scale. It is more of a representative drawing based on what you can see in his pictures I think the track is slightly different. If you look at the small spurs to the right of this photo you'll see what I mean. ppuin, your plan has some good ideas, but it does not take into account just how chunky G scale is. I do not own any anymore, but I am sure a switch is quite long in G scale. So you need to define exactly how much space will be taking up on a stright run by a switch. You also need to allow more space between tracks. The switch lead into section B looks good on paper, but look at how much space is being taken up by actual track on that picture. I'm not criticizing your design concept, merely stating that pencil marks can be decieving. Andre how many 40' cars can be fit into each spur? On your previous photo post everyone was so impressed with your layout space, but I do not believe most of us smaller scalers understand how large G scale really is. How long are the switches? One thing I would try to do on the layout is have the inside track, on the part where there is a bridge, curve away fromn the wall then curve back so that you could have two bridges there and trains would have to snake through the front part. It would only add visual appeal, but I like seeing trains wiggle through mild curves. I do not know how common derailments are on your layout, but I do know how expensive G scale locos are. I would put some kind of guard rail on my outside edge so trains do not take the big fall to the ground.
how many 40' cars can be fit into each spur? Spurs on the angle peninsula starting from botom to top hold: 4, 5, 6 cars. On the other, starting from the top and working down: 7 on the passing siding or reverse loop route 9, 7, 8, 7 How long are the switches? LGB 1600 and Aristo wide switches are 19" long I have very few derailments. Nothing has left the bench. Thanks for the input so far guys. I do like the suggested layout options especially the point to point operation uses. As I run battery power reverse loops and wyes are no trouble and offer additional opportunities. Space is tight as Geeky stated but I will look into making those changes and see what can be done. Keep up the input guys! Andre'
Hi Andre' Nice plan. You'll get a lot of hours out of that. The major part of my layout is also a 'folded dog bone' design. I didn't notice any tracks/switches that allowed you to get trains running in the other direction. I put a 'crossover' in a yard where two main lines came close together (like "D" in your plan) and disguised it as just a scenic or operational siding then, as required, a reverse loop track when trains are run right through it. Dave
Sorry to rain on your design parade ppuin Dude. But now you can design some more. Andre, What about moving the engine house, I think thats what it is, to the other side of the peninsula. You could get longer yard tracks and possibly a passing siding along the main. I keep looking at your space and it seems that you are down to the age old dilemma of more track or more space for structures. I'm doing the same thing with my N scale layout.
