That last one is a real candidate! Very nice design and the only compromise is the radius...but I feel that will be necessary given the constraints. This will rule out any large steam obviously...even a 4-8-2...which I had problems with on a 13.75" radius. Thank you sir...I will give that serious consideration. Man...I really need to work on my layout design skills.
Just for kicks I added some commercial structures and roads. Whatever is brown along the green backdrop can be kitbashed or scratched.
Paulus, For the bottom design...I am assuming the turnouts are #7 and the radius on the far right is 12.5"? What are the radii on the left side?
hi Geck, yes i used the same standards R min= 12,50 (13,75 0n the outer track) #7 switches and a 3 ft trainlength. Paul
It could be it's just me, but on a lot of layout plans I get the "we are going round and round" feeling. What is obviously missing on the small plans is some hidden storage/layover tracks commonly known as staging. Is that even a possiblity in small plans other than a passing siding behind a backdrop? Yes it is, and without the complications of a helix - mind you a helix also adds extra running distance - but here goes my suggestion with a separate "Staging" layer. since the tr4ains are limited in length staging doesn't need to be really large either. Having reasonably easy access to "things" should help. Three tracks should be enough and if desired one could add a turnout/track going to a fiddle connection. BTW this version will have that "mandatory coal mine" :desire: plus a few bridges. The visible part will be coming up.
And here now the visible trackage. The town South of the river grew organically i.e. every time a new industry moved there they needed a rail siding - otherwise they wouldn't move there! At a higher elevation North of the river sits the coal mine. Both locations have one thing in common: very interesting to do all the switching without blocking the mainline and the other rail traffic. How does it all fit together? Download a trial copy of AnyRail and check out the different layers of the plan. I'll add more structures a little later
hi gentlemen. Hans, i do think your plan has severe grade issues. Lets us be specific about vertical spacing. Foam or wood sub-road beds will take almost an inch (foam more). The heigth of a N-scale car will be about an inch, unless you want to run high cubes. So 2,5 inch of vertical spacing seems needed. For a bridge 2 inches will do. In an underground staging area some finger space is needed. Having the track 4 inches below the upper level seems a minimum to me. Opinions might differ on this, setting standards is important however. It is making calculations clear. At the very left you have 4 feet distance (maybe 5) to get under the mine. This will result in a 5% grade, not counting vertical easements nor compensation for curves. The other entry to the underground world has to go down under the river, till you arrive under the station. The river will be a wee bit lower then your station, so again you have just 5 feet to go for at least 3 inches down. Again a 5% grade, this is pretty steep and again not counting space for vertical easements nor compensation for the pretty small radii.(11,25 inch) And a staging area just 3 inches below the tracks above, is rather tight. What i like in this plan is dividing the layout in two parts by the river. Using the curve at the right keeps the length of the passing siding sufficient for long trains. Alas the grades will make running those trains impossible. Hans, when you go back to your first drawing, it might be possible to have both tracks at the back, going down to underground staging. The length from the "tunnel entry" to the staging area is about 17 feet. With a grade of almost 3% you can have the staging area 5 inches below the visible part of the layout. (this time compensated for vertical easements and curves) If you like i will provide you a drawing. The long grades along the back should be concealed, so you end up with long very hard to reach stretches of tracks. Not my piece of cake. BTW the OP should be much more involved in this "dispute". The best start would be a drawing of the room, with doors and other obstacles. One of his first remarks was about adding a removable staging area. Could be a clever way, avoiding severe grades. We often seem to forget that N scale is tricky. Subroad beds and fingerspace are the same as in HO. The distance on trackplans much shorter however; the result is obvious. Smile Paul
Thanks for the plan Hans...very nice, but Paulus makes good points. I didn't have grades for a reason...there just isn't enough room to avoid steep grades. Staging will have to be "offsite" in the form of cartridges...ala the Ian Rice method. Here is my room layout, 10x12, and there is much less space here than represented in a 2 dimensional drawing. The box just outside the room to the right is a closet...and it is FULL! The gray boxes are obstacles that cannot be moved. The entry way is on the bottom left corner and there is a tall window adjacent (left) to that. So you can see the limited area I have. I am not fixated on an L shape either, but it was a way to incorporate much of the things I wanted (larger turnouts, larger radii, etc.) The reason for the L was I do not have room for something to protrude into the middle of the room.
Oh...should mention the gray box on the left is actually a foot closer to the door than indicated...thus given me six feet of space beyond it to the far wall.
Hi Paul, Thanks for your comments! It would be touch and go in one place, the grade separation RH to RH in the top LH corner (coal mine) is as posted 1.75". A quick check and adjustment can bring that to 2.2". The main would have a 2.9% grade, the mine spur would climb at 3.3%. The old "lets split the difference" trick, in this case even practical since "going to the mine" is seldom a water level affair. I've driven through PA and WV a few times (in my previous life). The RH to RH in the staging portion is 2.6". since all tracks can be easily reached from the edge that should be "doable" add to that a cutout in the subroadbed of the staging level and things should work Minimal vertical clearances in strategic places can be done by using different materials at those points i.e place the mine tracks on a piece of plexi or PVC. Many ways to skin a cat. The other trick that is a bit outside the box: suspend staging from the visible portion i.e. have standoffs that work in reverse One thing I always do when building projects for customers and/or layouts for myself: staging or anything that isn't plain and easy is test run 'til the cows come home. Presently I'm in the process to rebuild my complete staging yard in the garage. Since the commercial materials - I'm modeling in 1:22.5 - weren't up to my standards, turnouts and track are now being handlaid. @ geck, Yep, that's the usual case in the different fora, as the plans move along there are (usually) a few "BTW" items that show up. :doh: Don't worry I'm used to that, when I do this for customers they get to complete our Layout Design Questionaire. In the fora I just prpose a few things and take it from there. :angel:
One more kick at the can. As suggested by Paulus I added staging to the "City" version. :neutral:And that's about it from my end on this project.
I haven't posted any other plans...due to other commitments. I will keep plugging away...thanks for the suggestions everyone. I'll post a final plan when I have one.
