Guys, I have been through a couple of iterations of this plan myself, but want to post it on here for some critique as I am fairly new to layout design and operation. I have gone for 33mm track centres as we already have the double track set which has 33mm centres and therefore also requires #4 turnouts to maintain the track centres. The layout will be operated by my 2 boys, aged 10 and 8 and myself. It will be a combination of freight and passenger operations. I am going to wire it for both DC and DCC so the kids can utilise the kato controllers while I will use my powercab when I am operating. The layout is 12' 4" long by 5' 4 inches wide narrowing to 4' 3" at the right hand side. I am undecided as to the industries we will model at the moment, but have included the locations. Feel free to make any constructive criticism you feel is merited. Alan
5x12 is a huge slab of a layout. Consider what you will do when something derails in the middle of the layout, how you are going to have to crawl all over the thing to even get the track laid, etc. Consider using a hollow core door, and from there expanding with a second one.
If you really want to stick with that size, consider keeping the middle open like this plan. I'm no layout design expert, but I do know that this will be a much more operation and maintenance friendly design. The other advantage of this plan is that it allows huge curves. The one I used in the plan is about a 22 inch with a foot of straight section in between.
Thanks for the feedback. I had looked at a cut out in the centre, but as I have 360 degree access to the layout, I had discounted it. I will look at it again, although 8*2 seems a big cutout (although it does have it's merits in that it is 16sq ft less to scenic!!
Jeff, What are the elevations where the track crosses over tracks? Do you know what the incline will be?
Paul The clearance is around 40mm at the first crossover (which i know is slightly tight), with the second crossover closer to 50mm. I have been looking at extending the curve of the double track as i was concerned regarding the clearance. The double track is at a constant elevation of around 75mm all round. I believe the incline to be 5% which is a little steeper than I would like, i would prefer it to be a maximum of 4%, but I need to test that out, It is based on my rough calculations. Alan
Paul, looking at it again there is an easy solution which I missed, which is to incline the crossovers slightly, which will increase the clearance and reduce the grade on the cross under. Doh!! I was so focused on the 75mm constant height round that curve that I missed the obvious.
Alan it looks like an AnyRail trackplan? if so, could you attach the .any file? I think with a little tweaking you have quite a workable plan thanks for sharing Gary
I only have the demo version of AnyRail so I can't edit you plan, sorry, but here's my thoughts & suggestions: I think you can compress it down without really losing anything and shave at least a foot off each dimension. That will make reaching things a lot easier, especially for short 8 and 10 year old arms! The biggest issue I see are the grades for the crossover, as others have mentioned. I'd rework that corner, perhaps taking the 3rd track and going off and around the outside of the dual track curve, rather than cutting under it. You can still have bridges for scenery, just make them over a river or a road. How much of this double track do you already have? Are you just trying to use as much of it as possible? I ask because I notice many of your yards are 4 tracks, when you could probably get by just fine with only 3 tracks. I can envision the yard where the "barge" is being an inter-model transfer yard, but a 4 track car ferry float is massive! On the long industrial spurs (lower left upper right) you have a run around but also a short stub end track. I don't think you really need that stub end track (save yourself having to buy some switches). A little bit of scenery between the tracks and the edge of the layout does great things for the look of a layout, but too much means you are blocking your view and risk damaging scenery when you have to reach over all of it. Are you going to do anything as a view block in the center? even a basic backdrop will break up the racetrack look of the large double track oval.
You have a lot of space used for things that don't really help either your track plan or your layout accessibility. Why so much space dedicated to the town? It adds an extra foot to your reach into the center of the layout. And You have a lot of "water" space -- you could flop the car ferry tracks to RH turnouts to bring that yard closer to the main and shrink the "water" to just wide enough to hold the car ferry. Then you have the option of bringing that edge in, otherwise you're going to have a very long reach to the barge yard to throw switches or uncouple cars there. Or keep the width and move your double track main closer to the layout edge with a wider radius curve on the LH side. If you're set on using the curve track you have you can widen the curve by putting a short section of straight track in the center of it. Don't know why you have double track spurs to the industries, but if you split the tracks into two separate spurs and have them go in separate directions you could add industries to the new single spurs.
Thanks for the feedback so far guys. Lots of info to digest so far. I will make some changes and re-post in the next couple of days.
I think I would try to adjust the car float location to make it closer to the edge and move it more to the left in order to make the tracks leading to it a bit longer for more car storage. Also, you don't want the car float to block the entrance to the water inside the track where the barge is located. As for reducing the size of the town in front of the tracks, it would make it easier to reach the trains beyond the tracks. Bill in FtL
