Ntrak/t-trak

Obviously, you don't know T-TRAK.
The tracks end right at the edges of the modules.
The modules interconnect using only the Unijoiners, with no extra joiner tracks required.
As mentioned, above, the T-TRAK standard has options for double length (and double depth) modules.

 

All, I am a big supporter of t-trak due to medical conditions that make handling an n-trak module difficult if not impossible. I currently have 57 finished t-trak modules, 13 of which are used in my current 2 HCD home layout, 9 of which are used in the current club t-trak layout, and the rest available for use at show layouts. I have 14 single length, 21 double length, 4 triple length, 5 single corners, 4 double corners, 3 inside corners, and 2 return loops. Oh yes, almost forgot, 2 junctions. The t-trak layout is bound only by how many of the t-trak modules we can carry to a show, at times, it is larger than the n-trak layout. Having fun and speaking to the public at shows, trying to convince others that model railroading is fun and can be done in a limited space is of importance to the future of the hobby. When people discover that a complete layout can be set up on a kitchen table, the light goes on that they too can join this hobby. All you need to start out is a HCD, 2 double corners/4 single corners; and a triple or double/single or 3 singles per side and off you go on your journey to a great hobby. Not everyone can have the space for a layout with 18" or larger curves, long straights, etc. All of life is a series of compromises, the purchase of a home, a car, clothing, tv's, and your hobby and how you enjoy it. If it works for you, it fulfills its function. This is a hobby and you must decide what works for you. later, Craig

 

Not to mention triple and quad length modules, as long as the length is a multiple of a single. You can also run a scene over multiple modules, my 'Whereford' Santa Fe depot module is over two doubles with a single in the middle and my yard has a double for the throat at each end and straight track doubles and singles added between depending on how long I want it. I'm planning an intermodel yard that will stretch over five doubles. On the subject of yards, umpteen joiner tracks to fit and put in?, nope just click the modules together.

BTW there is no reason you cannot use any track you want on the module as long as you have a short piece of Unitrack at the ends as an interface.

 

We usually spend more time deciding how to arrange the modules than we do actually setting them up.

If we have corners left over we set up four with a couple of modules between them to show how you can have a layout in a small space and still be part of a large setup. For my eventual home layout I am planning large radius corners, most likely built to HO T-TRAK size but with N scale track so I can set up HO modules on the same custom built benchwork I am planning to put the modules at a higher viewing height with storage space for modules beneath. BTW for those who didn't know there was HO T-TRAK have a look at our Australian site I linked to earlier, there are also Z and T scale standards.

We've run 100+ car trains so N-TRAK doesn't have the monopoly on long trains either.

 

Contrary to Point353's experience, after building a more prototype looking set of modules and proving that both ME track and hand-laid turnouts both looked exponentially better and operated more reliably than Atlas 80, as well as winning the MR photo contest with a shot of this very scene, and attracting a large group of N-scale modelers who were dumbfounded by the realistic look of the ME code 70 flex and the hand-laid code 70 turnouts, the entire Utah N-Railers Ntrak club apostasized from Ntrak and went with a different, more realistic looking and operating standard. This was all in the middle to late 80's through the middle 90's and the only code 55 that was available was Railcraft, with no RTR turnouts whatsoever, so we HAD to learn to roll our own.

The point being that there were many observers and modelers at the meets who were extremely attracted by the more prototypical look of the ME code 70 track...which had nothing to do with the rail height, and everything to do with the ties.

No "agenda" here. Just stating facts. Nowadays Atlas 55 and ME 55 track just looks more prototypical than code 80.

As to the DD40AX's. These are not Bachmann engines. These are Overland Brass engines, and would not run on anything less than a 20" radius. If you wanted the cars to stay on the tracks that were being pulled, then 24" radius was the minimum.

Just for giggles, here's another view of the scene that shows the vertical and horizontal dimensions better. Ntrak modules once again, but not "tabletop"...L-girder with risers and splined Masonite subroadbed, with integral folding legs, two 6 footers with no joiner tracks in the middle (another innovation in mid-1980 that the Ntrakers all said was impossible...NOT).



Of note is the "photogenic curve" that these covered wagons are on, which has a radius of over 100". I don't believe that Kato Unitrack has any sectional curves which come within the same universe as this...in other words, it is very limiting, whereas plain old Atlas 80 flex will allow this, and could conceivably be integrated into T-Track modules and hybrid modules to achieve larger curves.

I have a good buddy who attends the shows and sets up a very impressive T-Track layout, gets lots of compliments and has done some very interesting scenery on it. He can set it up quickly and tear it down way before my little group has our custom modular layout down and gone. Yup, T-Track has some real benefits, but it also has limitations...just as every modular set of standards have...including my own. He and I have lunch together and discuss our differences and what we like about each others' concepts...no prob whatsoever.

Several of us here have elected to go a different way than T-Track because our preferences are way different than T-Trackers and we are not willing to accept the compromises that compliance to its standards forces us to adhere to. However, if you're willing to accept the standards, then some pretty impressive modeling can be done within T-Tracks strictures. However, for "Big Railroading", Ntrak, even with its crazy 3 track mainlines, low height and module dividers (which I never never used) allows much larger scenes and more prototypical curves considering its 24" minimum mainline radius. Them's the facts.

Then, there are those of us who wanted something other than Ntrak, and have elected to develop our own modular standards. FUN!!! Ain't this hobby GREAT??? I really love the diversity.

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

Well and good if you choose to deviate from the NTRAK standard, but you tradeoff the interoperability that is a cornerstone of the standard. Your group becomes exclusive rather than inclusive. Adhering to the standard ensures that you can tote your module to an NTRAK meet anywhere in the world and know that it can be incorporated into the layout, regardless of whether it was built last month or last century.

 

A modular layout where the modules don't comform to the published standards whether they be N-TRAK, T-TRAK or whatever-TRAK is technically not modular but sectional.

There was recently a large T-TRAK layout at a model train show in Stuttgart, Germany with modules from around the world, including a couple from Australia.

 

Well you made me look it up and guess what? I can turn your comment around and say that, "Obviously you don't know T-trak" either because the tracks do not end "right at the edges of the modules". According to www.t-trak.org the tracks extend 1/32" beyond the module edges. See here:

http://www.t-trak.org/easy,step4-5.html

 

If only I could build T-Trak with Atlas code 55 track as I like the look of the 2 track over NTrak's 3 tracks(there's always that standards thing).......I just can't bring myself to use Kato Unitrack. It's quality track, but the tie spacing and uniform ballast don't work for me. Not knocking the track or those who use it. Thought about using code 80 flex and using the adapters at the end. But no, ever since I used 55 on the home layout I've been bitten by that bug. I changed a lot of wheel sets from pizza cutters. I don't expect the world to change for me though(be nice huh??). Maybe once I get proficient at hand laying track I'll build a few to hook up with the others.

 

I was at a show last Sunday with my clubs T-Trak layout and we were talking about how many more trains we could run if we had a third track. How much longer will it be before three becomes the norm with T-Trak?

 

I just went to the Greenberg show in Edison NJ. The Jersey Central N-Trak group was there and they added a 4th track set back a few more inches. Their president was telling me it was because they like to be able to run more trains ... makes sense to me. There were 3 N-Trak clubs there and a few of those other larger scale clubs.

Regardless of the scale, everyone I spoke to was having a great time.

 

My favorite part of attending shows is the modular layouts. On one hand I love all of the different modules. On the other? I can't stand the abrupt 'transitions' to another scene. Oh well, I can't have it both ways.



While I know what N-Trak looks like I'm not sure if there was any other type at the 'Springfield, MA" show.

 

Fine, we can be as fussy about the precise dimensions as you want.

The comparison being drawn was to NTRAK, where the ends of the tracks are set back from the edges of the modules and additional interconnecting tracks are required - as opposed to T-TRAK, which needs no extra connecting tracks between modules (because the track actually overhangs the edges of the modules by 5/128" at each end).

 

Hahaha!! Verrrry irreverent! I like it...

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

 

I really hate people knocking down other modeling methods. Get off the high horse and just benefit that other folks are being creative and promoting our hobby as that aids us all in the long run...

The way I look at all of this is not about what standard works, nor operational capabilities, nor what looks best, nor how many trains I can run, blah blah blah.

To me it's about the community, modeling, MY interests and promoting all of them. I model Ntrak because it's the club I joined. I model TTrak as it's a part of the club and there are times I can't take Ntrak to shows and still need a creative outlet on a smaller scale. I'm starting a FreemoN set so that I can use C55, want to join another local club, and for some more prototypical style set ups.

 

As I've said, there is no reason you can't use any track you like on your modules with just a short piece of Unitrack at the interface. Many use Peco track within the module to save money ar make use of the greater variety of turnouts. I haven't seen a module yet with Atlas C55 but I am thinking of using it if I ever get around to building my branch line terminal module.

There's this thing out now called DCC. We run up to a dozen trains on our two tracks often with one or two operators doing a bit of switching.

 

We use that as one of the selling points of T-TRAK, and N-TRAK when we used it. You don't have to model the same prototype as everyone else in the club or use the same scenery material (or have the same scenery skills). Some of our modules fit in well together but it's mostly by coincedence than by design. We have American, Japanese and British prototype modules happily co-existing together and to be honest 95% of the public at train shows can't tell one from the other anyway.

For my use at home I am planning a set of American and another of Japanese prototype modules that each fit together but that I can swap every now and again when I want a change. Two layouts in the same space effctively, and then I might build a set of HO modules and then On30.....