Hello!:teeth: : I was sitting around looking at the Model Railroader series on the Black River Junction, thinking that it might make a nice, fairly simple layout, that had some of the features that I was looking for. Then I downloaded their N scale plan and thought, gee, this thing is WAY bigger in N scale than it should be. So, I decided to try to design a layout that captured the compactness of the HO scale layout. I then clicked on my trusty Atlas RTS software and started working. Now it's a week later, and I think I have finally gotten to a stopping point on the design. (See pic, sorry for the small size!) The main outer line is all going to be Atlas Code 80 Flex instead of the sections shown in a radius of 12.5", except for the area around the 4 way crossing which is 11". The inner passing loop will be flex also, at 11" radius. A lot of the long straight sections will also be flex as well, so as not to have too many little joints. Intended for use on all the turnouts is the Atlas Custom Line standard ones. When I get all the track purchased, construction will most likely start in the next week. Sincerely, J.W. Hall N Scaler
It's an ok plan. I think with that kind of space you could do a whole lot more. Even if all you do is alter their plan, you could create lots more interest. I would be tempted to combine the staging tracks into one yard connected to the mainline by a wye. The long passing siding is merely a false double mainline, so why not make it a double mainline so you can roll two trains at once. There are so many really nice plans out there, and that one seems kind of limiting.
Hi All! : Here is another plan that is similar, except for the fact the C&O does not actually interchange with the NYC tracks but just crosses them. However there are interesting switching opportunities for each railroad, plus retains the staging tracks at the lower left. Sincerely, J.W. Hall Designing a Layout
Both plans look good. I think the biggest problem with both is that those staging tracks look kind of short. It could be an optical illusion caued by the way the track renders in the drawing. I would keep planning and see what works for you.
Hi!:teeth: : Thanks for the comments on my plan! When you mentioned having a double track main line the little light bulb came on :lightbulb: and I thought "Gee I really DID want a two track main line!" The former NYC tracks that ran through my home town in Indiana were two track. The staging tracks I really didn't plan well, just kind of threw some track down there to suggest where they would be in relationship to the main layout. I have at least 3' length for the staging, or more if necessary. Do you think that would be enough? Kind of new to the idea of staging, but it really seems to make great sense to stage up the trains first, not just plunk them down on the layout track like I did on my former layout. Thanks again for the constructive comments:shade: . Sincerely, J.W. Hall N Scaler
J.W.: Make the shortest yard or staging track as long as your longest train. I'm sure there are dozens of differing opinions about the ideal length of the longest train for this layout. I'd suggest keeping the length under the length of the longest passing siding on the layout, which will be about 3 feet, give or take a car length. I like the idea of a yard serving both directions on the main. Such an arrangement will give you lots of operating options, but might be a space hog: If you start your yard throat at 15 inches in front of the layout, by the time you have turnouts for 4 tracks, your shortest track will start at about 3 feet from the front of the layout. Can you extend a 1 foot wide yard for 6 feet from the front edge of the layout down from the left hand side? I'll try to post a pic later tonight.
J.W.: Here's a variation on your plan that has a yard extending down the left side. I made the crossover in the lower right of the loops start in the curve so there is less chance that the S-curve of the crossover plus the S-curve from the crossover to the right side yard lead will derail cars. The S-curve in the upper left of the loops might be a little more reliable if you shift it a half foot to the right...maybe to start right next to (to the left of) the turnout to Industries 1, 2, and 4. This will also give you better access and visibility to the crossover instead of hiding it behind Industry 1. I made some fairly significant changes in the industries. I tried to keep industries sort of near where you had them, but I took out some of the switchback moves because they take so much room and (for some people...like me) stop being "interesting" and start becoming an irritation relatively quickly. I've numbered the industries. Industry 1 is served by the track next to it. Industry 2 is moved back a little to allow you clear access to uncouple, re-rail, and otherwise handle the car and clean the track by Industry 1. The track between Ind 2 and Industry 3 is the switchback track for Industry 4 that you could (if you have to) use for Industry 2. I put another switch in to serve 2 tracks at Industry 4. I put 2 tracks at Ind 4 so you could spot a car on one track and pull a 2nd car from the other without having to use the first car as a "handle" that would complicate the switchback move due to the length of 1 loco plus 2 cars being too long if you have a car at Industry 2. I served Industry 3 with 2 tracks and made it accessible when a train is going counter-clockwise. (Industry 4 is also only able to be served when the train is going counterclockwise.) I added industry 5 with 2 tracks so you could have Industries 1,2, and 5 all served by trains moving clockwise. The number of cars served should be balanced with the traffic moving the other direction from Industries 4 and 3. Notice that I tried to keep the tracks in front of the buildings so you could have easier access to them from the inside of the L. I'm not 100% satisfied with the track arrangement in the yard...I'd like to play with straightening out the throat so there are no S-curves in the ladder. Eliminating them is a little less prototypical but I believe what you will gain in reliability of drilling cars into the classification ladder tracks is well worth it. To do this, there may need to be a 12.5 inch radius coming into the yard from the right instead of 19 inch radius. I assume you've set the depth of benchwork under the loops at 30 inches to keep the reach to the back turnouts reasonable. Is there any possibility of extending the layout to the right so the loop area is longer than 5 feet? How about the yard length...any chance of more than 8.5 feet (2.5 for the loops plus 6.0 for the yard)? Just some ideas...Take what you like.
J.W.: Here's a drawing showing the yard tracks without any S-curves in the classification ladder. All moves to/from the arrival/departure track, the 3 classification tracks, and the caboose track can be made without pushing or pulling through an S-curve, although it will be necessary to go through the curved portions of 2 turnouts, one right after the other, both bending the same way. Since traffic will be moving slower in the yard, this should not be problematic. Locos will need to make some S-curves, but...again...yard speeds will minimize problems. To straighten the yard throat, I had to make the yard area about 20 inches deep instead of 18 ,as the first plan showed.
