Published track plans don't match products available


Tim

New Member
Yesterday I finally began to implement the layout I have decided to build. I spent the past two weeks studying the classic text "101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders" by Linn H. Westcott. I spent countless hours online looking at pictures of others' layouts and a few track plans. And I downloaded the Atlas free track planning software and spent some time with that. It's been a harrowing few weeks.

But I finally decided what I was going to create. My space is 6' x 5' 6", and the largest practical use of that is an L shaped table those dimensions and 24" wide. Even in N scale, that puts some limits on what I can build. I wanted a significant length of mainline, but I have never been impressed by trains running in a circle, so a folded oval was not on my list of things to consider. Even when flipped, twisted, and elevated for over/under operation, they're still just circles.

The 24" width means in practical terms that curves are limited to about 10-11" radius, with 10" being a better choice since it leaves some room at the edges (don't want rolling stock falling off the edge!).

I wanted realistic operation, with several yards for assembling trains and/or breaking them into smaller consists. I wanted enough room for some simple industries to justify the railroad's existence, and I specifically wanted a railroad that would run short trains using small locomotives – it makes the layout look larger.

I considered several of the layouts in the book and after a lot of sketching how to bend layouts around my L shaped table, settled on number 47, aka Cerro Azul RR. There's a pic below of the layout as it appears in the “101 Track Plans” book.

It's a switchback mountain railroad, originally designed so it would fit within 6' x 30” (the squares are 6” square in N scale). I'll have to play a bit with the main yards, since my table is only 24” wide, but after adding in the extra mainline to each leg of the switchback up the side of the mountain, I'll wind up with about 50-60 feet of mainline. That's enough to make it take some time for my train to move from the main yard all the way to the top of the mountain. It takes a total of 4 separate direction changes to climb to the top.

The highest point of track will be only about 6-7” above the base (divide all marked dimensions by 2), although I could easily increase that, and over a 50' distance, that's a very gentle grade (about 1%, which is not very steep, even for prototype lines). Even my little Plymouth Diesel (Bachman) can handle 4-6 cars on that grade.

So I laid down a layer of 1” foam sheet to provide a work surface and deaden sound, then laid brown kraft paper over that and taped it in place. Time to draw the track and fill in details in the center where the plan has to bend 90 degrees. First, I marked off the 6” x 6” grid so I could begin transferring information to the table. And quickly discovered I had more work to do first.

I am going to use Peco code 55 throughout, but don't have a stock of turnouts yet. So there was no way to lay actual pieces in place to determine best locations. I did trace the outline of the one turnout I have (a Universal Fine – medium radius left hand) and tried using that as a template to draw the locations on the paper. Unfortunately, it won't work. I can't match things up with the locations shown on the book's drawing. Points of Intersection (PI) and other things marked on the plan simply don't line up. I kept finding myself using more space on my table than the drawing indicated I should have.

About the time I realized that, I discovered a post here that mentioned Loy's Trains site, so I took a break and visited them. Turns out they are retiring, and worse, they have already sold out of Peco stuff. Too bad, as the prices posted looked really good. Then I clicked on a few pics of the individual Peco parts. Wow! They shot each picture with a ruler alongside the part! Inspiration hit. I quickly downloaded and saved every one of the Code 55 pictures, turnouts in all sizes, crossovers, double and single slip switches, crossovers, etc. Now I had a way to address my problem.

So I opened my word processor and imported the picture of the right hand small radius turnout and printed a copy. I compared the ruler in the picture with my real ruler and discovered they didn't match. No problem, I had pretty much expected that. A few minutes with my calculator showed me how much to scale up the picture to make it life size. Once I printed that and checked it, I copied that picture several times, placing them together on one page. A page break and then I pasted it again. I used my program's capability to flip a picture so now I had an image of a right hand turnout at the top of the 2nd page. Copied that one to the clipboard and added in a few more to fill the 2nd page.

Now, I have a 2 page document that when printed gives me exact size images of the parts I need to place on my layout. A little effort with scissors and I can now “paste up” my layout using proper images of the real parts I will be using. No necessity to try to guess where the PI is, and no hoping that my turnouts match up with the dimensions Linn used when he wrote the book.

It's a simple idea. I have every one of the images I downloaded, and if anyone would like to have them to use as I have, PM me and I'll send the file. It will be less than 1MB total size, and I have a total of 17 images. Before Loy's is gone completely, it might be a good idea for others to do the same exercise I did, selecting whatever materials they need (Atlas, whatever). Hope this wasn't too long, and I welcome comments of course.

Tim
 
Great job, Tim. You happened to pick one of the oldest layout books in existence so I'm not surprised that things don't match up, especially switches. Peco wasn't even around when that that track plan was drawn. Even Atlas has made slight dimensional changes to their track but any code 55 track wasn't around whan that track plan was made. Seems like you've come up with an elegant solution to overcome the problem. I'll be interested to see how things go as you start building.
 
Good luck with that.

I tried duplicating one of the plans in that book and found that I had to use almost 50% more space to pull it off than the plan used. Your system should work fine.

The other free design package, XtraCAD has Peco turnouts as part of their library. If you can't get your layout to work in your space, I'd suggest using that software next time. The Atlas software has more limitations than just limiting you to Atlas track geometry.
 
I tried duplicating one of the plans in that book and found that I had to use almost 50% more space to pull it off than the plan used. Your system should work fine.

That's one of the complaints I had for years with the original book. It was published back when there was actually very little in the way of track components available commercially. So even though the switch angles are correct for frog number, that's about it. No length or overall width or even a brand of switch was used to illustrate the majority of the book. Just a switch type. In many places to get the track into place/space as illustrated, it would have to be handlain.

I think I still have my original copies from the early 1960's around here. Choice of scales in it were O-S-HO-TT.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders" is so old, did it even offer suggestions for N scale layouts? If not, the conversion process alone might have caused the "inflation" problem you're experiencing...
 
"101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders" is so old, did it even offer suggestions for N scale layouts? If not, the conversion process alone might have caused the "inflation" problem you're experiencing...

The later editions, reprints, had an N scale conversion factor in them, but when it was first published N scale wasn't around. A few guys were working on a new scale called OOO, but at the time there was only one supplier, and no one was sure the scale would catch on. It wasn't until Arnold Rapido got heavily involved with the commercial development, IIRC, that OOO morphed into the N scale we have now.

Also keep in mind that what commercial turnouts and such that were available, all had different geometry except for the frog angle, and at times, depending on brand, that too was/is suspect. Ex. an Atlas #4 turnout actually is a #4.5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:



Back
Top