Yet another newbie

[StarikIgolkin]

Chip, the Hogwart's layout looks very cool, and the stock is very impressive. The "Draco" car almost cost me a keyboard


OK, I may have gotten a little carried away with RTS today. Here're two potential layouts:
1. This one is based on Great N-Pire Railroad from the book by Kent Wood and Ric LaBan. I made some minor changes, but mostly I used it to practice with RTS.

What I don't like here is that the industry is pretty much combined with the yard, except for one line off the elevated loop, and whatever town industry the small town loop serves.

2. This one is my interpretation of the advice given here, it's influenced by a few of the contest designs from your site. Note - the outer lower part of the oval is not the main line, it's the line that runs through the port. The inner lower part of the oval is the main line, and it runs on bridges above the port, it has no intersections with industry lines, I just didn't draw upper and lower levels separately.

What do you think?

 

[SpaceMouse]

So far, the second one is the best you've done. There are some minor problems with, but I'll address a more macro problem.

Once again, the RTS software is there to sell track. It is good at sectional track, but that limits your ability to run track where you need to. The software simply uses more space than it needs to in each instance.

Download XtrkCAD. http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage

It is simply a far superior program. You will need to run the tutorial and it will take you 4 hours plus. Once you learn the program, you open yourself up to a range of possibilities that do not exist with RTS.

The plan you drew with with RTS will take about half the space with XtrkCAD.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

I'll look at XtrkCAD tonight, thanks.

Does the "half the space" statement still hold if I'm planning to mostly use sectional track? (after few days on eBay I probably have more Atlas sectional track than this layout needs )

Though I have some Bachmann switches that seem to have better starting curve, and that alone can probably save some space, so it would be nice to be able to plan the layout with software that supports more than just Atlas.

 

[UP2CSX]

Sectional track doesn't take up any more space than any other kind of track, it's just that the Atlas software appropriates more space to it than it really will need. XtrkCAD will give you a more realistic view of were the track will really fit.

I like the second layout better also. One thing you're going to hate is that four track, stub end yard. You need at least one crossover track in the yard or your switcher will get trapped when trying to make up trains. Even better would be to redesign that area so the yard is double ended, e.g., both ends of the yard would have a track that connects back to the mainline

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Took me a while due to some real life interference.
Chip, Jim, I see what you meant about RTS now - XTrkCad is MUCH better.

Jim, I didn't figure out how to make the yard double-ended, but I did make some (hopefully improving) changes to it, based on information here.

Note: Main line goes above port industry line with elevation difference of 1.85''. I made sure the grade is 2 degrees or less everywhere.

So, what do you think?

 

[UP2CSX]

Looks much better now that you have a longer tail track and a runaround track. You'll be surprised at how much easier and more protypical these changes make one you're actualy doing switch.

The twon and park locations don't seem to make sense though. I'm assuming you're going to have a depot on the top portion of the layout in the area pf the passing siding so that's usually where you'll find a town. I'm not sure you have enough space for a park bigger than a postage stamp on a layout that size. I have a little park next to my depot and that seems to be about right for a town my size.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Thanks, Jim

Maybe "Park" was poor choice of words, I meant that this would be more of nature scenery than urban or industrial. I've added some color to show where I thought area boundaries would be.
What do you think?
I'm uncomfortable about two things here - that a/d track is in park area, and that the yard lead and runaround are in town area, but just couldn't think of how else to lay the areas.

 

[UP2CSX]

I guess that's what I'm saying. The yard lead and other tracks are going to impinge way too much on the town area. Having the A/D track running through the back alleys of a downtown area wouldn't be a problem at all and would add some interest. You can add a lot of trees and foliage to the area below your tail track, maybe even a small line of hills made out of foam. That will give you both a natural look and act as a view block from the port.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Jim, I think I understand what you suggest - is this it?

I've re-designated one of the industries as quarry - that would work better with the hills and give bigger nature area.
Does this look ok?

And another question - where in the yard is a good place for magnetic uncoupler(s)?

 

[SpaceMouse]

Hi,

I see a couple of things.

The lead on the runaround in the center of your town is so short even the smallest engine couldn't make the move.

Your switches, while they work, are the most aesthetically ugly switch you could pick.

I think what you need to do is get the measurements of the buildings. RTS doesn't have them in the program. Almost every other track program does. Then create scale replicas of the buildings so you can see how they work. Right now I think you are being a little optimistic as to what kinds of things will fit.

You specify a quarry, but there is no way you could fit a quarry in that space.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Just when I thought I was getting close

Chip, thanks for the response, I have a couple of questions:

Your switches, while they work, are the most aesthetically ugly switch you could pick.

I saw a lot of sites mention Caboose Industries switches, which look real nice, but they seem manual - is there a way to combine them with some sort of remote? Is everyone doing DCC control for switches these days, or is it just an electric switch, and what is a good one?
I have a bunch of Atlas remote switches, which is why I used them on the layout. Would you suggest selling them and getting something else (what?), or just separate the switch from the remote, and use some under the table remote?

I think what you need to do is get the measurements of the buildings. RTS doesn't have them in the program. Almost every other track program does. Then create scale replicas of the buildings so you can see how they work. Right now I think you are being a little optimistic as to what kinds of things will fit.

OK, I'll see how best to fix the lead and will start working on the roads and buildings.

You specify a quarry, but there is no way you could fit a quarry in that space.

Maybe switch places between mine and quarry?
Is there another industry that could be in small hills?

 

[SpaceMouse]

Just when I thought I was getting close

Chip, thanks for the response, I have a couple of questions:


I saw a lot of sites mention Caboose Industries switches, which look real nice, but they seem manual - is there a way to combine them with some sort of remote? Is everyone doing DCC control for switches these days, or is it just an electric switch, and what is a good one?

Yes they are manual. I know they don't seem as cool, but all the major layouts I operate on use them. They are cheap, reliable, and they are more prototypical than the electric--and a lot less hassle.

I have a bunch of Atlas remote switches, which is why I used them on the layout. Would you suggest selling them and getting something else (what?), or just separate the switch from the remote, and use some under the table remote?

Or use the Caboose. On my current layout, I can't use them because all my turnouts are in streets. So I use Hump Yard Switches. Still manual.

If you must have electrically operated think in terms of the Tortoise.

OK, I'll see how best to fix the lead and will start working on the roads and buildings.


Maybe switch places between mine and quarry?
Is there another industry that could be in small hills?

I think you will find that area is just too small for any industry. The rail to the back cuts off any chance for credibility. The two spurs in the upper two corners are pretty tight as well.

Don't worry, this stuff always takes a while to sort out. I still think you need to commit to learning XtrkCAD. It is a time investment, but your layout is a bigger one.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Yes they are manual. I know they don't seem as cool, but all the major layouts I operate on use them. They are cheap, reliable, and they are more prototypical than the electric--and a lot less hassle.

So, you have to manually flip them? - that seems to be a lot of flipping for switching work. They are not remote mechanical, right?

 

[SpaceMouse]

So, you have to manually flip them? - that seems to be a lot of flipping for switching work. They are not remote mechanical, right?

They can be. Actually, you'll find the manually flipping the switches is not that hard. The thing is, if you are going to be dropping cars, you have to be within reach of the turnout anyway to uncouple the cars.

Try for laughs and giggles asking who uses mechanical switches and who uses electric. I think you'll find the vets go manual.

 

[UP2CSX]

You can use the Atlas switch machines and mount them under your layout. Atlas has a kit to do this. Chip is saying that the switch machines sitting next to the track look ugly and detract from your scenery. Tortise undertable switch machines are another, but more expensive, option.

Don't discard the idea of ground throws too early. Caboose Hobbies make some very prototypical looking ground throws with switch stands that give you a visual indication of the switch direction. If you have a walk around throttle, you can hand throw the switches, just like the real world, as the trains move around the layout. I have all ground throws except for three powered switches that are too far to reach without knocking things over. I have more problems with derailments at those switches than any others since all I do is press a button and forget it. Even though they have red and green indicators, I'm usually looking at the layout and not the switch panel so I forget I threw the switch to the passing siding and now the mainline train comes through and it's time to stop everything and spend 10 minutes getting all the motive power and cars back on the track.

I agree with Chip about the quarry and those two short stub end tracks at the top of the layout. None of them will hold more than one car and they will just detract from you ability to add hills and scenery to the layout. Those two rear corners will be very important for blending your backdrop into the surrounding scenery and are perfect places to make hills with cuts for the railroad. Also, each switch is going to add $15 -$25 to the cost of your layout, depending on what brand you ultimately use. That can add up in a hurry and is usually the biggest track expense on any layout. There's no point in spending money on switches that don't really add anything to your operation when you could spend the savings on scenery or rolling stock.

I'd also have the main part of town end above the tail track and have the rest of it be industrial and an "other side of the tracks" area. I also agree with Chip about finding a way to extend the end of the tail track beyond the runaround by at least one locomotive length. You cam move the whole yard to left by about six inches to give yourself more room.

Don't despair. Your are doing a really good job at working on all the kinks before you build. I sure wish the internet had been around when I built my first layout.

 

[StarikIgolkin]

They can be. Actually, you'll find the manually flipping the switches is not that hard. The thing is, if you are going to be dropping cars, you have to be within reach of the turnout anyway to uncouple the cars.

Don't discard the idea of ground throws too early. Caboose Hobbies make some very prototypical looking ground throws with switch stands that give you a visual indication of the switch direction. If you have a walk around throttle, you can hand throw the switches, just like the real world, as the trains move around the layout. I have all ground throws except for three powered switches that are too far to reach without knocking things over. I have more problems with derailments at those switches than any others since all I do is press a button and forget it. Even though they have red and green indicators, I'm usually looking at the layout and not the switch panel so I forget I threw the switch to the passing siding and now the mainline train comes through and it's time to stop everything and spend 10 minutes getting all the motive power and cars back on the track.

Got it. OK, going manual then, now I have a bunch of remote switches to sell. eBay, here I come
I looked at Caboose site, they have some very nice looking throws, I really like the way their high level stand looks.

I agree with Chip about the quarry and those two short stub end tracks at the top of the layout. None of them will hold more than one car and they will just detract from you ability to add hills and scenery to the layout. Those two rear corners will be very important for blending your backdrop into the surrounding scenery and are perfect places to make hills with cuts for the railroad. Also, each switch is going to add $15 -$25 to the cost of your layout, depending on what brand you ultimately use. That can add up in a hurry and is usually the biggest track expense on any layout. There's no point in spending money on switches that don't really add anything to your operation when you could spend the savings on scenery or rolling stock.

OK, the quarry line is gone. The two short stubs in rear corners were supposed to represent interchange. I don't have a problem taking them out. Gone.

I'd also have the main part of town end above the tail track and have the rest of it be industrial and an "other side of the tracks" area. I also agree with Chip about finding a way to extend the end of the tail track beyond the runaround by at least one locomotive length. You cam move the whole yard to left by about six inches to give yourself more room.

Hmm, I solved it by shortening the runaround by 2 1/2". I also moved the yard down a few inches to get more space for town, now that it moved up.

Don't despair. Your are doing a really good job at working on all the kinks before you build. I sure wish the internet had been around when I built my first layout.

Thanks, Chip, Jim, you guys are great, don't know what I would do without your help.

So, here's the next version, without buildings yet, but with all other changes (didn't find ground switches in XtrkCad, so I just replaced remote with custom line):

 

[UP2CSX]

Looks a lot better to me. With both the tunnel and mine in the top left, that space behind the mainline will be put to good use making some hills. Now it's time to start planning roads and buildings.

 

[Rotorranch]

Just simply out of curiousity, since you are already at 3x6, why not make it a 4x8? It would give you more space to work out some of the issues discussed in this thread.

It could even be built as two 2x8 or 4x4 "modules" to allow for future expansion/modification.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Rotor

 

[StarikIgolkin]

Just simply out of curiousity, since you are already at 3x6, why not make it a 4x8?

Because I want to stay married?

More seriously, because 3x6 I can put in the corner, and while it's not easy, I'm tall enough to reach over 3 feet. 4x8 will not fit into the space I have available for it, and will need more space as it will need clearance on all sides to walk around it. Even 3x6 is tough, the section of the wall that I can put this to is exactly 6'.

 

[SpaceMouse]

I suggest a test before you commit to 36" wide. Put a paper cup on the edge of a table and put another paper cup 30" away form the edge. Now put a pen on the table on the other side of the second cup. Now pick it up without knocking over either cup. Keep moving the cup closer to you until you can pick up the pen without knocking over the cup.

You can reduce the plan you have to 30" and not lose a thing. If you don't, I guarantee you'll regret it.

Now that you have the passing siding on top of the layout, you don't need the runaround on the yard lead at all. Use the space for engine service--fuel sand , etc.

Some of the sidings on the lower end of the layout don't look like they have any room for structures.