Skip to main content

Went back to the drawing board recently, after attempting to design a mid-sized island layout with wider curves, and decided that many of you are right and that an around the walls approach has its advantageous.

With any luck, I may actually be able to build this over the next year or two. I have access to a roughly 15x15 space (the space is a little larger, so I could fit a 15x15 maximum layout footprint) in the basement, with walls on two sides, and open access on the other two. A large area in the middle would be left open. I should be able to reach everything. Maybe liftout bridges or a hinge for access from the left side. I am able to duck under, so that is an option, too.

The outer main is O84, and the inner main O72. The yard is O60. I think there are options here. Could go even wider on the curves, or keep both mains at O72 to save a little space and try to reconfigure the yard so that:

1) The arrival/departure track/yard lead/drill track combo is O72, allowing any train to pull in and arrive/depart. I suppose this track also serves as a passing siding off the inner main.

2) Provide an O72 pathway to a track or two where O72 engines can be parked. I don't have any, yet, but that may change.

3) Depending on the main curvature and benchwork, there is room to insert some industry sidings around the layout, too.

I intend to mostly operate freight trains, with diesel power. I am sure O72 steam will make it into the collection eventually, but I see most of my purchases and operating going diesel. Other than just running/watching trains, I think it could be fun to simulate some operations by having a road freight arrive/depart from the yard, while a switcher can move cars around, build a train, or run a local to serve industries.

I designed the yard from Ken's trackplan book and some other forum resources. I think it would be functional for assembling or disassembling a train without impacting the mains, allowing switching to happen as an activity while trains run. These would be freight operations - not really enough room for passenger trains. Maybe it is too ambitious, but I like the idea of trying to work in a yard and I think I have just enough space for it. Enough space for some engine storage as well, which will be mostly diesel power.

The outer main could be slightly elevated, reaching 2-3" in the top right, with a ~2% grade on either side. It would not be a huge scenery layout, but there is room to tuck a mountain or tunnels somewhere, and perhaps a narrow town/city scene at the top of the layout.

I'm no carpenter, but I would be able to handle the benchwork for this. It would be open grid with plywood, and maybe homasote. I would likely try to assemble in modules, so that I could dissassemble and reuse if say, in 5 years, we gut and finish the basement...

I put this together in FasTrack, but it could be redesigned, and probably better, with Atlas or Ross/GarGraves. Cost to build, using FasTrack, would be roughly $2,500 based on buying everything new, at sale/discount prices from dealers. Could probably shave some of that off by purchasing some of the track used. Probably another $1,000 for lumber, wire, and related layout building supplies. Countless hours of time that I don't have to build it.

Anyway, appreciate the feedback as always. I think I am getting closer to a style/idea for the next build.

Two screenshots attached...these are largely the same, but the yard lead/drill track/etc is a bit different. Trying to find the most efficient/effective setup for that.

15x14_basement_yard_1

15x14_basement_yard_2

Attachments

Images (2)
  • 15x14_basement_yard_1
  • 15x14_basement_yard_2
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Your best option is the lower one above because with the two crossovers in the lower section, trains running counterclockwise (which is the only direction they can leave your yard) can both enter and exit your outer main.

As far as suggestions for improvement, run that stub siding on the left up to the top and connect it to your inner oval just like your existing yard lead on the other side.  Then curve 2 of your longest yard tracks toward that new lead and connect them to it with two more switches.  Now your yard will have 2 run-through tracks and several stub tracks, and trains can enter and exit your yard from both directions.

Even if you only curve and connect one of your yard tracks on the left, trains can now enter and exit the yard in both directions.  However, you will need a pair of crossovers at the top of the plan (with the ones at the bottom remaining) that will allow your new clockwise running trains easy access to your outer main.

Finally, the choice of curve diameters within your available space is always a problem.  Using O60 in the yard will restrict / eliminate the use of any engines actually requiring O72 curves, but using O72 curves in the yard will lessen yard storage space.  Since you are planning to build modularly, I would recommend using the larger curves for now with the intent to increase storage space later (when more room is available) by merely inserting a new straight section into the existing yard.

Good luck and have fun!

Chuck

I like the second plan with the added switches and yard lead mentioned above. I'd also spread out the industries around the back of the layout too. Adds to the operational variety by needing to clear a main to allow a local through. Think about shortening the length of the ovals so that sidings could be along the wall too. Lot's of great building flats available that you could put a loading dock on. Good use of the 2 corners too. A rural town with street running freights would look nice.

Modular construction is a good idea too. You could also add bump outs to the interior for industrial sidings. Think about what rolling stock you have and what industries they will serve for design help.

Taking passenger service out of the equation reduces the complexity of the track plan but the wide curves would allow you to take a set off the shelf to run them if you want.

Bob

@PRR1950 posted:

Your best option is the lower one above because with the two crossovers in the lower section, trains running counterclockwise (which is the only direction they can leave your yard) can both enter and exit your outer main.

As far as suggestions for improvement, run that stub siding on the left up to the top and connect it to your inner oval just like your existing yard lead on the other side.  Then curve 2 of your longest yard tracks toward that new lead and connect them to it with two more switches.  Now your yard will have 2 run-through tracks and several stub tracks, and trains can enter and exit your yard from both directions.

Thanks - I will take a look at that. Trains can enter from both directions now, but only onto the A/D track. Your suggestion would create another run-through option and make it easier to pull a train into the yard, cutoff the road power, and send them onto a storage track, I think.

Even if you only curve and connect one of your yard tracks on the left, trains can now enter and exit the yard in both directions.  However, you will need a pair of crossovers at the top of the plan (with the ones at the bottom remaining) that will allow your new clockwise running trains easy access to your outer main.

Finally, the choice of curve diameters within your available space is always a problem.  Using O60 in the yard will restrict / eliminate the use of any engines actually requiring O72 curves, but using O72 curves in the yard will lessen yard storage space.  Since you are planning to build modularly, I would recommend using the larger curves for now with the intent to increase storage space later (when more room is available) by merely inserting a new straight section into the existing yard.

Yes - I am going to redesign the A/D track, at a minimum, to be O72 so that any train can at least pull into the yard. O72 on the sidings and stubs will be less critical since diesel power will "operate" the yard. But, it would still be good to have an O72 engine storage track somewhere in the mix.

Good luck and have fun!

Chuck

Thanks for the feedback!

@necrails posted:

Two thoughts, lower plan provides a slightly longer passing siding or storage track when not working the yard, longer is better.

The crossover at the bottom of the plan will be out of reach when the inevitable derailment occurs, consider relocating to any of the other three sides.

Thanks - the bottom of the layout will have access. The top, and right side, are against the walls.

@RSJB18 posted:

I like the second plan with the added switches and yard lead mentioned above. I'd also spread out the industries around the back of the layout too. Adds to the operational variety by needing to clear a main to allow a local through. Think about shortening the length of the ovals so that sidings could be along the wall too. Lot's of great building flats available that you could put a loading dock on. Good use of the 2 corners too. A rural town with street running freights would look nice.

Modular construction is a good idea too. You could also add bump outs to the interior for industrial sidings. Think about what rolling stock you have and what industries they will serve for design help.

Taking passenger service out of the equation reduces the complexity of the track plan but the wide curves would allow you to take a set off the shelf to run them if you want.

Bob

Thanks Bob. That's a good suggestion about trying to squeeze some industry spurs in along the top. Agree about the bump outs as well. There is room to add one or two on the inside for a scene or industry. That's the plan with the passenger trains - can always plop them on the layout to run them as desired.

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Ste 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×