5x10 & 5x12 Atlas-O 2-Train Layout

I started with the intent to try for a 5x9 layout, but the track almost by not quite fit, too many compromises and the grade became steeper, so I ended up with a 5x10.   I might look at an extension to make 5x12, and see what that does.

Still to add a couple of streams, and perhaps a waterfall.

Subjectively, the plan has a satisfying balance between track-work, scenery, and structures.

Ken, nice design,  If you were to make this layout a 5×12 what is the best way to stretch it out.  I am trying to figure out a area on our main layout,  that is 6.5 by 17ft. Something like this would fit in the center nicely.  Also how hard is it to make your plan 3D like you have done in the past.  It helps in determining the grade for me.

Thanks for posting this,  it has given me a few ideas. Nick T. 

Great track plan. I really like the running variety with the 045 loop.

Should be a fun layout.

Don

Ken your efforts always amaze me.  But I think this one would work better in 5x12.  The right lobe of the inner loop gains 6" (which doesn't seem like enough vertical clearance, taking into account thickness of the sub-roadbed) in about 141".  That's an AVERAGE grade of 4.2%.  If the transitions to and from level are eased, the maximum grade would be closer to 5%, which is Lionel trestle set territory.  With rubber tires and speed control you can get away with murder, but for me, 5x9 is a single-level layout.

Also, you've obviously mastered AnyRail.  SCARM is now highly evolved, and capable of producing beautiful 3D renderings.  The software is more stable than RR-Track (support is MUCH better!) and you can actually playtest in 3D with up to three locos moving at once.  I showed one of my layout creations to a friend, and he said, "Why build anything.  I would have a great time just running trains in the simulation!"  Just saying!!

Great plan! 

Ken, that's really nice.  I think I could easily adopt it to a 6' x 12' table with MTH ScaleTrax (or any other track system too for that matter, not a big deal).  Not so much enlarging the track footprint as simply enlarging the table itself for more room around the outside.  Better safety margin and more scenery opportunities. 

Was this track plan created with AnyRail or SCARM? Licensed or freeware version?

Thanks,

Rick

Rick posted:

Was this track plan created with AnyRail or SCARM? Licensed or freeware version?

Thanks,

Rick

 

Rick, I created this plan with AnyRail.   The licensed and freeware versions are the same, EXCEPT that the free version is limited to creating a plan of 50 track sections.   The free version will open plans created with the licensed version that exceed 50 sections, but will not allow adding additional sections.   The license is not expensive, and AnyRail has a forum that is monitored by the designer/creator, who has responded to my posts within 24 hours with thoughtful and informative replies.

Nothing wrong with SCARM, but for me, AnyRail is faster in putting together plans, and with FasTrack there is a lot of time spent in finding small section combinations and different track diameters to make connections.   So any time advantage pays off with FasTrack.   I have played with SCARM a good bit, and have been working with it more recently.   SCARM has much better 3D.   

As discussed at length in another thread, the designer of AnyRail actually purchased batches of Lionel Fastrack and measured the track sections, and included the "as manufactured" FasTrack section lengths in AnyRail.  As an example, Lionel's 4.5" section is actually 4.55".   That small variation seems minor, unless multiple sections are connected:  it doesn't take long for the variations to add up to 1/8" or more, which was explored in that other thread.   So for FasTrack, with ridged plastic ballasted sections and no flextrack, AnyRail is more accurate than SCARM.  Manufacturing variations in other track types with flextrack are less important, this only pertains to Lionel's FasTrack.

In AnyRail I have a set of terrain textures that I use for layers in elevation.   And I have a set of structures I can pull from.   I think that the learning curve is much easier with AnyRail, which was a factor for me, as my time to play with layouts is limited.

It took 8 minutes to revise the plan for 5x12, track, terrain, framework, trees, structures.   Including the time to create this image, edit it, and post it here: another 2 minutes, or 10 minutes.

With grades analyzed by the software, and my markings in blue.   The main grade is 3.7%, with a 2% elevation change easement section at the bottom, and a 1.5% elevation change easement at the top.   The elevation of the bridges and elevated plateau is raised to 6.5".   There is a 1-1/4" section at the grade changes, from 2% to 3.7%, and from 3.7% to 1.5% to ease the grade change transitions.  Two O54 turnouts are on grade, at either 2% or 1.5%.

Replying to Ted's comment above, in the first 4x10 design, the grade continue through the two sections that I have now made as the grade easements at 1.5% and 2%, so that added length with the shorter elevation (6", now 6.5") made the grade 3.5%.

If I recall correctly, my scale SD60M loco measures less than 3.5" in height, with the addition of 1/2" for roadbed and tie and rail height, that comes to 4".   So 6" is pretty reasonable (no double-stacks), and now 6.5" is nice.  

Excellent creativity, I always enjoy these and your explanations. 

With the added length, I worked in Lionel's animated Freight Station with a platform directly across the track, and the Oil Derrick with "nodding donkey".   With the Cattle Pen, that makes three animated structures.   The rotating beacon could be added on a ridge for a fourth operating accessory.

With one water feature added.

Here is a 3D view try.

My original layout, each block is one foot.   Click on the underlined phrase to link.  

That is very well done - great work shown in the slide show linked!!

Room was a basement level bedroom.   Closet bottom of track diagram.  

Mixed Freight posted:

Ken, that's really nice.  I think I could easily adopt it to a 6' x 12' table with MTH ScaleTrax (or any other track system too for that matter, not a big deal).  Not so much enlarging the track footprint as simply enlarging the table itself for more room around the outside.  Better safety margin and more scenery opportunities. 

Interested in Paul's idea of a large space with a 6" terrain border.  A simple expansion without much effort in detailing terrain around the layout.

Thanks Ken for the 3D pic. very helpful. great work. Nick T.

Ken, thank you for your detailed response.

Rick

Here with a 2" border all around, rather than 6".   Maximum reach to the center is long but perhaps manageable 32".

Ken I'm just getting into doing a layout. Bought some Atlas track yesterday and came upon your plan. Definitely something I would like to do. Is there a parts list that goes along with this? I don't know enough to proceed without one at this point. Thank you

Ken uses track planning CAD software for his designs, and that software will generate a parts list.  I'm not sure which one he uses, but you can acquire either SCARM or AnyRail for free, subject to a piece count limitation while being used.  As long as you know what track brand Ken used, you can duplicate his plan in your software (you might have to do it in "sections" to get the whole plan) and then view a parts list.

I offer this suggestion because Ken has moved on to commercially selling track plan booklets.

Chuck

Thank you. I will have to look him up and see if I can find his book with this layout. It's perfect for my space. Thank you

BUMMER! I bought his book but the layout did not make the book. Ken, Sir I would gladly pay you for the parts list. Meanwhile, I will dig into your book. Thanks

Where / how are Ken's track plans available ???     Thx

He has "published" many directly on this forum, some have appeared in railroad magazines, and I believe 15 have been published in a bound document, but I don't remember by whom or what the name is?  Try searching for either "Ken O- Scale" or "Ken Hoganson" either here or on the internet.

Chuck