Video added! 9.5 X 15 "L" Layout: Fastrack and Atlas O

Here is the latest version with trains on the rails (created using AnyRail, then imported into TrainPlayer, adding trains locomotives and cars, and then exported as an image).

Ken,

This is developing nicely!

The overpass at 5:30 or in the SSE, which then leads to a switch, appears to be a short run with a steep slope. How will you handle that?

Moonman, I am not sure that I follow.   The trestle is an overpass at 5".   The track running left from the overpass is at a grade of 3% to the turnout that makes a crossover at the far left.    The track running from the trestle going up (north) and curving to the left is at a 2% grade to the turnout at the very top making the crossover.

The track running underneath the trestle is at 0" and climbs up both directions at 2% to reach the turnouts that are at 2" elevation of the left hand side platform.

Ken-Oscale posted:

Moonman, I am not sure that I follow.   The trestle is an overpass at 5".   The track running left from the overpass is at a grade of 3% to the turnout that makes a crossover at the far left.    The track running from the trestle going up (north) and curving to the left is at a 2% grade to the turnout at the very top making the crossover.

The track running underneath the trestle is at 0" and climbs up both directions at 2% to reach the turnouts that are at 2" elevation of the left hand side platform.

The colored text is the area. I usually set the overpasses higher. That was the cause of my concern.

You handled that nicely with an acceptable slope.

Hi Ken, I like this plan. I wonder how much bigger it would be using 0-72 and 0-80 mains with 0-54 middle section? I would be using Gargraves track and Ross switches.

Doug

Hi Doug, I would estimate probably 12" more in either direction.   

Reaching the interior of each platform becomes more of a problem.

Updated structures and town.   With three trains running and a diesel switcher poised at the Yard Tower.

An updated pic with subtle scenic details, and one slight track adjustment for a more gradual curve coming off the turnout in the lower right between the trestle and power plant.

A short video of trains running using TrainPlayer.   Recorded using Powerpoint screen recorder.

nice job, very creative use of space proving you don't need a monster basement to enjoy o scale.

After consideration, and measuring more locos and cars, I thought to raise the elevated trestle from 5" to 5.5" above the level of the right-hand table-top.   I added the positions for the trestle bents, and in two places I thought there should be a steel support that has to span over the lower track - which needed additional clearance for trains beneath.   This increased the grades leading to the trestle but did not affect other grades.   The left hand grade to the trestle over the pond is now at 3.7".   The right side grade over the broad curves is now 2.5%.   

Overpass is a big consideration.  With two levels I eventually went with 7" for tunnel clearance. Grades were over 3%. 

Another look.

Scenery work to accommodate tunnel portals.

The other grade.

Tunnel clearance.

Mike CT, very nice layout!   I see that you have the girders supporting the track.   For the plan that I am working with, the idea is just to have the trestle bents, like a toy train layout with the Lionel trestle set.   Your support structure adds about 1.75" beneath the track, certainly a more realistic look than the simpler idea from Lionel's Super-O track plan.   Thanks very much for your pictures and measurements!

You're welcome.  Simplest structure added, as you noted, about 1.75" to 2"   Best wishes with your layout.  Mike CT    I did the deck bridge twice, second one, a more detailed commercial purchase.

I decided to drop in a #5 cross-over using Atlas-O to replace the pair of O-72 turnouts making the cross-over between the mainlines at the top of the track plan.   Thus replacing the O-72 reverse curve made with the two O-72 turnouts (which is a mild reverse curve) with a high-speed #5 cross-over.   I used Atlas transition joiners (6095) coupled with a 5" Fastrack transition section (612040-2) to make the joint between the two types of track.

Pull the pins from the Fastrack transition track so that the Atlas transition joiners will plug in.  Ballast the Altas-O to match the Fastrack profile and ballast color.   Perhaps Lionel needs to make Fastrack #5 turnouts.

There are two other sections of Atlas-O:  the elevated trestle over the yard, and a short section of O-81 on a trestle on pilings over the pond.   Neither of these sections require ballasting, and the transition between the two types of track seems natural here, and adds visual interest.

With scenery embellishments: 

AnyRail calculates this as 1.35 scale miles of track.

I have a finished 12 X 20 room in the basement that will become available when I retire around 2 years from now.   Here is how the layout might look flipped and rotated for my space.

This version I extended the upper left loop and yard tracks about 5 inches.   And rounded corners so they don't catch you as you move around the layout.   And you can see I am exploring the possibility of an extension for an around the room shelf run of O-72 minimum.

Here is the layout plan flipped for my room in the basement, with two expansion turnouts to make an around-the-room O-72 run.   With the lower track and yard extended about 5" from the earlier versions.

I found room for an On30 loop of track to display/run Bachmann On30 trains.   Just to add some additional fun and things to look at while running the O trains.   My first take on this:   The On30 parallels the elevated O section and runs on the same trestle bents with the O-gauge above the yard.   Height is 5.5" above the yard to 7.5" elevation through the mountain above the tunnels.   Using Peco On30 code 100 flex track.  The tightest radius is about 20" through the mountain area.

A short video of four trains running:

I thought the yard needed a locomotive escape track & runaround track.

Ken, i'm impressed with this layout period. All ingredients for fun and pleasure. Really interested in doing a version of this in my space. You are terrific at what you do here. My space available allows me freedom of footprint but as you stated, still need to be able to work on everything. Your thoughts and direction would be welcomed. Thanks

Jay, you can email me at kenhoganson1@gmail.com.

Some thoughts about the design process that I use to come up with my track plans (which then evolve to layout plans):

The process begins first with decisions on the design: for instance what is the intention, what are the minimum diameters allowed, are easements desired, and of course the general plan/idea for the layout.  For this design:

1. A larger version of the "1957 catalog layout".   I did not care about the most inside O-36 loop around the town, that did not interest me for operation or train running.   So an "L" shaped layout, a bit more that two 5X9s linked.
2. With a minimum O-54 route (Fastrack O-60 and Atlas-O O-54 trestle)
3. A minimum O-48 for the inside route if possible (was not sure if some O-36 would be needed, turned out - not needed)
4. Easements whenever possible
5. What maximum grades allowed, I wanted 3% or less.
6. Two independent mainlines, so that one can sit back and watch two or three trains run, and enjoy
7. Connections between the mainlines
8. Multiple train running options (in this case switching trains between routes, reversing trains, the inside loop-to-loop route)
9. A small yard
10. A bit of an engine servicing facility
11. Some spurs for industry
12. A town, a tunnel, a trestle, a stream
13. No reverse curves on the main (allowed for accessing spurs or in the yard)
14. Space for my large Menard's structures
15. Allow for easy reach (30") and access, as much as possible
16. I decided to try for minimal (or zero) Fastrack roadbed trimming.  Trimming is not hard to do, but I decided to avoid this.  Consequently the track centers between the parallel routes are larger than the trains require.

The actual process is tedious, with much trial and error and experimenting with different arrangements to build a smooth design.  Then also much inspection and consideration to remove any reverse curves (only allowed in switching spurs) and minimize the number of track sections, and to ease (widen) curves when possible.   Naturally, I start with the mainlines first, building toward the configuration desired.  Then while optimizing I add spurs and the yard.   I go through multiple versions, saving each version in case I have to backtrack, or reuse part of an earlier design idea.

.   

One of the key ideas in this design was having the two main platforms at different levels.   This allowed the grades overall to be minimized, with the inside route dropping as it goes from the left platform to right, and the outside route climbing.

Another key idea was the connecting section of track that makes the loop around the yard also a reverse curve (running through the woods in the layout plan).   I had to work to make the grade on this short section acceptable.

Perhaps a third was the broadening of the curves on the upper right and creating the access area, so that more of the layout will be within reach.

I was able to make one of the cross-overs part of the curves and easements (O-72), but the other crossover (unless using the Atlas-O turnouts) of two O-72 turnouts has a reverse curve in the connection between turnouts.   Should be OK for O-54 and lesser locomotives and cars.

The gentle indentation of the bottom parallel tracks toward the center and mountain, was not a design requirement, but is a personal preference of mine.   I think these curves are beautiful and help with reach toward the center of the layout.  These tracks could have run straight and parallel along straight benchwork.

I believe there is but one place where Fastrack plastic roadbed needs to be trimmed - on the lower left the two O-72 turnouts with one leading to a spur, and one crossing over to the inside route.   There is no 1 3/8" section between these two turnouts.

Your approach to these designs is what I would think most folks look for. I know I do, many of what I consider natural features and realism. I too like to see several trains at once on graceful curves thru natural settings. I would like to see an expansion of this layout positioned as you show into a possible 20 x 15 corner but trying to keep the depth as workable as it can be. Thoughts ?

Thanks Jay, I am interested in your expansion idea, but have other projects ahead of me at the moment.   Any other design preferences that you have, beyond simply expanding the design?  (a simple expansion might be something I can think about in between activities).  -Ken

Ken,

   Of all the different layouts you have designed and engineered this engineering is the best.  I never alter any of your great design work, in this case I would add the appropriate Command Control FasTrack switches to your layout design engineering, simply because I love the FTCC Switches so much.  You would however need to allow for transitioning in and out of the FTCC Switches in some area's of this incredible layout.

As usual incredible layout Engineering design work by a Master Layout Designer!

All the best

PCRR/Dave

I do like the layout as is but in expanding maybe grade issues won't be a problem and could possibly use a girder plate style with Atlas over the yard set up rather than trestle bents for a more dated approach, and Double engine shed (MTH) with possible expanded yard. Passenger Stations etc. Will be using Fastrack, tunnels, bridges, water is all terrific, not as many operating features, although not ruling them out. Again thanks, keep up the great work !!!!!

Ken

You have really done a fine job with this plan. I keep going over every inch of it and it gets better each time.

Hi Jay, following up.   Can you send details about the kind of expansion you are considering?  kenhoganson1@gmail.com

Ken, great design! Any chance I could get the track plans for this in AnyRail or any other format you have?

Thank you!

  -- Dave Swindell