Advice on my first layout (updated)

A few changes in Red for you to consider. Nothing major, just longer sidings and an extra yard track.

Thanks, Dave.  I appreciate that.  

I took Dave's changes and removed the "S-curves".  All the inside yard switches and curves are O60 since that is the controlling diameter of the Gold loop.  There's room form some industrial spurs on the left portion of the Gold loop.

Jan

Beachhead:

Just one comment about radius. If you have plans to run the newer big steamers then O72 would be your minimum curve. The typical new diesels run on O54 curves. There are still a lot of diesels (for example the smaller switchers) and semi-scale steamers (Lion Chief I think) that will take O36.

So your radius will depend on what type of locos you plan on running.

Joe

PS - I like Jan's changes. Getting rid of S curves wherever possible is always a good thing.
You may also want to read up on super elevation for your outside curves. I am trying 1/16 and a 1/8 styrene strips my layout to see which looks better.

Jan, I appreciate you working on that. I'm still under the weather and just couldn't concentrate any more last night. I wanted to do what you did, but things weren't working and it was getting too frustrating. I particularly like how you changed the yard.

Dave,

Thanks for the nice words.  Hope you are better soon.

Jan

First of all, thanks for the feedback.  I was at a funeral all day and I was bummed out.  It was nice to come home and see this.  Joe, such are the limitations of the space.  I included the map of the room just in case someone out there saw a better way to arrange things.  Since Dave and Jan worked off that original plan, I'm taking that as tacit approval that I'm headed in the right direction.  In any case, I really really doubt that big steamers are in my future (or any steamers for that matter).  I'm a diesel man but I do want the widest curves I can get away with.

Jan, I'm digging these changes.  I see you flattened things out.  Do you think it's too ambitious to take on that elevated loop in my first layout?  I wasn't wedded to the idea anyway.  I just thought it would look cool and allow me to squeeze in another siding.  I think your plan is more sensible.  I could always change things later.  I'm really happy for the help guys.

To be honest, the elevations in the original wouldn't have worked because they needed to be 6" before the yellow track met the green track. Since Jan has separated those tracks, I don't think they still need to be 6", so here's a version with the light green tracks at 6" and the purple tracks at 3.2 and 3.5% grades.

Cool.  So now the elevated section is just for looks, right?  If so, maybe I can lower it to 4".  By doing that I could have a longer elevated run.  Four inches is enough for that train to be visible as it cruises along the back of the layout.  Do you think that's a good idea?

I just checked center-to-center distances and it looks like there's ~4.5" on the left side, but only ~3.5" along the top, so you might have to adjust the spacing from the wall and then the spacing between the upper tacks. A 4" elevation is what I plan to do (though 2" would probably work) on my layout to get just enough height so I'll be able to see both trains as they pass each other.

You are welcome. 

I didn't purposely eliminate the grade... it just happened as I was rearranging track sections.  Grades and bridges are a focal point of visitors,  You have the room for comfortable grades and could cut the NE corner of the layout. I can't do grades, but I sure that they're greater than 2%.

Jan

I've seen some pretty crazy grades on O27 type layouts.  I don't want this layout to look like that.  But would 3.5% look god awful?  I guess that would be for me to decide.  That bridge would be cool though.  If I cut that whole corner like that (not just the bridge) I could use that back corner for another access.  I see that Dave's "Latest Layout Plan" makes that shape.

IMHO, the problem with grades is not so much that they're steep and maybe don't look realistic, it's more that if you're not running engines that automatically slow down/maintain speed when going downhill, you have to constantly adjust the throttle or they run away on you and that doesn't look realistic. Some people like to work the throttle, others don't. Plus you can often hide the steepness by adding a tunnel, trees, buildings, etc. A steep grade also means you have to limit the length of trains to whatever the engines can pull up the grade. The MTH graduated trestle set is designed to rise 6 1/2" with a 4.7% grade. I personally prefer filled in hills over trestles, but that's just me. Either way, you can set up a test section of track at some point to see how much your engines can pull up what degree grades and make your decision based on the results. I haven't decided if I'm going to do the crossover or not because that section will be on a removable platform for access to a water heater. Even if I don't do the crossover, I'll have a 4%-5% rise.

Okay, food for thought.  Thanks again for checking out/amending this plan.  I needed a little confirmation that I was headed down the right path.