Skip to main content

Howdy all,

I'm currently working on a store front Christmas display and will be fundamentally done by Labor Day. It is a simple oval loop. I've only been in the world's greatest hobby for less than two years and am eager to get going with command and control, multiple engines running at the same time, and multiple levels. So, among other things, I've started my first attempt at track design software. Went with SCARM and purchased the license. I found an interesting layout for me to get my feet wet with switching and command and control. (file attached, hope that does not break any rules. Sorry if it does.) The file is built with Lionel O tubular. To date I've invested in Atlas. Not sure why, just like it. I'm thinking of switching to Ross and/or Gargraves because the switches seem very popular, and their products look really cool.

Question: is there a way to substitute in different track brands to an existing design or is it a one piece at a time effort? Alternatively, if I can confirm there are same size curves, switches, and other track in both brands as compared to the Lionel tubular design, can I just assume they will work? (yes, make fun of the word assume...).

Thanks in advance. OGR Rocks! - Bill

Attachments

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Bill, no, there's no way to bulk convert one brand track to another, mostly because while some tracks appear to match, they often don't. For example, tubular O-27 curves are 14.18" long while Atlas are only 13.50". As a result, the geometry doesn't match, see photo. The shorter ones are Atlas, both with an 5.5" straight in the center. Brands often don't have the same sizes. Atlas has O-27 curves, but not switches, their smallest is O-36, GarGraves is O-32 and Ross is O-31. Even where they offer the same size switch, the footprints don't match. And that isn't the only problem with. Atlas has a lot of the same size straights, but GarGraves and Ross don't. GarGraves is even worse because their shortest straight is 6.20" and there other straights don't come close. The end result is they have to be cut, IF you want a close match to whatever design you're trying to match. You're only recourse is to use the design as template and try to get as close as possible. I played around a bit and it's going to be pretty hard to match those short zig zags, the location of the 90 degree crossover and the location of some of the switches, especially if you're limited to the same size space. If you're just trying to learn SCARM, it'll actually be a pretty good exercise if you don't limit the size of the space, but concentrate on just getting the overall design close.

test

Attachments

Images (1)
  • test

Thanks Dave. I like the idea of modeling something close enough. I don’t have my heart set on anything specific. I’m doing this to learn C&C and operations, graduating from simple loop and one transformer. It feels like going from a row boat to a hydrofoil.
I appreciate the offer to help with follow-up questions. Learning SCARM will help me with future budget battles with my financial controller (a.k.a. My wife).

Thanks again. OGR Rocks! -Bill

Bill,

Going from one track system to another has its own unique problems as Dave has said.  Anyway I like a challenge.  My preferred track system is Atlas.  Here is my Atlas O36 version of your design.  As you can see it almost fits in your space.

Lionel_Classic_O-gauge_L-shaped_Layout-v1 JWC V1

The complex track arrangement of the Y and crossover limits the flexibility in the design in order fit the space.  You can scrap a little space by selectively using sections O27 curves.  Every thing is O36 switches and curves.  SCARM in the tools drop down Tools tab has a Parts List option.  There are no cut pieces in the design.

I moved all your scenery to Layer 1.

Jan

Attachments

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×