Desperately in need of HELP with completing layout design. New to Lionel Fastrack & o gauge

Since you're desperate, I'll try to help.

In looking at the "Missy Delight" track plan you show, it appears that you could expand the "height" of the layout by simply inserting four (4) of the same straight pieces (either 4.5", 5" or 10") in the middle of each of the four O-36 curves to get whatever overall dimension you want.

You should also be able to expand the "width" of the layout to whatever dimension you want by simply inserting an equal number of the same straight pieces (either 4.5", 5" or 10") into the top left middle of the 10" straights and at the bottom where the 1 3/8" or 4.5" straights are already in place.

I don't think it gets any more complicated than that and you would just add those extra pieces to the existing track pieces shown on the track plan.  

By expanding the dimensions of the track you would also allow for longer spurs and could add additional straight pieces to extend the length of the two spurs. You might want to wait until after you've put everything together and then measure as to how much extra length you could add to each spur. Lionel makes an earthen bumper and a lighted bumper and they are different lengths.

Your best bet is to go on their website and they will show the length of each bumper. You could also go on Lionel's website and pull up each of your engines and it will give you the recommended minimum curve for each.

Hope this helps.

Thank you so much Richie.  I really appreciate it.

What are your thoughts about adding the switch on the far right and at the top to expand the outer path?  How should I go about connection those tracks?

When separating the middle loop from the bottom track (by removing the switches) which pieces would I need to purchase that will mimic the same curve that the switches created?

Thanks again.

Is there some give and take with the fastracks?  Meaning, if the software I am using is showing a slight disconnect, can I force it to connect without ruining the integrity of the track?  I just tried recreating the Missy Delight layout and there are two spots that aren't connecting according to the software.

There should be enough give in the tracks at those points to shift them to connect.  That would certainly be the case with regular sectional track.

Thank you Palallin!  I think I just about have the layout complete with allowable give and take in the tracks.  

(I've attached a photo)

Should I consider using a different kind of track other than Fastrack?

I'm not sure putting the additional switches in really does anything for the layout since you already have switches near that section anyway and you can expand the layout in both directions by simply inserting straight pieces into the layout.

If you inserted four 10" straights right in the horizontal middle of the layout (one in each of the four O-36 curved sections) you would expand the layout vertically by 10" and get pretty close to 5' height. Likewise, if you inserted a 10" straight at the top left in between the two 10" straights and also inserted another 10" straight at the bottom left adjacent to the 1 3/8" straight, you would expand the layout width to almost the 9' width you were looking for.

You don't need curved sections to do it. The straights will fit nicely in the middle of the curves and simply widen the curve. Like Palladin said, there is a certain amount of give even in Fastrack that acts as a fudge factor. You can also make custom pieces by cutting with a saw - like a Dremel or mini table saw. You have to re-locate the pins.

Yes- you can use the power switches for sale on E-bay to turn each spur on and off. The down side to them is that you have to physically move to that location (like using a manual turnout switch) to turn it on and off. You can make your own and wire it back to a centrally located panel with an SPDT switch mounted on the panel so you don't have to move to throw the power switches.

If you wanted to separate the loop and eliminate the switches you should be able to replace them with just a curve of the same rating. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe an O-36 curve would swap right in for an O-36 switch. 

Guitarhulk posted:

Should I consider using a different kind of track other than Fastrack?

Track preference is an intently personal choice.  Get some experience with several types, if you can, especially committing to a type for a permanent layout.

Lots of folks swear by FT; some swear at it.  Still, that's true of every system out there.

Anthony,

Take a step back and ask yourself what you want to accomplish with this layout. For example, if you want to run two trains at the same time, this particular layout requires one train to stop and give way to the other. You also have six switches on this small layout which means one or more may not be needed to accomplish your goals. What is your layout size? Consider two loops with sidings?

Eliot

Anthony, I agree with everyone else's advice.  All these fellows are regular contributors here and I value their opinions.  I did just what Pallalin suggested when I switched from HO to O gauge 6 years ago.  I developed my preferences on track type, sold some I didn't like and kept some for different purposes.  Yes, you will be able to flex the Fastrak joints enough to make your latest plan work.

I do want to reiterate the questions Eliot just asked.  As much as I don't do well getting down and back up from the floor any more, I think you should just try some different things on the floor temporarily.  As long as you just buy some extra track sections and no extra switches, you won't have much money in it.  See how the Missy Delight plan works for you.  Then you could do something like Eliot suggests like two loops and sidings.  This may help you get an idea for what you personally want out of a layout.

Richie C. posted:

I'm not sure putting the additional switches in really does anything for the layout since you already have switches near that section anyway and you can expand the layout in both directions by simply inserting straight pieces into the layout.

If you inserted four 10" straights right in the horizontal middle of the layout (one in each of the four O-36 curved sections) you would expand the layout vertically by 10" and get pretty close to 5' height. Likewise, if you inserted a 10" straight at the top left in between the two 10" straights and also inserted another 10" straight at the bottom left adjacent to the 1 3/8" straight, you would expand the layout width to almost the 9' width you were looking for.

You don't need curved sections to do it. The straights will fit nicely in the middle of the curves and simply widen the curve. Like Palladin said, there is a certain amount of give even in Fastrack that acts as a fudge factor. You can also make custom pieces by cutting with a saw - like a Dremel or mini table saw. You have to re-locate the pins.

Yes- you can use the power switches for sale on E-bay to turn each spur on and off. The down side to them is that you have to physically move to that location (like using a manual turnout switch) to turn it on and off. You can make your own and wire it back to a centrally located panel with an SPDT switch mounted on the panel so you don't have to move to throw the power switches.

If you wanted to separate the loop and eliminate the switches you should be able to replace them with just a curve of the same rating. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe an O-36 curve would swap right in for an O-36 switch. 

Thank you.  I am going to to give this a shot.  I really appreciate your help.

Mark Boyce posted:

Anthony, I agree with everyone else's advice.  All these fellows are regular contributors here and I value their opinions.  I did just what Pallalin suggested when I switched from HO to O gauge 6 years ago.  I developed my preferences on track type, sold some I didn't like and kept some for different purposes.  Yes, you will be able to flex the Fastrak joints enough to make your latest plan work.

I do want to reiterate the questions Eliot just asked.  As much as I don't do well getting down and back up from the floor any more, I think you should just try some different things on the floor temporarily.  As long as you just buy some extra track sections and no extra switches, you won't have much money in it.  See how the Missy Delight plan works for you.  Then you could do something like Eliot suggests like two loops and sidings.  This may help you get an idea for what you personally want out of a layout.

Thank you Mark.  That is a great idea.  I will work on a floor layout.  This will also help me determine the size of the custom table I will need to build.  Thanks again!

Scrapiron Scher posted:

Anthony,

Take a step back and ask yourself what you want to accomplish with this layout. For example, if you want to run two trains at the same time, this particular layout requires one train to stop and give way to the other. You also have six switches on this small layout which means one or more may not be needed to accomplish your goals. What is your layout size? Consider two loops with sidings?

Eliot

Thank you Eliot.

palallin posted:

Guitarhulk posted:

Should I consider using a different kind of track other than Fastrack?

Track preference is an intently personal choice.  Get some experience with several types, if you can, especially committing to a type for a permanent layout.

Lots of folks swear by FT; some swear at it.  Still, that's true of every system out there.

That is really funny.  Thank you for the advise.  

palallin posted:

There should be enough give in the tracks at those points to shift them to connect.  That would certainly be the case with regular sectional track.

I disagree.  I've used Fastrack a lot, and that kind of mismatch will cause misery.  It's not that you can't connect the tracks, but they'll continually work themselves apart.

It would be a piece of cake with tubular track, Fastrack doesn't forgive geometry errors very well.

I agree with Gunrunner, those gaps look pretty large.   1/2" mis-alignment or more, it would appear from your diagram.   If you can make the bend at all, you will see gaps in the roadbed, and sections will tend to work loose, and you will have electrical connectivity problems at the joints.  Not fun.

Keep working on it, to try to refine and reduce the gaps. 

I also suggest that you refine the track plan, to reduce the number of not-smooth curves, and reverse-direction curves.   -Ken

Anthony,

I have a "small" 5' X 10' Fastrack layout due to space limitations and basically have two loops and several sidings.  The outside loop is made up of 48" curves while the inner loop uses 36" curves.

I wish that I could have totally eliminated any 36 inch curves and switches as I am very limited as to the engines and rolling stock that will work on my "inside" loop.

If you have any width above 5' available please considering using a wider table.  42", 48", or 60" curves will give you more flexibility than 36" curves.  Keep in mind, however, that you cannot place a 5' or wider table against a wall and reach anything on the wall side.  I built my 5' wide table on casters so that I could move it away from the wall when needed.

Fastrack is easy to use and wire, however, it is loud if not mounted over sound dampening material.

An "inwork" photo of my 5X10 is attached:

Anthony,

Everyone has given you good suggestions.  I'm enclosing a file of possible FasTrak lengths to let you fill gaps.  Just use the measuring tape tool to get the length of the gap; look up the track sections needed; and add them.  Cut a section to fit if necessary.  You'll see quickly if there is a vertical misalignment.

To correct a misalignment you'll need to shift one (or both) track by adding/removing/cutting a straight section from a vertical or diagonal run of track.  If you make a diagonal change, you'll change the length of the gap you're wanting to fill.

I played with your original file.  You're use of different diameter curves made it impossible to complete using a track system that doesn't have a flexible section.  Here's the end result and the file. There are still unconnected track joints, but they are within the ability of the track system to absorb.

Jan

Anthony, Jan did a good job with re-aligning, but he continued one of your design ideas, which I suggest that you look at redoing.   

The two reverse-direction curves circled may cause you some trouble, particularly if your train is routed through both reverse curves.   These curves introduce additional drag, tending to pull at the wheels and flanges.   Fastrack is great, but, you would likely see some derailments going over these two reverse curves, as wheels climb up and over.   Speed dependent, of course.

That's a lot of track for a 5x9.  O scale accessories eat up a LOT of real estate, so you may want to scale back.  What if you want to add EZ Streets?  And you certainly want to leave a little space around the outside edge for any derailments.  

From experience, I went the same route you did, and in the end went back and ripped out most of my switches for two reasons - one, I didn't use them, and two, so I could run prewar w/o issue on my outer loop.  I have an inner loop with some switching capabilities and an elevated track that I am not that crazy about.  

Honestly, I would look at some post war or post war inspired layouts (such as below) and start there (I would eliminate the shared track space at the far double switch if you have the room).  I think you will be happier in the long run with something more simple.  

http://ctt.trains.com/rapid/20...-this-retro-railroad

Montclaire posted:

Honestly, I would look at some post war or post war inspired layouts (such as below) and start there (I would eliminate the shared track space at the far double switch if you have the room).  I think you will be happier in the long run with something more simple.  

http://ctt.trains.com/rapid/20...-this-retro-railroad

Excellent suggestion and I was thinking the same thing as I read through this thread for the first time.

Many of the PW Lionel Dealer Display Layouts (most are 4x8s or 5x9s) are examples of well planned designs that include a couple of loops and are loaded with fun operating accessories, signals, and lights. You can really get a lot into a relatively small space. And these layouts are pretty much turnkey...get the track plan and inventory of track and accessories and build.

HMorgan125 posted:

Anthony,

I have a "small" 5' X 10' Fastrack layout due to space limitations and basically have two loops and several sidings.  The outside loop is made up of 48" curves while the inner loop uses 36" curves.

I wish that I could have totally eliminated any 36 inch curves and switches as I am very limited as to the engines and rolling stock that will work on my "inside" loop.

If you have any width above 5' available please considering using a wider table.  42", 48", or 60" curves will give you more flexibility than 36" curves.  Keep in mind, however, that you cannot place a 5' or wider table against a wall and reach anything on the wall side.  I built my 5' wide table on casters so that I could move it away from the wall when needed.

Fastrack is easy to use and wire, however, it is loud if not mounted over sound dampening material.

An "inwork" photo of my 5X10 is attached:

Thank you for much for this information.  I really appreciate your insight and time.

Jan posted:

Anthony,

Everyone has given you good suggestions.  I'm enclosing a file of possible FasTrak lengths to let you fill gaps.  Just use the measuring tape tool to get the length of the gap; look up the track sections needed; and add them.  Cut a section to fit if necessary.  You'll see quickly if there is a vertical misalignment.

To correct a misalignment you'll need to shift one (or both) track by adding/removing/cutting a straight section from a vertical or diagonal run of track.  If you make a diagonal change, you'll change the length of the gap you're wanting to fill.

I played with your original file.  You're use of different diameter curves made it impossible to complete using a track system that doesn't have a flexible section.  Here's the end result and the file. There are still unconnected track joints, but they are within the ability of the track system to absorb.

Jan

Thank you so much.  This is fantastic.  I am going to keep plugging along and start working my track layout.

Looking through your posts, here's a list of druthers as I see them:

-- Fit on a 9 x 5 or slightly smaller board.
-- Purchase ‘Missy Delight’ track pack layout because it seems cost effective for the switches.
This may be true regardless of the final design. Simply compare the lists of parts in any package to the list of parts you need and go from there.
-- Run 2 trains at once.
-- Park two other trains on the runoffs.
Runoffs, better known as Spurs, are only big enough for an engine and maybe 2 cars.
-- Top runoff would curve under the outer path which will be elevated at that point.
No way that's going to happen. Outer track needs to rise 5" for clearance and that means grades of 9-13%, way too steep.
-- Willing to use other track systems instead of FasTrack, if my engines would be supported and it would make completing this layout easier.
Not sure what you'd gain, you still need to use O36 curves.
-- Should I also consider using multiple power tracks to make sure there is enough juice throughout the layout?
You're going to need to block the spurs and the switches, so you'll need a few power feeds.

Anyway, like someone else suggested, you might want to consider something more simplistic like this:

Anthony, as you are interested in the "Missy's Delight" layout plan with curves that go at different angles and not parallel to the layout surface edges, I though you might be interested in looking at this plan attached.   It has two independent mainlines with two pairs of cross-over turnouts, with reverse loops to change train direction, and the inside route can run as an oval or figure-8.  There are two 90-degree crossings, which adds lots of interest, and of course a hill/tunnel which both mainlines go through.

Depending on the train routes that you choose, you can use the line at the bottom to hold a train while two others run.   Or, if you run both inside and outside as ovals, a third train could then be in the Morton Salt siding, and a fourth on the unused "leg" of the figure-8 past the station.

With all of your trains being Lionchief or Lionchief+, you can wire the entire layout as one, but add power drops at the middle of both curves on each side, and at the center of the two straight tracks at the bottom of the plan.   --Ken

If you choose to elevate the outside loop, starting from the ends of the turnouts, using 2% inclines/grades you can get to 1.5-2" in height.   With 4% grades you can reach 3-4" height.   Using a Fastrack trestle set you can reach 6" in height or so, perhaps with enough length for a short curved bridge in the center.

In case you are interested, the tolerance for making connections is a fine 3/32" everywhere.   This is an excellent standard, pretty close to "perfect", so you will not have problems with operation or electrical connectivity, or visible gaps in the roadbed.

There are no sharp O-31 track sections, the minimum is O-36 with O-36 turnouts.   The outside loop is even wider, at O-48 with O-48 turnouts, so you can run equipment requiring O-42 diameter on the outside loop.

Having just (1+ year ago) gotten back into trains, and for the first time into O Gauge, I have some thoughts:

The advantages of O gauge in my view are big trains, easily handled by young (an old!!) as well, and the ability to revisit our youth.  The bigger cars and locomotives have bigger speakers to make better sound.  The O-Gauge stuff is less "fiddly"- and runs more reliably than HO and N, again my opinion.  Part of the fun (for me) is chasing postwar equipment, repairing, maintaining that old stuff, AND still have the ability to buy NEW Lionel LionChief Plus with handheld control with no DCC system to learn.

Many times, we look at model train magazines, using HO or N scale equipment, and want operation possibilities close to prototypical railroading.  In the end, complicated O Gauge plans in small spaces tend to look "toylike".  But, "toy trains" are fun, too, especially since they remind us of our times as kids. 

But- if we want "realistic" and "model realism", then we have to make compromises to use O gauge/scale.   I think you have to choose.  I decided to do O Gauge as realistic as possible- "model railroading".  I am fortunate to have more space than a 5 X 9.  But maybe some of these ideas will help:

- I used a track layout with a few spurs (2),  but left a lot of room for scenery and buildings, a fun part of the hobby, too. 

- I also raised only the "city" part of the layout, and will only run a trolley up on that section, so I don't need to have steep grades to get up there with the trains.

- I ran the 048/less realistic part of the layout under a mountain, hiding it.

- I am happy to run non- O Scale, compressed, "traditional" equipment, 16" passenger cars, and traditional-sized locomotives.  The times I have bought full O Scale stuff-  I have sold it.

With these compromises, I still can run trains, but also have the fun of scenery and structure building, too.  And visitors are "wowed" by the layout- they don't even notice  "not scale" as long as I don't try and mix in O scale 80' cars and six-axle diesels.

Here is a variation, I often like to curve the spurs on the outside to get just a bit more length.   These are O-60 curves.

HMorgan125 posted:

Anthony,

I have a "small" 5' X 10' Fastrack layout due to space limitations and basically have two loops and several sidings.  The outside loop is made up of 48" curves while the inner loop uses 36" curves.

I wish that I could have totally eliminated any 36 inch curves and switches as I am very limited as to the engines and rolling stock that will work on my "inside" loop.

If you have any width above 5' available please considering using a wider table.  42", 48", or 60" curves will give you more flexibility than 36" curves.  Keep in mind, however, that you cannot place a 5' or wider table against a wall and reach anything on the wall side.  I built my 5' wide table on casters so that I could move it away from the wall when needed.

Fastrack is easy to use and wire, however, it is loud if not mounted over sound dampening material.

An "inwork" photo of my 5X10 is attached:

That's a great little railroad!

Sean

Ken-Oscale posted:

Here is a variation, I often like to curve the spurs on the outside to get just a bit more length.   These are O-60 curves.

Sir,  have you a track list for this layout?

DoubleDAZ posted:

Looking through your posts, here's a list of druthers as I see them:

-- Fit on a 9 x 5 or slightly smaller board.
-- Purchase ‘Missy Delight’ track pack layout because it seems cost effective for the switches.
This may be true regardless of the final design. Simply compare the lists of parts in any package to the list of parts you need and go from there.
-- Run 2 trains at once.
-- Park two other trains on the runoffs.
Runoffs, better known as Spurs, are only big enough for an engine and maybe 2 cars.
-- Top runoff would curve under the outer path which will be elevated at that point.
No way that's going to happen. Outer track needs to rise 5" for clearance and that means grades of 9-13%, way too steep.
-- Willing to use other track systems instead of FasTrack, if my engines would be supported and it would make completing this layout easier.
Not sure what you'd gain, you still need to use O36 curves.
-- Should I also consider using multiple power tracks to make sure there is enough juice throughout the layout?
You're going to need to block the spurs and the switches, so you'll need a few power feeds.

Anyway, like someone else suggested, you might want to consider something more simplistic like this:

 

Greetings Dave,  I attempted to create this layout in both SCARM and AnyRail without success.  Would you mind answering a couple questions for me concerning this layout?  v/r JByrd

Jbyrd posted: 

Greetings Dave,  I attempted to create this layout in both SCARM and AnyRail without success.  Would you mind answering a couple questions for me concerning this layout?  v/r JByrd

Sure, ask away.

Thank you in advance for the assistance, and thank you for your service.  

As you look at your layout I put the top most section together in SCARM, then attempt to add the middle section of track and it overlaps itself.  So I am only laying the top horizontal section then the middle section starting from RT to LT and that is where I am getting the overlap.  I'm certain that I sm doing something incorrectly.  Perhaps I am adding the wrong short curve at the end of the RT AND LT?  

Jbyrd posted:

Thank you in advance for the assistance, and thank you for your service.  

As you look at your layout I put the top most section together in SCARM, then attempt to add the middle section of track and it overlaps itself.  So I am only laying the top horizontal section then the middle section starting from RT to LT and that is where I am getting the overlap.  I'm certain that I sm doing something incorrectly.  Perhaps I am adding the wrong short curve at the end of the RT AND LT?  

You're welcome.

I'm not sure why you're trying to rebuild the design because the SCARM file (ANTHONY.SCARM) is attached to my post on 6-2-2018. To download it, simply right-click on the attachment filename and select Save Link As (or Save File As, something to that effect).

Failing that, this photo may help you figure things out, it shows the track numbers and I've added a color-coded legend for the smaller tracks.

Probably because this is all new to me and I've no idea what I'm doing, lol. Maybe I should have mentioned that part. My apologies. Thank you for the schooling sir.  That worked.

Not a problem, we've all been there. Feel free to ask any questions about SCARM, I'll be glad to help you figure out how to do things.

Super, I am pricing out the parts now.  I'm sure I will be hitting you up again as I get into the build.  You have already assisted me a great deal.

Thank you all for your feedback and input. It really helped me as I worked through the design. It’s been very helpful and I appreciate it. Sorry I’ve been MIA for 6 months. I’ve been working on a clever new train table and finalizing the track layout. I’m looking forward to working on the scenery soon. I’ll post some photos of my progress. I was planning on posting final photos but I’m too excited to wait

Here are some photos......

I’ve ordered more track to finish the spurs. 

And another........