Four Track Mainline Layout

Kevin,

Any additional separation that you can achieve between the level will be greatly appreciated when you are doing your scenery and when viewing the trains.  Your grade is just over 2%.  Today's engines can handle 3% and more with ease,  At 3% you'll have 15" of separation (minus framework, etc.).  If you look at it in terms of scale feet, you have about 32'.

Jan

Tom Tee,

Some good thoughts regarding Double crossovers.  I just went to the drawing board and checked using #11 switches would use about twice the double crossover at 64". Then I looked at using #8 double crossover, they would need about 48" and would look a lot better.

I will keep messin with it and let you know. Thanks for pointing it out. A lot of passengers would be wearin their coffee on those short crossovers at speed.

Thank you, Kevin

FastMail, I have a 9x13 layout and have been thinking about what I would want to do with my next larger layout. Your 4 track mainline will be really spectacular. I am finding I change my layout based on what I want it to do and what I want to run given my space constraints. The track layout is less important.

Regarding your passenger trains, where are you going to park them and where will the passengers board?  Where will the station be located? Those trains will be over 10 feet long and need a lot of space. For my next layout I would like to keep 4-6 full length passenger trains ready to go. And I would like to have a real overhead electrified line as well to run my Milwaukee Road EP-2, Great Northern Y-1 and a Pennsy GG1 - all passenger trains. (blame that on Don)

q1 - do you want a cityscape or mountains/country?  I think that really drives how you configure the track layout.

q2 - do you want to be able to run trains in different directions? (without taking them off the tracks) If so, you may want to consider reversing loops.

q3 - do you want any type of dramatic feature in your layout, something a visitor cannot help but say "wow" and that you would be really happy with? 

q4 - what kind of industries or landscapes do you want to feature? What do you want to model?

q5 - do you want to keep the 4 track mainline over the entire layout or just have it as a feature in a section?

A few suggestions - there is a wealth of information on the web. Besides this forum which is wonderful, you may want to check out these. To me these modelers made a big impression on me- of course there are many more.

Don McQuaig's (forum member) vids Last Run https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liGxckhiLek and https://www.youtube.com/watch?...1SS5Esado&t=513s  and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8__pRxVSyyw

Eric's Segal  of Eric's Trains https://www.youtube.com/channe...kal_rt9zt6Td60lfdGQQ  also active on this forum. Lots of posts and reviews - check out his layout.

A YouTube video City Edge - (music is a bit much at the start IMO)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt430GmLTRA

So why these three - examples of rural town and mountains 50s, mix of everything with Eric's layout and a really busy city scene modern era.

Hope this helps ... Jeff

Oh and lastly - mpeterll  designs and builds layouts. Although mostly in HO, he goes into detail on the considerations needed in order to plan a layout. Watch a couple of his planning videos to get an idea of what goes into creating a layout plan.     https://www.youtube.com/channe...JvPgKrQNrDtA0rK00xAw

Hi Jan,

Thank you for the thoughts.  I thought 10" in scale would be about 40 feet? I had better check my lousy arithmetic.  All along during the design I thought I need to stay close to 2%. Some of my engines like a 1995 Lionel Santa Fe had 3 dummy units in a A-B-B-A configuration and would be pulling 9ea passenger card plus a couple of express cars. I also have a 20th Century with heavy cars by  Sunset GGD that is around 23 feet.

Jan, Should I decide to increase the separation to 15" at what height would you recommend above the floor for upper and lower levels.

Thanks for making me reconsider, kevin

FastMail, I have a 9x13 layout and have been thinking about what I would want to do with my next larger layout. Your 4 track mainline will be really spectacular. I am finding I change my layout based on what I want it to do and what I want to run given my space constraints. The track layout is less important.

Regarding your passenger trains, where are you going to park them and where will the passengers board?  Where will the station be located? Those trains will be over 10 feet long and need a lot of space. For my next layout I would like to keep 4-6 full length passenger trains ready to go. And I would like to have a real overhead electrified line as well to run my Milwaukee Road EP-2, Great Northern Y-1 and a Pennsy GG1 - all passenger trains. (blame that on Don)

q1 - do you want a cityscape or mountains/country?  I think that really drives how you configure the track layout.

q2 - do you want to be able to run trains in different directions? (without taking them off the tracks) If so, you may want to consider reversing loops.

q3 - do you want any type of dramatic feature in your layout, something a visitor cannot help but say "wow" and that you would be really happy with?

q4 - what kind of industries or landscapes do you want to feature? What do you want to model?

q5 - do you want to keep the 4 track mainline over the entire layout or just have it as a feature in a section?

A few suggestions - there is a wealth of information on the web. Besides this forum which is wonderful, you may want to check out these. To me these modelers made a big impression on me- of course there are many more.

Don McQuaig's (forum member) vids Last Run https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liGxckhiLek and https://www.youtube.com/watch?...1SS5Esado&t=513s  and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8__pRxVSyyw

Eric's Segal  of Eric's Trains https://www.youtube.com/channe...kal_rt9zt6Td60lfdGQQ  also active on this forum. Lots of posts and reviews - check out his layout.

A YouTube video City Edge - (music is a bit much at the start IMO)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt430GmLTRA

So why these three - examples of rural town and mountains 50s, mix of everything with Eric's layout and a really busy city scene modern era.

Hope this helps ... Jeff

Oh and lastly - mpeterll  designs and builds layouts. Although mostly in HO, he goes into detail on the considerations needed in order to plan a layout. Watch a couple of his planning videos to get an idea of what goes into creating a layout plan.     https://www.youtube.com/channe...JvPgKrQNrDtA0rK00xAw

ScoutingDad, Jeff,  A lot of great info and suggestions, Below I wrote out some thoughts for another person. It may answer some questions. I will try and be more thorough later. Snowing hard in Seattle right now. Maybe somone could help me out and tell me the right way to quote another member in my reply  thanks

Layout particulars and thoughts, I'm pretty long-winded, sorry

The room is 23'6” x 13'6” and completely finished. The room is adjacent to a basement guest apartment living room and has a dutch door on the entry and to the left of the entry a 6' x 3' opening at 42” high (a pass through window)

For orientation in SCARM, open layer labels, otherwise in screenshots lower level roundhouse is at West end, room entry is on South Wall, leaving the turntable first is a Double Slip switch, Same at the bottom of layout at start of to ramp inclines.

The layout is 2 level being vertically separated by 10” top of rail to top of rail. The top of the lower level rail will be between 36-42” above the floor (looking for advice)

The upper level will be supported by custom made wall brackets on W,S,& E walls. Along the North wall supporting the upper level is a bit complicated to describe and still on the drawing board.

There was no room for train reversals considering length of trains and good access other than the yards being open at both ends and a turntable. Access was very important, using my SCARM ruler I tried to insure all tracks would be reachable. I also used a Mianne lift for the entry, and a simple hinged bridge at East end of South yard.

The upper and lower level are connected with two long incline ramps that are very close to 2%. These two ramps, one for clockwise and the other for counter-clockwise operations, start at a Double-Slip switch on the lower level near the entry and proceed up, along and supported by opposite walls.

I believe given the amount of operating detail and sound on the locomotives, slow speed running will be my preference. I hope to see two trains on tracks 1&2 (inside) moving west to east (CW) at different speeds, and two trains on outside tracks 3&4 moving east to west (CCW) at different speeds.

Not shown on the upper level is a passenger station along the North wall on the west end. Although not shown, tracks 1&2 along north wall will be separated by approx. 6.5” as will tracks 3&4 allowing for passenger platforms. Tracks 2&3 will be separated by 4.5” (Ross crossover east of station)

The lower level is all about yards, roundhouse, and service areas. Although a train could make a continuous loop on the lower level, that is not my intention. The long siding around the top of North Yard is a somewhat concealed location to park the 20^th Century Limited, approx 23' when not in use.

I would love to make the tracks in the North Yard longer using Ross curved switches instead of 4-ways at either end, but so far its beyond my abilities.

I want to use a lot of lampposts, track signals, billboards, yard floods etc to accentuate the dramatic effect of low light and night operations. I have installed multiple (5) trac lighting tracs with multiple circuits for lighting, wired back to a scene controller for specific settings and highlights. I hope to put a plexi-clear roof on my roundhouse and light the interior. I hope to use LED tape (undercounter) for dimmable indirect lighting under front edge of upper level shelf, this would light the tracks on lower level under main line above.

I have lots of thoughts on scenery for another day.

Still have no idea where to park Diesels? Unsure about my lead to turntable, steam and diesel service areas not to mention a boatload of etc.

Considering losing the two inner continuous loops on Mainline

@Fast Mail, I also love long passenger trains and thought I'd reached layout Nirvana when I joined a club with a highly detailed, great trackage, hi-rail layout with 4 independent loops within a 60' x 20' footprint with up to date electronics.

The layout functions beautifully and I am immensely grateful for the members who built such a tremendous platform on which I can operate my trains.

Your design, like the club's, lacks cosmetic curves.  So all you will see is your passenger train running in a straight line or making sharp right and left hand turns depending on the direction of travel.  Such an operation becomes boring and prevents seeing the more visually interesting perspectives of the train bending through gentle curves,

Suggestion:  pinch inward at least one side of the long straights to create cosmetic curves.

NOTE:  I did not read many of the posts, so if cosmetic curves are to be incorporated, read my reply as an endorsement of an excellent idea.

@Pingman, Carl, that is my biggest issue. I'm afraid it is to boring. However in my defense of boring I will tell you there is not much room left. The walking around space is getting thin and sleight.  Everywhere I tried to do something like you suggest the space limitations interrupt my great visions when we hit the drawing board.

One very drastic measure that I might take is to eliminate the 4th track and go with a three track mainline.  Another idea I have  would be for the mainline to cross a rocky gorge along the East wall over two double track bridges; then heading south tracks 3&4 enter a double portal tunnel under hilly terrain another 3 feet along the way and tracks 1&2 enter a double portal as well. Both pair of tracks emerge again staggered with the outer pair 3&4 staying in the tunnel much further before emerging.  Maybe I could work a jog in.

No matter how weak an idea in reality the 4 track mainline is the focus, the scenery is the right of way with signal bridges, switches, and trackside equipment. hopefully with 3-4 trains operating at different speeds in opposite directions.  I love NYCRR steam and the famous Water Level Route is what I am trying to evoke.  I plan a two platform station with stairs up to a terminal above on the North wall at the West end.

I am glad you see my problem as I do, I hear you and this is what this posting is for. 

I wish there was a club near, I live on an island and its too beautiful to leave but their are few O gauge railroaders about.

Thanks again, kevin

I associate the term "cosmetic curve" with John Armstrong.

@Fast Mail, I believe you need to incorporate the avoidance of tangent track as a guiding principle of your design.

Another lesson learned from recent train club membership:  a 60' straightaway does NOT show off an O scale passenger train to good effect.  60' isn't much space for an E-7/8/9 AA or ABA plus six or seven or more 21" scale passener cars.  Even the club's travelling layout that has even longer straightaways does not show a long pax train to as good an effect as cosmetic curves would.

@Tom Tee, thanks for the photos.

Steam engines and long passenger cars?....got to use easements on those curves.  I know that would require flex track  and that it takes up just a smidge more space, but it makes a toy train look like a work of art, especially passenger trains. And the passengers will spill less coffee!  Good luck with your project. You are wise to ask for help on this forum. I try to listen to all of the advice from the skilled modelers here.  They are the best!    Earl     

Most of today's locomotives have traction tires and can handle much steeper grades than 3%.  Eric Siegel's grade to his upper level is 6%.

Structure is going to cost you some of that 10".  Structure between wall brackets will be required to support the upper level.  These brackets will also interfere with the two grades.  You can work around the latter.

I suggest that you watch/read  Norm Charbonneau's build thread and videos .  Pay particular attention to how he hides the curves: hills, tunnels, bridges, buildings, etc.

https://ogrforum.com/...-layout-space?page=1

https://www.youtube.com/user/normcharbonneau

Norm has only a double track oval mainline.  The track is set way from the table edge, and he uses sidings and buildings to interrupt the line of sight.

Fast Mail has some good suggestions on how to mask that you have just an oval.

You can have a god's eye view or a ground level view; you'll probably have both with two levels.

My redesigned layout is 24' by 14' with 3 levels.  There is staging under the highest level.  You could actually increase your vertical separation by staggering your four long sides.  Your staging would be the lowest, then the yard, the living room lower level, the above staging level, and finally the upper living room wall.  With a 3% grade you might be able to get close to 2 feet.

Jan

So, I really want to thank everyone for great thoughts on where I'm at with my design. Last night a major snow event here in the Pacific Northwest has everyone a little distracted.

Regarding easements on curves, currently I enter the outer curve with a section of 120" and the next section would be 112" same idea different radii on adjacent curves.

Right this minute; having read all the comments I'm beginning to believe I'm going to consider removing the two inner loops, however I will still open up the other two loops, for a four track 2 platform station. I will maybe abandon Ross sectional and go to gargraves flex. With flex and the additional space I may be able to put in some 10-20 degree bumps. I still have a notion of a tunnel and double track bridge in the Southwest corner. Yesterday I heard from a professional who will teach me flex track laying.

Please keep the comments coming, it is braking down the mental box I was in.

Thank you all, what a great resource

Jan,

I was busy typing away as your reply and layout became posted. I must have been reading your mind.

I have to be careful not to lose sight of my objectives. Of course all the thoughts arriving are forcing me to acknowledge the constraints of space. I really want a detailed authentic roundhouse; and storage yard.  I would love a better look at the layout you posted as well as any others that will help shed light on my dilemma. 

Best regards, Kevin

Jan, I should have mentioned I'm a big fan of Norm Charbonneau's work for a lot of years.  I have never talked with him and long before I thought I would build a layout i would study his work: pure enjoyment.

He creates space where there is none, his work never feels crowded but always complete. I believe one of his earlier layouts was a three track mainline and it inspired the NYCRR in me.

Of course even the NYCRR recognized in the Early Sixties to start abandoning the four tracks for two.

kevin

TomTee a fine example that with model railroading we all have to compromise.  So far I am happy with 7 car passenger consists all 17".

FastMail - It is really hard to say a 23x13 space is too small for a layout. Here are a couple of rough scarm images of potential track configurations. I really thought the horseshoe would be a great feature. Given the depth of the space it would be too small to get in 3 or 4 mainlines. So this is what I really like scarm for, seeing what will fit in any particular space.

All the curves are 72 dia. First one will not fit. Second could have larger dia curves and the lobes could be extended toward each other. In order to make a long passenger station fit, the track would have to have an elevation change at the back. Both have access problems with a required reach of 6 feet in some areas.  Both have the advantage of no lift outs/ups.

So its pretty obvious why your are back to an around the wall design. Same reason as mine - not enough space to do what I wanted. 

Tom, 

I might stray off subject and get a little philosophic. My wife and I built a large home on a island in Puget Sound. We had lots of out-of-town visitors who came to stay for a week or two. So I built a guest apartment in the Daylight basement below. A living room with kitchenette, a bedroom, bath hallway, closet etc. I saved one 24x 14 room for myself; that room is as far as yesterday's trains may roam.

The chances of expanding into another room are 0 to none.  Someday in the future the upstairs of my garage that is currently being used may become an option. If this layout gets completely into me. That space would allow me to stretch my legs it would be 24 x 36

For now the confines are limits, that life experiences have taught me not to exceed just because it is possible.

One day while staring at a pile of dusty boxes of scale locomotives. I decided to sell them as a lot since it seemed unlikely I would do anything with them. Then I saw a picture of a detailed roundhouse and I thought,  on the other side of an opening in the living room into my room I could build an operating and detailed roundhouse to park the engines on display.

Well that became, yards for cars, a single loop for staging for interest, the loop got bigger a second level 2 track mainline became four.....you know the rest.

So I must stay in the room that has become my box and I can't give up on the roundhouse that started this.

Thanks for the thought, kevin

Scouting Dad,

I couldn't agree more Scarm is great at seeing what fits I think of it as sketching. As I mentioned earlier the final drawing was not mine, but DAZ, Dave did the hard work.

I messed with all sorts of thoughts and almost went with something very close to your sketch, I also had one I really liked with a centerline peninsula on a lower level for yards and service.

Always the Roundhouse or "Old Man Access" became prohibitive.  The math simplified is  this formula'

Multi Track Mainline+Yards+Service+Full size Roundhouse =Room 23.5' x 13.5' + minimum radius 72"+ 100' of storage yards.

The laws of Mathematics are closing in on me " Help me  Euclid"

kevin