Help with 12'x12'6" shelf layout in my boys room

No one have any feedback? 

 You got skipped over!  

Likely because you don't seem to need ANY help. You touched on about every point you can. 

  Just know that if you run conventionally vs command, a grade is a lot of throttle work.

I'm not certain of your exact druthers but here is something to consider to avoid a duckunder or liftout.

This Jim Barrett dropgate design has worked for me at the attic room entrance to my unfinished  layout. The unit is a 1990s veteran of my former layouts and was reworked for the attic layout to be a faux steel plate truss bridge.  If building both a lower and elevated system you could consider a hinged dropgate for lower and hinged lift bridge on the elevated.  Barrett's OGR Video #11 shows how to construct both the drop section and a lift bridge. The parts came from Lowe's, a bike shop(brake cable) and hardware distributor for the transom catches (spring-loaded latching).  The Gargraves flex track curve arcs at my bridge are 072/084.

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

I think the Z-4000 is a smart idea. Do you plan on having a hinged section where the doorway is? Also, are you going to do a conventional layout or are you going to have command control? I think it would be pretty fun to run trains on. 

I plan to do either a drop or lift gate where the Doors are located.   

At first I will run conventional but with plans to go command control on everything.  

Thanks, I think it will be fun, I’m hoping that doing a raised section isn’t going to eat up too much space and take away the fun from the layout. 

Adriatic posted:

 You got skipped over!  

Likely because you don't seem to need ANY help. You touched on about every point you can. 

  Just know that if you run conventionally vs command, a grade is a lot of throttle work.

Lol yes I think I did, wasn’t feeling the love.  

i thibk my biggest concern is if doing a raised section that it isn’t going to limit other fun stuff that I could do with the layout, and if it would be better to keep it all flat and make it more functional.  

Inwill be running conventional first with adding stuff to run command as we go along. 

Dewey Trogdon posted:

I'm not certain of your exact druthers but here is something to consider to avoid a duckunder or liftout.

This Jim Barrett dropgate design has worked for me at the attic room entrance to my unfinished  layout. The unit is a 1990s veteran of my former layouts and was reworked for the attic layout to be a faux steel plate truss bridge.  If building both a lower and elevated system you could consider a hinged dropgate for lower and hinged lift bridge on the elevated.  Barrett's OGR Video #11 shows how to construct both the drop section and a lift bridge. The parts came from Lowe's, a bike shop(brake cable) and hardware distributor for the transom catches (spring-loaded latching).  The Gargraves flex track curve arcs at my bridge are 072/084.

 

 

I don’t teally have a prefer nice yet on the gate, all I know is that it will either be a lift or drop gate where the doors are.  Working these into the layout is probably going to the headache as I have a double door closet and an entrance door to work into the layout. 

rhanks for the info i will definitely check out the vidoe on the dropgate.  

Darran,

I have a few comments and questions for you. 

1. Are those O72 switches you are using?  You need them to minimize the track spacing.  That gives you 4.5" spacing which is good.
2. Grades with multiple tracks will not work with lift-up/swing-down sections.  You would need to do lift-out or lift bridge.  You would need to put each track on its own section to do any swing and not cause fouling.  could you mark where the doors are and how they swing?
3. Your grades will be around 4%.
4. You are pushing the limits on track spacing on the right side; it is close.  You;ll need to watch out for any clearance problems with passing trains.
5. I would use a RH and LH switch for your sidings in stead of the two RH you are using.  You can eliminate the S-curve.

Jan

Jan posted:

Darran,

I have a few comments and questions for you. 

1. Are those O72 switches you are using?  You need them to minimize the track spacing.  That gives you 4.5" spacing which is good.
2. Grades with multiple tracks will not work with lift-up/swing-down sections.  You would need to do lift-out or lift bridge.  You would need to put each track on its own section to do any swing and not cause fouling.  could you mark where the doors are and how they swing?
3. Your grades will be around 4%.
4. You are pushing the limits on track spacing on the right side; it is close.  You;ll need to watch out for any clearance problems with passing trains.
5. I would use a RH and LH switch for your sidings in stead of the two RH you are using.  You can eliminate the S-curve.

Jan

Yes they are all 072 switches.  I tried 054 and smaller switches but the track spacing became too far apart for what I was aiming for.  I'd like the spacing on the yard to be as closer than the main lines.

My gradings should fall just shy of any lift or drop gate sections, which measures 8ft (96") to the point where it will be 3" high, so my grade should be around 3.125%.

On the right side the blue and orange will have a 6" grade difference, so even though it looks close they are on different grades so passing trains wont touch at all.

I used the S curve setup to get the track closer together, but I do see your point so I took some of your suggestions and points, and tweaked the layout a little.  This layout uses 100 switches, with a 054 curve switch from Ross.  The yard tracks are shorter than they will be, this program I use limits me to 50 pieces per layout so I had to cut them short.  Yellow track is @ 0 grade, Blue track @ -3 grade and orange track @ +3 grade.  The right side orange and blue tracks, in between the bends will be at 6" grade difference.

What are everyone's thoughts on this revised layout?  or should I keep the double track in the top eft corner?

Darran,

You can continue your double mainlines past the door.  The tracks are still level and a liftout section will work just fine.  Also, by separating the crossovers you've created a way for one train to pass another.

Jan

PS.  Watch out for the doorknob.

PPS.  Is the closet door a slider?

Jan posted:

Darran,

You can continue your double mainlines past the door.  The tracks are still level and a liftout section will work just fine.  Also, by separating the crossovers you've created a way for one train to pass another.

Jan

PS.  Watch out for the doorknob.

PPS.  Is the closet door a slider?

 

Ok cool, I changed out the switches for 100 on the crossover section and on the yard.  With a little bit of extra bench-top on the lower right side I could get 4 tracks on the yard instead of 3, but I may just leave it 3 and do an add on later.

lol ok thanks Ill watch out for the door knobs.

Unfortunately they are not sliding doors, and they do swing outwards into the room so I will have two lift/drop gates.

    Visually, a small elevation difference of 2-4" would likely suffice to expose the background train for passing and remaining in view. You might even manage a single throttle setting for a whole loop that way. Though it sounds manageable and is, that grade will take constant throttle managing without block control or command. Fun till the day you want to just relax and loop.

   After the last post,  I thought about the drop down too. Having had my fingers banged in a lift up that got knocked shut when I was a kid, and watching adults get it worse, I can speak with confidence that a drop down would likely be safer. But if there was a toddler too, the flip up regains appeal. A lift out removable section seems safest but kiddo wont be able to handle that solo as soon . The closet, I'd think about adding sliding doors for fast access, and a lift out section for times of full access. 

  The drop down bridge or scene protuding into a doorway while dropped might be a knee or kick concern on an old house with narrow doors. But a flip bridge also clips elbows when carrying big boxes.

Every way has a pro & con; which is easiest for you to live with?

I played around to see what other layouts I could come up with that would work, be fun, and could be added onto in the future for expansion.  I came up with this one so far.  Thoughts on this layout?

This one I really like.....

I also like that one.  What is the diameter of your curves?

AmeenTrainGuy posted:

Darran posted:

This one I really like.....

I agree that one looks pretty good. 

Thanks.

Ken-Oscale posted:

I also like that one.  What is the diameter of your curves?

Thank you.  Most of them are 063, with a few 054 and the bottom right inside corner is 042.

Darran posted:

This one I really like.....

I like the set up, at the same time, you are limiting, in my novice opinion, the number of trains that can be run simultaneously without constant supervision. 

I think that a set of cross over switches are better suited for train running than the cross track. I would try to keep the two independent loops intact. 

Just my two cents. 

-Carl

DARRAN,

   Looks great, real nice shelf layout for sure, as Ken has blessed your engineering design I feel sure it's a good one.  I am curious also what diameter curves you plan to use and I am not big on GG Track because it is not friendly to my Tin Plate Trains.  

Just completed my ceiling shelf layout this past week, I used FasTrack building it with 072 curves and engineered nice triangles for the corners of the room to accommodate them.

If you have some questions on the shelf hardware and what I used for shelving let me know.

PCRR/Dave

What Carl said. Also 042 limits everything do that dia.    Can you make a plan with 072 curves just to see how much real estate it takes up ?

Clem 

Carl Peduzzi posted:

Darran posted:

This one I really like.....

I like the set up, at the same time, you are limiting, in my novice opinion, the number of trains that can be run simultaneously without constant supervision. 

I think that a set of cross over switches are better suited for train running than the cross track. I would try to keep the two independent loops intact. 

Just my two cents. 

-Carl

Thanks carl,  I was skeptical with the cross track and have mixed feelings about it and I agree with you on it.  I may try and put cross over switches back in and see how they fit.  

Clem,

   Unfortunately the actual real estate for the corner engineering build, does not work out perfectly because the corners of most older homes, are not constructed with true 90 degree corners.  The best way for exacting engineering of the track layout, is to construct the size of the ceiling shelving one desires and then engineer the track layout for the actual corner spacing, engineering the size of the corner triangles last, by measuring the actual distance the 072 curved track takes to round the corner, this then may change the actual track pieces required.  However this building technique gives the builder the exacting measurement he requires for each leg of the engineering triangle needed to complete the overhead shelving for his 072 layout, keeping the actual size of the ceiling shelf to a minimum.  

Determining actual shelf width dimensions limits the engineering of the real Track layout.

PCRR/Dave

Some room corners become complex engineering.

Pine Creek Railroad posted:

DARRAN,

   Looks great, real nice shelf layout for sure, as Ken has blessed your engineering design I feel sure it's a good one.  I am curious also what diameter curves you plan to use and I am not big on GG Track because it is not friendly to my Tin Plate Trains.  

Just completed my ceiling shelf layout this past week, I used FasTrack building it with 072 curves and engineered nice triangles for the corners of the room to accommodate them.

If you have some questions on the shelf hardware and what I used for shelving let me know.

PCRR/Dave

Thank you!  Most of the curves are 063, with a couple of 054 and one curve with 042.

i originally was going to do a do an above door shelf layout but as my son is still rather young at 4 years old I’ve decided to do this shelf at waist height. 

Thank you, I will definitely hit you up if I have questions on the shelf hardware and stuff. 

DARRAN,

   Working at waist high will be a lot easier than working up near the ceiling for sure.

Remember also you are limiting the Trains he can run with the smaller diameter curves you build with.  Engineer the layout not for the trains he now owns, but for the trains he is gong to want to purchase in the future.

PCRR/Dave

clem k posted:

What Carl said. Also 042 limits everything do that dia.    Can you make a plan with 072 curves just to see how much real estate it takes up ?

Clem 

Clem,  I did rework the plan with mostly 072 curves with a few 063.  Took up a lot of real estate compared to 063 outer curves.  

Darren.......... personally I like the 072 plan with 063 inside. I like the longer sidings, the crossovers ,and two separate loops connected.  Trains like larger curves. 

Thanks for all the comments, suggestions and feedback.  It truly has been awesome and a great help.  I shall stick with the 072 curves as it still fits and works.  The 3 Bridges may be a pain to build but I’ll work it out. 

Quick question, is there any real benefit between the Gargraves tin plate and stainless steel tracks when not used outside?  I know tin plate has wood ties and ss has plastic ties...I do like the look of the wood ties as they seem more realistic to me.  

Darren,

I checked your profile, and see you are brand new to the Forum.  Welcome!  This is the best place online to be, in my opinion!!

I do like that last plan too!  A little yard, 3 sidings, two crossovers, you fit in wider curves; what is there not to like?    Your space is a foot longer on one side and a half foot longer on the other side than my room we spent all last year planning, and I am just now starting construction.  It is a challenge to fit a decent O gauge plan into a room of this size, but it is well worth it over the smaller scales, in my opinion.  I modeled HO and N scales for many years.  My girls never got interested in my trains, but I think your son will love this.

As far as the different GarGraves track goes, I see no problem using either type indoors.  I use GarGraves with wooden ties, because like you, I love the look of the wooden ties.  I think you are going in the right direction!!

I'm looking forward to seeing how this progresses!  

Darran,

   I run FasTrack because it is friendly to all different kinds of Trains and the new FT Command Control Switches are just incredible engineering.  True wireless low voltage plug and play remote control switches, that run directly from Track power operated directly from Legacy Cab2 or TMCC Cab1.  

If you are planning on running Tin Plate Trains GG is not the best pick for your layout, however if you are just running modern and post War trains GG is great stuff.  I would use Ross Tin Plate Switches if you stay with GG Track.

If you already have a lot of GG Track that is fine just add to it, and purchase the Ross Tin Plate Switches.  However if you are purchasing Track for the 1st time I highly recommend FasTrack and the new FTCC Switches.

Have fun building your Layout!

As Mark said welcome to the OGR!

PCRR/Dave

Mark Boyce posted:

Darren,

I checked your profile, and see you are brand new to the Forum.  Welcome!  This is the best place online to be, in my opinion!!

I do like that last plan too!  A little yard, 3 sidings, two crossovers, you fit in wider curves; what is there not to like?    Your space is a foot longer on one side and a half foot longer on the other side than my room we spent all last year planning, and I am just now starting construction.  It is a challenge to fit a decent O gauge plan into a room of this size, but it is well worth it over the smaller scales, in my opinion.  I modeled HO and N scales for many years.  My girls never got interested in my trains, but I think your son will love this.

As far as the different GarGraves track goes, I see no problem using either type indoors.  I use GarGraves with wooden ties, because like you, I love the look of the wooden ties.  I think you are going in the right direction!!

I'm looking forward to seeing how this progresses!  

Hey Mark, thank you!  Yes new to the forum and brand new to O gauge trains.  My dad and Inused to have HO back in the 80s in England, we built a whole layout in the attic of our house.  It was huge and I loved it as a kid.  Now I have kids and they love trains so getting back into it, love the size and detail of O gauge so hat is what we went with. 

Yea it’s definitely been a challenge to design and get this track to fit where it’s fun, enjoyable, will last a long time, can be added onto later, and that utilizes all the space I have.  

Aweosme thanks for the feedback, I do love He wood ties look so more than likely will go with wood ties.  I have found that Gargraves offers both tin plate and stainless with wood ties.  Are here any real benefits to running stainless indoors over the tin plate?  I’m sure it’s somewhat harder material over tin but on the other hand does that create more wear on the trains?  

Csnt decide whether to go tin or spend a little extra and get stainless.  Lol never had these choices back in the 80s. 

Pine Creek Railroad posted:

Darran,

   I run FasTrack because it is friendly to all different kinds of Trains and the new FT Command Control Switches are just incredible engineering.  True wireless low voltage plug and play remote control switches, that run directly from Track power operated directly from Legacy Cab2 or TMCC Cab1.  

If you are planning on running Tin Plate Trains GG is not the best pick for your layout, however if you are just running modern and post War trains GG is great stuff.  I would use Ross Tin Plate Switches if you stay with GG Track.

If you already have a lot of GG Track that is fine just add to it, and purchase the Ross Tin Plate Switches.  However if you are purchasing Track for the 1st time I highly recommend FasTrack and the new FTCC Switches.

Have fun building your Layout!

As Mark said welcome to the OGR!

PCRR/Dave

 

Hey dave,  

we have some FasTrack already, my problem with it is it’s super noisy, looks to plastic and fake to me, and it’s expensive and not as easy to modify like Gargraves or atlas track with actual ties.   Unfortunately we do not have any DCS or DCC yet but that will come so looking for either manual switches that can be upgraded to accept the DZ-2500 switch machines, or get the switches with the DZ-2500 and use them without the DCS/DCC controllers until we can get some later down the road. 

Currently we do not have any tin plate trains so will be running all modern and postwar stuff as we build the collection...we don’t have very many trains yet lol. 

I have looked at Ross switches, I’ve heard that Gargraves switches are poor if your using 054 and smaller, but are pretty good in the larger sizes also.  

Darren, I don't know of any benefit of using stainless over tin indoors, unless stainless stays a little cleaner.  Maybe someone else will respond with some answer to that question.

I played around again, as I wasn't impressed with how the track went over the bridges.  So I took out the 072 curves with the make up pieces of track, and replaced it with flex track.  The curves actually are more fluid and are greater than 072 curves which is even better.  I also reworked the yard area to be larger, as I was able to get a little more room on the bench-top at the top and right hand side.  switches are all 100's, all curves are 072 or greater except for 4 pieces that are inside the 072 curves on the right side.  

Hey Darran,

I am thinking about the build process and train running as I look at the layout.

The GG flex is a good idea for the areas that require a removable section. You can fit those pieces of track last as well as the removable deck. The straight shelf areas, are, well...straightforward.

Operationally, I see some spurs that are accessed clockwise and others that are accessed running counter- clockwise. Is this to add some play value by permitting a "hand of god" direction change?  I would say move one of the engine sheds to the top spur.

Not sure how you are planning to run the trains. Just want to get you to think that through. Do you plan on running two trains in opposite directions?

You can get a 100 piece limit using the unlicensed version of SCARM. It's pc only. Use the download link under the gray heading download, not the flashy green buttons or adverts.

Moonman posted:

Hey Darran,

I am thinking about the build process and train running as I look at the layout.

The GG flex is a good idea for the areas that require a removable section. You can fit those pieces of track last as well as the removable deck. The straight shelf areas, are, well...straightforward.

Operationally, I see some spurs that are accessed clockwise and others that are accessed running counter- clockwise. Is this to add some play value by permitting a "hand of god" direction change?  I would say move one of the engine sheds to the top spur.

Not sure how you are planning to run the trains. Just want to get you to think that through. Do you plan on running two trains in opposite directions?

You can get a 100 piece limit using the unlicensed version of SCARM. It's pc only. Use the download link under the gray heading download, not the flashy green buttons or adverts.

Hey Carl,  you have some great points.  Lol no I’d prefer to eliminate the hand of god directional changes, and me getting carried away trying to cram all that I can into this layout has me not thinking the best. 

So with thst being said, I think I’m just going to do away with the yard for now and just have a few side tracks to hold locos and maybe some cars.  Maybe later on I can add a place just for a big yard, as right now we do not have many locos or cars.  

I’ve changed the design again lol, so instead of the yard I’ve just put a small town with a bypass loop in.  As my son is young, I plan to do the 4 seasons or 4 major holiday themes around the layout for educational purposes.

oh and I can’t use the SCARM program as I have a MAC  

I’ve attached the revised layout, let me you what you all think. 

I like the revision.

Railmodeller can lead you into a build issue. I see that it is making the nice flex curves. But, what does it have in the inventory required? The GG flex straights are 37". Does it show how many pieces are required?

When you flex it (bend it) you can preserve some length my matching the rails offset mid-curve and only squaring up the start and end. The inner rail will be the longest and the outer the shortest. Inevitably, you won't get all of each 37" piece no matter how you cut it. Allow for some extras when you purchase it.

You'll also have to determine which rail that Railmodeller is basing the curve upon for you to set the arc when scribing it. Draw it on the deck and bend to it.

I have a friend that I designed a layout with. We used SCARM on my laptop and some large format prints for him to copy the track plan into Railmodeller and learn the software as we went.

We tried to stay with stock diameter curves and used sectional pieces in the track plan to make creating sections of flex in specific diameters easier rather than making a lot of one off custom curves. You should be ok doing it with these curves as you don't have a lot of them to make.