Skip to main content

Greetings Everyone,

We just bought our First House.  (No more Renting, though we have to move everything from the rental house to our new house)..  And thus now there is a portion of the basement to use for our creative designing & construction of a Scale layout.  I have built several temporary layouts, and they have never fully gotten operational to the point of where I was happy.  Now we have a clean slate to start all over with, however, I am lacking track ideas.  We have ideas of features that we want to incorporate, just not sure on how to get there.  Due to the configuration of the basement, there is not a perfectly dimensional area.  We have 1 side of a finished wall to partially remove/ create trackage pass-throughs, add a couple walls to the unfinished part of the basement that will become part of the Empire, and re-route electrical boxes and such.  Attached is a drawing I created in Photoshop CS5.  I have provided the approximate dimensions for each side.  The dimensions are accurate to within about 1-2 inches.

During the building of our previous layouts, I over-built the frame by using 2X4's for everything.  I am good with tools, framing, and construction, but I am not good with calculating load values with regard to what wood is appropriate for a train layout.

Configuration wise, the Primary option I am considering is an around the wall with 48" of depth for the Main Decks, and then 12-24" for the Elevated Decks OR alternately something with peninsula's (shaped like an E)....  If I do an around the wall, I like the idea of L Brackets coming off the studs.

Track wise, I would like to run (RCS) with a Mainline of 2 to 4 tracks.  Track Diameters: Outer: O-104, Middle 1: O-96, Middle 2: O-88, and Inner: O-80....  I have also explored running a separate track about 24" off the ground for my 6 y/o.  However, I'm not sure how functional that would be nor what diameter track to run.  (For this, I am looking to emulate Patrick H.'s lower level)......

I would like to do Double Track Mains both Elevated & Non-Elevated.  Thus, I was thinking I could do Elevated on the outer perimeter, and go with O-104 & O-96, and then run the O-88 & O-80 track on the Deck. However, I would like to have grade changes from the Elevated track to the Non-Elevated tracks.  If the layout looks too crowded with 4 Mainlines, then I'll drop the smaller diameters, and just go with the O-104 & O-96.  I would also like to have double reversing Mains on the Non-Elevated track if possible, so that I can keep things interesting, but then again, I do not want to make the layout feel overwhelming.

Feature wise, there are various features that we would like to incorporate into our layout.  We will be purchasing a Millhouse River 34" TT, and then a corresponding RH with at least 5 stalls.  For the 47" Opening, I am working with Damien at Mainline Bridges, and we are exploring the possibility of building a compressed version of the PRR Lift Bridge, that is still in use to cross the Ohio River here in Louisville.  For passenger service, we are going to have multiple Union Stations.  For the various freight we have, we would like to have a nice sized switch yard running down the longest side of the layout.  We may even look to incorporate humps for said switch yard.  For the Yard I have been looking at the RCS Four Way Eight Track Set.  For the yard area, I would consider kicking out the decking to 60", so that there is ample room to have the yard and mains.

Theme wise, our layout will be based on Family Tree Concept/ where my family has either lived in the past or currently lives, thus we are modeling different geographic regions of the US, and so for each part of the United States, we are going to do a Union Station/ Depot for that area.  That does not mean that the Union Station's will be Large & Dominating the layout, but I would like to make them the focal point for that region.  At this point in the development of the plans, we will in some way, shape, or form, have the L&N Union Station here in Louisville and the Santa Fe Raton Station in Raton, NM.  Backdropping the Raton Station will be a mixture of created/ textured Mountains and various photos of the Sangre De Cristo Mountain Range that runs between Colorado and New Mexico.  Beyond that, we are still deciding on which Stations for the Midwest Region & Northeast Corridor.

Electrical wise when it comes to wiring the track/ switches/ etc..., I am completely and utterly clueless.  I am currently using Fastrack, and have just connected the tracks together, and used the track as a means of completing the circuit.  When it comes to Commercial/ Residential Electricity, I am fine as I can wire houses & buildings no problem at all, but with regard to tying it into Model RR Track, I am getting stumped.

Track wise, look for LOTS of Fastrack on the B/S Forum here in the not to distant future.

Hopefully this is enough information to get started.
Last edited by James Eaton
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Seriously consider something other than Fastrack.  Fastrack is the greatest thing ever invented for temporary on the floor under the tree layouts!  For a semi-perm home layout--go with a realistic track in now before you invest tons of money into the toy Fastrack, realize it, then have to sell all of it and re-start.

 

Gargraves track with Ross turnouts is by far the most widely used combination for realistic home layouts.

Originally Posted by John C.:

Seriously consider something other than Fastrack.  Fastrack is the greatest thing ever invented for temporary on the floor under the tree layouts!  For a semi-perm home layout--go with a realistic track in now before you invest tons of money into the toy Fastrack, realize it, then have to sell all of it and re-start.

 

Gargraves track with Ross turnouts is by far the most widely used combination for realistic home layouts.

John,

 

I'm not sure if you missed it due to the abbreviation within the context of my paragraphs, but I am selling the Fastrack, and investing into Ross Custom Switches for this layout.  I am going to keep a small amount of O-60 Fastrack Curves and some straights for our under the tree layout during the holidays.  But beyond that, the Fastrack is not going to be a part of this layout.

 

Thank you for your input.

James

 

You have a very nice space to work with.  I applaud you for deciding on an around the walls concept.  It will help you to maximize the use of your space for trains and for people.  A a center peninsula is also an excellent idea.

 

I have a few suggestions for your consideration.  First, get a copy of Track Planning for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong if you don't already have one.  It will save you time and money by preventing post construction redesigns and rebuilding.

 

Second, give more thought to reach-in distance.  Thirty inches or less is ideal.  Thirty six inches is a comfortable maximum for most adult men.  Go much beyond that and reach-in distance becomes problematic.

 

Consider putting your yard and engine service facility on a peninsula.  If you have access from three sides you can have a large yard and/or roundhouse without excessive reach in distances.

 

If you have or will ever get large articulated steam or electric locomotives and scale length passenger cars plan on 6 inch track centers for multiple track main line curves.  O-72, O-84, O-96 and O-108 will allow all known three rail equipment to pass on adjacent tracks.  Four or four and a half inch spacing was fine for scale Hudsons and Madison cars but many of us have larger trains today.  Go with Ross switches and Gargraves flex track for curves and you can have any curve and track spacing you need. 

Originally Posted by rockstars1989:

I would help but I turned into a skeleton reading your post.

Nick,

 

Any thoughts you may have, please share.  I could have written more text, but I figured I should probably stop where I did. :-)

 

Have a good day.

 

Originally Posted by Ted Hikel:

James

 

You have a very nice space to work with.  I applaud you for deciding on an around the walls concept.  It will help you to maximize the use of your space for trains and for people.  A a center peninsula is also an excellent idea.

 

I have a few suggestions for your consideration.  First, get a copy of Track Planning for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong if you don't already have one.  It will save you time and money by preventing post construction redesigns and rebuilding.

 

Second, give more thought to reach-in distance.  Thirty inches or less is ideal.  Thirty six inches is a comfortable maximum for most adult men.  Go much beyond that and reach-in distance becomes problematic.

 

Consider putting your yard and engine service facility on a peninsula.  If you have access from three sides you can have a large yard and/or roundhouse without excessive reach in distances.

 

If you have or will ever get large articulated steam or electric locomotives and scale length passenger cars plan on 6 inch track centers for multiple track main line curves.  O-72, O-84, O-96 and O-108 will allow all known three rail equipment to pass on adjacent tracks.  Four or four and a half inch spacing was fine for scale Hudsons and Madison cars but many of us have larger trains today.  Go with Ross switches and Gargraves flex track for curves and you can have any curve and track spacing you need. 

 

Ted,

 

Thank you for your input.  I like the idea of a center peninsula for a RH & TT, but I'm not sure if I have enough room to do around the wall and a peninsula.  I do not have any track planning software.  I have tried experimenting with Railmodeler, but so far my experience has been that its measurements are not accurate.  Also I only have Mac's, and I don't run emulators for Windows, so the software options are quite limited. :-(

 

With regard to reach-in distance, I originally was considering 36" for depth, but then I realized I would not have enough deck depth/ room for both Elevated Track and Buildings/ Terrain.  I am 6'4" and have a wingspan of almost 36" without bending/ reaching.  (**I'm only 32 y/o, ;-)**)  48" is the max depth I was considering, except for where I was contemplating adding a switching yard, then I was willing to add more deck space if needed.  If you could post a drawing of what your suggesting, I would greatly appreciate it.  I can only visualize insofar, then I start getting lost.

 

I do not have a Big Boy, but I did have the JLC Y6b which I traded for the VL Hudson, and I setup the trackage on my current layout with spacing of 4.5 inches from Center Rail to my wall.  This layout I'm tearing down was a Double Main with O-72 and O-60 running on the inside.  At 4.5 inches, the Y6b never encountered the wall.  But for this next layout, I am planning on 6 inches from the wall, and also 6 inch track centers.

 

Here is my current motive power:

 

Vision Line Hudson

JLC GG-1

Legacy Northern

Legacy SD80MAC

Legacy SD70ACe

Legacy ES44AC

Legacy ES44AC

Legacy ES44AC

 

Current Passenger & Freight:

 

Santa Fe "Chief" Heavyweights: All 6 + SS Diner

Polar Express Heavyweights

PRR Aluminum "Congressional's"

GGD El Capitan- Order Placed

 

Switch wise, I am definitely going with RCS Switches.  Track wise I have not made a firm decision on.  I've read quite a lot about the Big 3: RCS, Atlas, & GG.  However, I cannot come to a decision on which is best for what I am looking to achieve.  I have plenty of time.  As much as I want to start building this next layout, I've still got to tear down my current one, and get moved from this house to the new house.

 

Once again, thank you for your suggestions and input.  It is greatly appreciated.

James....with respect to your future track centers...6" is quite wide.  It sounds as if you are taking great care and really planning.  My center spacing is only 4"...much more realistic in appearance.  I accomplish this spacing using 89 and 96 diameter curves.  The full-sized MTH 22" long auto carriers will pass, very closely, but still pass each other through these curves.  In a few areas where my curves had to be reduced to 72...I go to a single line to avoid the unrealistic 6" spacing.

with respect to your future track centers...6" is quite wide. .......  My center spacing is only 4"...much more realistic in appearance.

 

In the real world broader spacing of parallel tracks on main lines has become common in recent years.  It adds to flexibility in scheduling maintenance activities and increases safety for track and train crews when compared to multiple main tracks with 12 to 16 foot centers.

 

In the 1:48 scale world our curves are unrealistically tight unless they are O-200+.  For curves of O-72 into the O-100s six inch centers are the standard that will allow the operation of all locomotives and cars.  It would be a shame to build a new model railroad and find that some cars (like GGD passenger cars, Lionel scale auto racks or Atlas piggy back flat cars) and some locomotives (articulated steam locomotives or scale electrics with rigid car bodies over articulated frames) were not compatible with the layout. 

 

Switch wise, I am definitely going with RCS Switches.  Track wise I have not made a firm decision on.  I've read quite a lot about the Big 3: RCS, Atlas, & GG.  However, I cannot come to a decision on which is best for what I am looking to achieve.  I have plenty of time.

 

James

 

Like many people, I consider Gargraves and Ross as a single track system.  Steve actually began building his Ross switches with Gargraves rail.  He has been making his own rail for many years now but the ross and Gargraves product lines compliment each other very nicely.  Ross offers the greatest quality and variety of switches in O guage and fine sectional track.  Gargraves makes very good sectional track and their flex track is economical and offers tremendous design possibilities.

 

Atlas track matches the height of Gargraves and Ross.  Their ties are scale in two dimensions and the tie spacing is correct for today's main lines.  Atlas has a wide selection of sectional track.  The flex track is hard to work with, it just is not flexible.  Atlas has numbered switches, which are essential for O-72+ scale oriented layout design.  The switches have caused problems for some and Atlas has made design revisions over the years.

 

The third scale oriented track system is MTH ScaleTrax.  It got off to a slow start in the market but has been gaining momentum since Rich Battista's beautiful layout appeared on the cover of OGR.  ScaleTrax has numbered switches available and the flex track is really flexible.  The switches should get a close inspection and tuned up as needed prior to installation on a layout.  The techniques used to work with ScaleTrax are like those used in HO and 2 rail O scale. The ties are scale in all three dimensions which makes transitioning to hand laid track with ScaleTrax simple and shim free.

 

I like the idea of a center peninsula for a RH & TT, but I'm not sure if I have enough room to do around the wall and a peninsula.

 

You may not, unless the center wall is non-structural and removing it is possible.  Center peninsulas are a great way to make a round house and turn table a visual focal point and maintain an easy reach to the tracks.  Here are two views of early work on the lower level of the peninsula on the Northwest Trunk Lines.

 

This photo shows the Ross turntable with space left for the matching Ross roundhouse.  The tight 7.5 degree stall spacing of the Ross roundhouse and the 7.5 degree option on the Ross auto-indexing turntable controller help to maximize the use of space around the turntable.

 

 

This photo taken from the same vantage point shows locomotive service and ready tracks in the foreground while the coach yard is going in in the left background and the freight arrival/departure yard is at about the 60% stage of completion in the right background.

 

I do not have any track planning software.  .....  Also I only have Mac's, and I don't run emulators for Windows, so the software options are quite limited. :-(

 

As a person with friends in Redmond I should advise you to get a computer with a real operating system and then get some good layout planning software. 

 

My experience with RR Track has been great.  While it has a few quirks it will save you time in the design phase and will likely save much time, frustration and material in the construction phase.

 

 I have plenty of time.  As much as I want to start building this next layout, I've still got to tear down my current one, and get moved from this house to the new house.

 

That sounds like a great attitude.  You have plenty of time to consider what you would like and what your new space will allow.  Keep us posted as your thinking evolves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last edited by Ted Hikel

Please keep in mind that if you go around the walls and or have an "island" always keep in mind that reaching distance is about 30 inches max.  So many people have these areas that are 5 and 6 feet deep and every single time that has been a problem.

 

Long ago a very smart cookie told me when you plan/build that railroad just remember the track that is hardest to reach will be the first place that you will have a problem.

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

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