@Darrell posted:With a slight modification the track spacers could come in handy to trace out the track for cutting the sub roadbed!
For a single mainline that is, they are perfect for a double mainline as is!
Let me know if anyone needs something modified, I will draw up a single track version for sure as I am getting close to cutting sub roadbed. Thanks for the input! Let me know if you have a particular modification you would like.
ok, here is a couple of pics of the roadbed jig. I made one a little too small, envisioning it being hung up on curved track. The larger one has no problem with 072 curves or 054, if I need tighter curves the small one I am sure will do the job. In the mean time I will make some small revisions to make them more durable and user friendly. I will then post the .stl files to the 3d forum. enjoy
Stills
Pic of longer sub roadbed jig
Wow that is just great! Have you thought about selling them? You know some of us slower folks like me could sure use one! LOL 😆
I’d be interested in buying also; both for single and double track.
@RubinG posted:I’d be interested in buying also; both for single and double track.
I have track spacers with outlining pencil, and single track pencil jigs. Let me know the track spacing dimension you need, as these can be made to any spacing. These have only been developed for Gargrave track, as that is all I have to measure and test them on.
@mike g. posted:Wow that is just great! Have you thought about selling them? You know some of us slower folks like me could sure use one! LOL 😆
Hoping to just post the .stl files on 3D forum, if someone doesn't have 3D access then I could make some extra's to send out. Don't want to make any money, rather share and give back to this community for every one's help.
I will be looking forward to when you post the files, my printer is looking for something to do!
Very nice, John!!
I uploaded the files yesterday and awaiting approval before they will be posted. I do not know how long that takes, but patience is a virtue! I'll print some up for anyone without a 3D printer. Just PM me.
Update on printing production (that is stretching it) it is taking 18 hours for a set to print. Hmmm I would be printing for centuries to make a million dollars LOL Neither me nor the printer will survive that long...
@Darrell posted:I will be looking forward to when you post the files, my printer is looking for something to do!
Hi, They were just posted yesterday!
Belated Merry Christmas All and Happy New Year.
I have been suffering from analysis paralysis these past few months. However I may have gotten out of that with having added a trolley track. It is still in imaginary stage, however I feel good about how much interest this may add to the entire layout. Scarm has been dusted off and I am getting a good sense of how it will look. While I have been spinning my wheels with layout stagnation, I printed up some elevated supports that will have either one or two tracks at any height I choose. I'll post some pics on the elevated sections and a preliminary scarm when that gets completed.
Again Happy New Years to All !!!
John belated Christmas and I hope you have a wonderful New Year!
It is nice to hear that you may have a trolley system to add to your layout! It will give me something else to drool over on your layout! I can't wait to see how it grows into profusion!
Take care and don't let the gears sit idle to long!
John, I think analysis paralysis can hit all of us at some point. The trolley line sounds like a good idea. Have a blessed New Year!
Hi Mark,
Hoping you and the entire forum had a Happy New Year!!!!
Love all the work you've done on your layout. Fantastic work! I am hoping to attain 1/2 of what you have done.
Here is the preliminary scarm dwg. I know it is VERY preliminary, however I wanted comments and suggestions on all the rules I have broken. LOL I will also upload some pics, I do not have two 30 degree crossings so I moved one for picture taking.
Here are pics with a rudimentary
layout, using paint cans for elevated lines etc. lol
Happy New Year, John! I'm not really up on yards. I don't think you need so many leads to the turntable; two is good. That point may have been discussed before, but it's been a while so I may be thinking of someone else. The tracks that cross over others look to be 4.75" above the 0 level tracks. I don't recall if you are running any high modern equipment. How thick will your roadbed be for the upper tracks? I had one place where I had clearance, but used a screw that was too long on the top and it stuck down too far. Oops! I fixed that and didn't really damage anything. The preliminary tracklaying is a good idea. I'm not the only one who has laid track and found a place where tracks don't meet and need modifications.
Hi John I really like the layout plan. There are a few things that I would think about right off the bat.
1) I noticed that most of your layout table is 4' wide. I know that could be a problem for me, unless I had an overhead creeper.
2) if you removed the inner siding on the side where the TT is you could lessen the width down to around 36" which would leave you room for a service road!
3) I see you have a lot of O-32 curves. I know most of my engines are meant for 0-54 or bigger.
I also see the separation from the main table it only 4.75" I don't know anything that can go under that except an empty flat car.
I know one thing if we get a house with a room close to that size I will be asking permission to use some of your plan for my next layout!
Happy New Years!
@Mark Boyce posted:Happy New Year, John! I'm not really up on yards. I don't think you need so many leads to the turntable; two is good. That point may have been discussed before, but it's been a while so I may be thinking of someone else. The tracks that cross over others look to be 4.75" above the 0 level tracks. I don't recall if you are running any high modern equipment. How thick will your roadbed be for the upper tracks? I had one place where I had clearance, but used a screw that was too long on the top and it stuck down too far. Oops! I fixed that and didn't really damage anything. The preliminary tracklaying is a good idea. I'm not the only one who has laid track and found a place where tracks don't meet and need modifications.
Happy New Year too!
Thanks Mark for paying attention to the details. The elevations were ignored as I wasn’t sure where things would go. I have enough track to keep all inclines to under 3% I just need to now go back through and fix those issues. My goal is for a 6 inch clearance
I was excited about the trolley addition and want everyone’s feedback, so it was rushed to posting lol
thanks
@mike g. posted:Hi John I really like the layout plan. There are a few things that I would think about right off the bat.
1) I noticed that most of your layout table is 4' wide. I know that could be a problem for me, unless I had an overhead creeper.
Happy news years !
yes I am struggling with reducing the width of the layout, I do have an overhead creeper, however it will not be fun to work from, so I may be following your sage advice2) if you removed the inner siding on the side where the TT is you could lessen the width down to around 36" which would leave you room for a service road!
3) I see you have a lot of O-32 curves. I know most of my engines are meant for 0-54 or bigger.
as far as the 0-32 curves, that is the trolley run
I also see the separation from the main table it only 4.75" I don't know anything that can go under that except an empty flat car. Yes I will get elevations sorted as soon as I get some more time on scary
I know one thing if we get a house with a room close to that size I will be asking permission to use some of your plan for my next layout!
you have been a tremendous help for me for sure!!!
thanks
Happy New Years!
John, to piggyback on Mark's post, I don't understand the track that curves across the TT. Is that an elevated track and part of the trolley line? If it is, can I assume the O32 curves will only be used by a trolley?
@DoubleDAZ posted:John, to piggyback on Mark's post, I don't understand the track that curves across the TT. Is that an elevated track and part of the trolley line? If it is, can I assume the O32 curves will only be used by a trolley?
Happy New Year’s
yes all 0-32 curves are trolley only and that section on the TT is operator error . Too many space bar hits I think, so it should stop much shorter and can be adjusted when I start laying out the yard area
thanks
@mike g. posted:If that is just starting, your way ahead of the game! I can tell now that this is going to be a special layout! I am so glad I am fallowing along!
Starting after getting out of analysis paralysis lol. I have been procrastinating wayyyy to long
@Aegis21 posted:Happy New Year’s
yes all 0-32 curves are trolley only and that section on the TT is operator error . Too many space bar hits I think, so it should stop much shorter and can be adjusted when I start laying out the yard area
thanks
That explains that. I didn’t notice the 032 curves. Yes, it is easy to have tracks sections show up unintended.
Im glad you are starting to flex your joints and get out of paralysis! 😃
John, you are so smart! I need to get some trolly cars so I can use the smaller curves I have that my bigger engiens wont run on. Would be a perfect idea for a upper loop between cities or towns!
Hi Mike,
Maybe not so smart, but desperate to have more interest in the layout. Also, I am starting the trolleys most likely bump and go. However I would like to switch to a command control and have trolley stops etc. That maybe biting off more than I can chew. Glad my escapade with the trolley inspired you for your future build. I am sure it will be a fantastic layout, given you had done such a great job before!
Well I am finalizing the track layout on scarm and I know I have read this answer several times around this forum. However I cannot remember the height of a track over another track for clearance??? I think my tallest train is 5" but may have visitors with taller engines. What height will accommodate modern trains? And what is the height for old post war conventional powered trains?
Thanks in Advance
john
The Fastrack elevated trestle set is 5.5" and what I use but I don't have any crazy tall rolling stock. I believe others would suggest 6" clearance.
Based on my experience, especially with today’s scale sized engines, cars and cabooses, you really need a minimum of 6” clearance from rail top to the bottom of the upper level sub- roadbed. And you want to limit your grade to no more than 3% ( 3” per 100”) plus at least a couple of feet of transition - gradual grad e until you reach the 3% grade) to avoid problems with loco pilots and loco length.
just as a side note, I’ve been working on redesigning my plan because I’ve learned that I really can’t work on track when it’s is more than 28” away from me due to short arms and a gut. So I’ll need to narrow my layout to accommodate that limitation. I only mention this so that you take any similar limitations into account.
Thanks again to everyone in the group for their help and insights.
Rubin
@David_NJ posted:The Fastrack elevated trestle set is 5.5" and what I use but I don't have any crazy tall rolling stock. I believe others would suggest 6" clearance.
Thanks David for your input, I will adhere to the 6" clearance as it seems reasonable and will accommodate most visitors running their trains. it maybe good to go 6.25", but I'll see what grades that poses.
Thanks!
@Aegis21 posted:Thanks David for your input, I will adhere to the 6" clearance as it seems reasonable and will accommodate most visitors running their trains. it maybe good to go 6.25", but I'll see what grades that poses.
Thanks!
I went with 5.5" on my 5x9 layout. If I had an independent 2nd level, height/grade wouldn't have been a concern.
@RubinG posted:Based on my experience, especially with today’s scale sized engines, cars and cabooses, you really need a minimum of 6” clearance from rail top to the bottom of the upper level sub- roadbed. And you want to limit your grade to no more than 3% ( 3” per 100”) plus at least a couple of feet of transition - gradual grad e until you reach the 3% grade) to avoid problems with loco pilots and loco length.
just as a side note, I’ve been working on redesigning my plan because I’ve learned that I really can’t work on track when it’s is more than 28” away from me due to short arms and a gut. So I’ll need to narrow my layout to accommodate that limitation. I only mention this so that you take any similar limitations into account.
Thanks again to everyone in the group for their help and insights.
Rubin
Thanks for confirming the 6" min. clearance. And I will heed your sage advice on the grade with transition length. As far as reach goes, that will be an issue I will need to contend with for sure and am planning to have some removable sides to lengthen my arms and shorten my gut. I think going to a 32" table width after removable is taken out, will be the best that the layout will allow. I do have an overhead creeper which will help out in those areas.
Thanks for your input!!!
@David_NJ posted:I went with 5.5" on my 5x9 layout. If I had an independent 2nd level, height/grade wouldn't have been a concern.
Yes two separate levels is a tremendous help with clearances. No grade/trasition worries!
John I think 5.5 is the lowest point on my layout. I researched on this website I recall somebody saying the double-stacks auto carriers are the tallest stock.
John, good advice from everyone. I used 5" minimum and my grades are 4%, however, all my equipment follows steam/diesel transition era prototypes. Those numbers work for me, but they won't work for you. If I had your space, I would have gone with less grades and maybe an inch higher clearance. I certainly won't be running an hi-cubes, double stacks, or pantographs on my layout.
@42trainman posted:John I think 5.5 is the lowest point on my layout. I researched on this website I recall somebody saying the double-stacks auto carriers are the tallest stock.
Thanks for the information! I will strive for 6.0 lowest point, while keeping grade < 3% not sure if that is feasible, but worth shooing for. I wonder if it worth going lower to achive grade or allowing > 3% but < 3.5% grade at one or two sections and having a lower grade right when the incline levels out? Seems from reading the posts on this forum there seems to be issues with transitioning between grade and level track.
@Mark Boyce posted:John, good advice from everyone. I used 5" minimum and my grades are 4%, however, all my equipment follows steam/diesel transition era prototypes. Those numbers work for me, but they won't work for you. If I had your space, I would have gone with less grades and maybe an inch higher clearance. I certainly won't be running an hi-cubes, double stacks, or pantographs on my layout.
Hi Mark,
I doubt I will be running hi-cubes, double stacks or pantographs, although pantographs could be a possibility. I will be striving for 6.0" clearance and less than 3% grade. Although if my grade has to go to 3.3% I feel I could live with that, or at least I am hoping to be able to live with it.
I actually prefer small molive power like a PRR H-6 2-8-0 or G5 4-6-0 or a NYC 4-6-0, but even in that case standard scale passenger cars may be 18” long and give you a hard time, especially if your vertical transitions are too sharp. I also have a bunch of of 60 foot (16”) shorties, but even those are 60% again as long as a 40 Foot scale box car. But on the other hand, I’m finding that 072 curves are tough to work with, even though I have more space to work in than I’ve ever had before. I guess the bottom line is try what you want to, see how it works and be flexible. Have fun and enjoy your railroad.
Rubin
@RubinG posted:I actually prefer small molive power like a PRR H-6 2-8-0 or G5 4-6-0 or a NYC 4-6-0, but even in that case standard scale passenger cars may be 18” long and give you a hard time, especially if your vertical transitions are too sharp. I also have a bunch of of 60 foot (16”) shorties, but even those are 60% again as long as a 40 Foot scale box car. But on the other hand, I’m finding that 072 curves are tough to work with, even though I have more space to work in than I’ve ever had before. I guess the bottom line is try what you want to, see how it works and be flexible. Have fun and enjoy your railroad.
Rubin
Sounds like sage advice! I was fortunate enough to maintain 072 curves on the two main lines. And some spurs are 054. I have so much to learn on clearances with the different length of cars and now engines. I also like the smaller engines as my layout is not huge, so it seems like a better fit.
Thanks for the input,
John
So I am FINALLY getting something done on the layout. My fear of messing things up, over came the reality of progressing with the project. Not sure if this was a good decision or bad, however I will at least find out! The track plan is done (for now) and I will be laying track per the drawing. This way I can outline and cookie cut the roadway and elevate the track accordingly. Again, I do not know if this is correct, however at least something is getting done. The present tabletop is 1/2" plywood, then I have homasote boards and cork road bed. I am tempted to use both, homasote for sound and cork for bevel and ballasting. Any thoughts from anyone would be greatly appreciated. Here are a few pics on the present progress. I have been making brick pavers to use as a town main street with trolley running in both directions. These are small samples to give me an idea on how it will look before running the 3D printer for days and wasting filament to boot! Second pic shows two main lines which will need to align with the Atlas bridge. The pavers shown in the fifth pic will extend to the side walk on each side for a full road handling vehicle traffic in two directions and parking on each side. The vehicles shown are in the parked position. Now to print a couple of larger pieces to show full street.
Sounds like a good plan laying track. For yard areas and sidings. I would place the track directly on the homesote. No need to have a nice ballast profile in the yard or on a siding.
I like the look of the pavers. You see a lot of layouts opt for the concrete look. Nice job of framing the track with the 3D pieces.
I like the brick! And I understand your Paralysis by Analysis - it is intimidating to constantly do things we’ve never done before! But that’s also the joy of this hobby - learning and growing. I’m also finally moving ahead on my layout. Choose to have a bias for action!
John, I agree with Dave to just use Homasote in the yard. I used cork over Homasote on the mainline for the ballast profile. I like the brick for the street running. Very nice!
@Dave_C posted:Sounds like a good plan laying track. For yard areas and sidings. I would place the track directly on the homesote. No need to have a nice ballast profile in the yard or on a siding.
I like the look of the pavers. You see a lot of layouts opt for the concrete look. Nice job of framing the track with the 3D pieces.
Thanks for the homosote advice and I hope the pavers come out as good as I hope.
@Hannibal-St Joseph RR posted:I like the brick! And I understand your Paralysis by Analysis - it is intimidating to constantly do things we’ve never done before! But that’s also the joy of this hobby - learning and growing. I’m also finally moving ahead on my layout. Choose to have a bias for action!
Thanks again for another paver vote. The paralysis comes in when I cannot picture how things will look and feel for anything. That is why I got sidetracked doing the pavers, just needed to see if that was a workable solution to tracks on the street. And I agree on the action part for sure! Again Thanks for the feedback
@Mark Boyce posted:John, I agree with Dave to just use Homasote in the yard. I used cork over Homasote on the mainline for the ballast profile. I like the brick for the street running. Very nice!
Thanks Mark for your feedback. I will certainly use everyone's advice on the flat homosote yard. And it seems the pavers will be a good solution with all the positive feedback. I do tend to stray as I was pinting some paver pieces with man hole covers LOL Again thanks to everyone taking their time to comment and give their advice! VERY much appreciated!
Man hole covers are good!! 👍🏻👍🏻
Got tied up working on a rental property, and boy have I slowed down over the years, geeze
Well I finally made it to the NSLHS and got a 30 degree crossing and the rest of the cork road bed I will need. btw NSLHS not so local hobby shop in Zelienople Pa. about 45 minute drive. Sure do miss Mercer Junction!!!!
Now to continue with the layout build.
I’m glad you got the crossing, John. Yes that is my NSLHS too. It takes me about 45 minutes to get there as well, though fewer miles since I use back roads and a secondary highway, RT 68.
Well the crossing worked great so far, Actually getting track squared, aligned and cut for "final" layout design. Seems like nothing is final in this hobby lol Just when I got a good head of steam, the boiler springs a leak in the form of Covid-19. I'm in the forth day with symptoms and meds, starting to feel well enough to type this note. So it is a set back but recoverable.
While I have this downtime, I was hoping people will advise on my next quandry. I have 1/2" ply down with track on it and will have it in "final" place soon, not sure how to do the homosote layer. The section of the layout that is a flat yard is easy, just slide homosote under track. My issue arises with the sections that have elevated lines. Do I take up track, lay homosote down, lay track down again to mark for cookie cutter. Or do I cookie cutter plywood and use that as template for cutting homosote. Homosote is purely for sound deadening. I am thinking of using cork roadbed directly under track. I hope this is coherently written, as my wife says I haven't been coherent for several days. 
IMHO, there is no need to use Homasote on the elevated (strip) sections. Just cork roadbed is perfectly fine. That's what I do. Because your 2nd level may have a relatively small surface area for sound transmission, Homasote would be an unnecessary overkill.
I agree with Bruce. No need for more than cork on the elevated sections.
Hope you make a full recovery from Covid. Been there done that 3 times.....none were fun at all.
Bob
John, It sounds like you got a bade case of it, but are slowly getting better. I'm sorry.
You have an excellent question. I have seen where some folks have been so exact in their cookie cutter process that plywood/Homasote/cork/track all form perfect curves. Mine certainly never turns out that way, though I have a lot of trouble controlling the saber saw to begin with. I did a lo of it with a hand keyhole saw, but my layout is a lot smaller than yours. I tried to make my cookie cutter plywood extra wide to take into account 'slop', that is where the upper layers don't line up. Also I thought I would have something to attach scenery to. I then laid out the track again to mark how I wanted to cut the Homasote. Hopefully there wouldn't be as much slop. That didn't always work out as hoped. After Jeff @ScoutingDad showed where He made trapezoids of plywood to fit to make the curves, I tried that. It turned out not bad for me. All said, I think I was in the same quandary as you.
If I do another layout, I'm not going to use both Homasote and cork, much like Bruce wrote. In fact, I ran out of cork on this layout, and just went with the Homasote until I used it up too. I'm not going to mess with grades either. I'll just work on one level.
@Bruce Brown posted:IMHO, there is no need to use Homasote on the elevated (strip) sections. Just cork roadbed is perfectly fine. That's what I do. Because your 2nd level may have a relatively small surface area for sound transmission, Homasote would be an unnecessary overkill.
Bruce,
Thanks for the advice which makes perfect sense. Not much of the drum effect on elevated sections.
@RSJB18 posted:I agree with Bruce. No need for more than cork on the elevated sections.
Hope you make a full recovery from Covid. Been there done that 3 times.....none were fun at all.
Bob
Hi Bob,
Thanks for affirming Bruces advice. As for going through this 3 times, I cannot imagine. Hope you have a clean bill of health. May God Bless You
Thanks
John
@Mark Boyce posted:John, It sounds like you got a bade case of it, but are slowly getting better. I'm sorry.
You have an excellent question. I have seen where some folks have been so exact in their cookie cutter process that plywood/Homasote/cork/track all form perfect curves. Mine certainly never turns out that way, though I have a lot of trouble controlling the saber saw to begin with. I did a lo of it with a hand keyhole saw, but my layout is a lot smaller than yours. I tried to make my cookie cutter plywood extra wide to take into account 'slop', that is where the upper layers don't line up. Also I thought I would have something to attach scenery to. I then laid out the track again to mark how I wanted to cut the Homasote. Hopefully there wouldn't be as much slop. That didn't always work out as hoped. After Jeff @ScoutingDad showed where He made trapezoids of plywood to fit to make the curves, I tried that. It turned out not bad for me. All said, I think I was in the same quandary as you.
If I do another layout, I'm not going to use both Homasote and cork, much like Bruce wrote. In fact, I ran out of cork on this layout, and just went with the Homasote until I used it up too. I'm not going to mess with grades either. I'll just work on one level.
Hi Mark,
I am getting better, and glad for all help my wonderful has been through this ordeal.
Sounds like Bruce, Bob and yourself are all in agreement with using cork on elevations. I question my ability to use the saber saw for cookie cutter curves. Haven't used saber saw in a while, lately its been jig saw. I will heed the having something to adhere scenery to, as this is where I am totally in the dark. Making scenery , walls, hills, cliffs, distance from track, distance from curves. I will have to keep my passenger cars and largest loco out to check for clearences. I do have the NMRA clearance plate which I will use for the tunnel.
Again thanks for the directional advice. Now to get on the right track and continue the build. Next quest will be to roughly outine/imagine area's for painting backdrops. I might attempt my own, if it doesn't work out well then I can always redo with another plan.
Thanks
John
John,
Feel better. As to the backgrounds, it’s really a good idea to put the backgrounds on Masonite , framed by 1x2’s rather than directly on the drywall. There’ve been numerous articles on how to do this in MR, CTT and any number of Kalmbach books. It’s really hard to beat the quality of backdrops available from LARC, Backdrops.com and others, but they get pricey, especially if you’re trying to cover 20 foot walls, like I am. Also, I’m still trying to finalize my track plan before I order the backdrops, but at least I’m making progress on benchwork.
im looking forward to seeing pics of your layout.
Rubin
As I am re-reading the posts, I noticed that there was no mention of sealing the roadbed, whether cork or homasote, with a coat of flat grey paint, to prevent the roadbed from drying out over time. This used to be standard advice. Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
Thanks,
Rubin
@RubinG posted:As I am re-reading the posts, I noticed that there was no mention of sealing the roadbed, whether cork or homasote, with a coat of flat grey paint, to prevent the roadbed from drying out over time. This used to be standard advice. Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
Thanks,
Rubin
I guess you can paint but I didn’t see any benefit. The cork gets covered with ballast and glue, and the rests gets some form of ground cover. I did paint the base of the table and any cover like homasote with a sandy color paint to help blend in any small areas that show through the ground cover, but this was purely cosmetic - not to prevent any drying.
The only reason I painted the cork and top of Homasote on my current layout gray was because I wasn’t going to be ballasting for some time, so I thought it would look better in the interim. I have never painted any of it on previous layouts.
Hi John, I am sorry I haven't been here for a while, but I really love what you're doing! As for Homasote on the upper level I am with the rest of the guys! I would still use cork or foam roadbed to keep the noise down. With the work you have done so far, I know you will do fine with a jig and Saber saw will be perfect! I want you to know that I am fallowing you as you're asking a lot of questions, I was never smart enough to ask and would have saved me time and $$$$! Who knows there might be other one's I never thought about!
Side note I do have a question, what is the brand of 3D printer do you have? Just in case I get a little extra $$ from our house sale! LOL
I used the Rust-O-Leum flecked gray garage floor paint on my roadbed, whether cork or foam. It helps hide any divots in the ballast and looks pretty good while ballasting is pending.
Hi John, I ment.to ask you what 3D printer would you recommend for someone who has never done anything like that?
@mike g. posted:Hi John, I ment.to ask you what 3D printer would you recommend for someone who has never done anything like that?
Hi Mike,
First I have EXTREMELY Limited experience and overall knowledge of the current products available. I can say what I have I am overly thrilled to have. I was very fortunate to take advantage of a temporary over stock problem with one of the distributors and get a creality CR-10S pro for 160.00 bucks. That was a steal at the time and may still be a geart deal if you could find it. At the time I was recovering from knee surgery and had lots of time to learn proper calibrations and alignments for this unit. along with adding upgrades that I feel should be standard (which at this time maybe standard/stock features) Tying the two z-axis drive screws with a toothed belt to keep each side in sync. A BL touch unit for z-axsis heigth measurements are the two huge ones for the CR10. I did find very small objects were a challenge to print with details intact, so for items that are real small detailed I purchased a resin printed which I have played around with, and it does a great job. That one is an eglegoo Mars 3 resin printer. For the couple of items I have printed the detail is spectacular. There are learning curves for using the software to design, then the slicing software ans the printing software.
Basically I am very happy with the two purchases, and like anything else time spent learning pays huge dividends. The PLA filament printer is great for making anything larger, the resin printer is great for small detail items like crates, rooftop duct work etc. I went with water soluable resin which is still smelley and hazardous to work with, to do it over again. I would do the filament printer and get to know that and then decide if you need small detail parts that are beyond the pla printers capabilities. A decent printer will make or break your experience with 3D printing if the time is not put in.
That is the best I can say as I am not an expert, just can relay my experiences.
John
@KarlDL posted:I used the Rust-O-Leum flecked gray garage floor paint on my roadbed, whether cork or foam. It helps hide any divots in the ballast and looks pretty good while ballasting is pending.
That is extremely helpful info! Thanks
@mike g. posted:Hi John, I am sorry I haven't been here for a while, but I really love what you're doing! As for Homasote on the upper level I am with the rest of the guys! I would still use cork or foam roadbed to keep the noise down. With the work you have done so far, I know you will do fine with a jig and Saber saw will be perfect! I want you to know that I am fallowing you as you're asking a lot of questions, I was never smart enough to ask and would have saved me time and $$$$! Who knows there might be other one's I never thought about!
Side note I do have a question, what is the brand of 3D printer do you have? Just in case I get a little extra $$ from our house sale! LOL
Talk about not being here, LOL I have been the King of missing member... Yes my lack of knowledge on this hobby is immense to say the least. I have the tendency to mess things up when it comes to saber saw work, hopefully it won't be so bad this time around...
Thanks John, I have been doing some studying this morning and think the PLA is the way for me to start. Here is what I am looking at right now, but that could change by the time I get moved and a train room up!
I have spent all day researching them and this one seams to come up as the easiest to set up and use! Plus reading all the reviews and tech remarks Bambu Lab sure seams to stand behind their products!
Thanks again for your input and when I get one I will probably bother you even more! LOL
As I now have 5 kit built buildings that I made to take off the roofs or whole floors, someone just over the weekend wrote that I should think about getting a 3D printer as well. I have been following modelers who use them for some time. The right one would probably pay for itself over buying details I don’t have the skills to scratch build. We will see.
@Mark Boyce posted:As I now have 5 kit built buildings that I made to take off the roofs or whole floors, someone just over the weekend wrote that I should think about getting a 3D printer as well. I have been following modelers who use them for some time. The right one would probably pay for itself over buying details I don’t have the skills to scratch build. We will see.
Hi Mark,
For my 2 cents, If you are looking to add detail items to scenes then a resin printer is the way to go. Any item with detail that length or width is less than 2 to 3 inches resin is a must. Building walls, street pavers, windows, doors are all possible and more practical with a filament printer (pla) I have done a lot with the pla printer (the chimney I sent you for your building is an example of pla quality and detail) Resin details and quality for small items is fantastic, however I am shy of the caustic nature and precautions that are a necessity of resin printing. I haven't done too much resin printing for that reason, plus I am not close to that stage of my layout. Your kit building abilities are fantastic and you would do well designing and doing your own kits. Or adding/expanding or changing an existing kit.
my 2 cents
John
Well I have a good amount of track laid down for getting cookie cutter ready to cut the elevated sections of track. Once I have the cuts drawn, I will remove track, plywood and make cuts per track tracing. Now will also be the time to work on the backdrop with plywood removed and walls made accessible. I have for 80% of layout blue painted walls as a backdrop and several people mentioned I should be using Masonite and 1x2's supporting the Masonite for backdrop painting. What is/are the downsides to using the walls as a canvas? I will be putting up an 9' section of Masonite, in the back room between layout and fish/pump room. which will be removable to access the back area's in that section.
Thanks in Advance
John
@Aegis21 posted:Well I have a good amount of track laid down for getting cookie cutter ready to cut the elevated sections of track. Once I have the cuts drawn, I will remove track, plywood and make cuts per track tracing. Now will also be the time to work on the backdrop with plywood removed and walls made accessible. I have for 80% of layout blue painted walls as a backdrop and several people mentioned I should be using Masonite and 1x2's supporting the Masonite for backdrop painting. What is/are the downsides to using the walls as a canvas? I will be putting up an 9' section of Masonite, in the back room between layout and fish/pump room. which will be removable to access the back area's in that section.
Thanks in Advance
John
John, sur3e sounds like you have been really busy! I sure hope you will be posting more photos as you go along! With me having to build a new layout I am going to need all kinds of ideas!
@Aegis21 posted:Well I have a good amount of track laid down for getting cookie cutter ready to cut the elevated sections of track. Once I have the cuts drawn, I will remove track, plywood and make cuts per track tracing. Now will also be the time to work on the backdrop with plywood removed and walls made accessible. I have for 80% of layout blue painted walls as a backdrop and several people mentioned I should be using Masonite and 1x2's supporting the Masonite for backdrop painting. What is/are the downsides to using the walls as a canvas? I will be putting up an 9' section of Masonite, in the back room between layout and fish/pump room. which will be removable to access the back area's in that section.
Thanks in Advance
John
John, this may not be much help as I’m still evaluating the situation. Like you I painted all the walls cloudless blue. My granddaughter did some clouds with stencils and rattle cans; and some free hand. In the meantime my plans changed and some of the clouds will have to be made smaller to create the idea of distance. My objective is to create a permanent Christmas layout. Recently we had some snow in mid state PA and I took some landscape shots of snowy fields in front of mountains. As a result I’m contemplating getting that printed. Before installing I would cut away the sky so that once installed the blue from the paint would create a consistent color.
Jay
@Aegis21 John, I presume you have drywall walls. When I sold my house the buyer wanted no trace the room ever had a layout in it. Fortunately I had used Masonite for my backdrops and only had to remove a couple of screws to de-layout the walls. Can't imagine how many coats of Kilz would be needed to cover over painted drywall.
I've got concrete walls in my layout area so 1/8 Masonite hung from the ceiling joists will do the trick for me. Trying to decide if I want a 90 degree corner or curve it.
@Aegis21 posted:Hi Mark,
For my 2 cents, If you are looking to add detail items to scenes then a resin printer is the way to go. Any item with detail that length or width is less than 2 to 3 inches resin is a must. Building walls, street pavers, windows, doors are all possible and more practical with a filament printer (pla) I have done a lot with the pla printer (the chimney I sent you for your building is an example of pla quality and detail) Resin details and quality for small items is fantastic, however I am shy of the caustic nature and precautions that are a necessity of resin printing. I haven't done too much resin printing for that reason, plus I am not close to that stage of my layout. Your kit building abilities are fantastic and you would do well designing and doing your own kits. Or adding/expanding or changing an existing kit.
my 2 cents
John
Thank you for the information, John. There are always pros and cons to everything it seems.
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:John, this may not be much help as I’m still evaluating the situation. Like you I painted all the walls cloudless blue. My granddaughter did some clouds with stencils and rattle cans; and some free hand. In the meantime my plans changed and some of the clouds will have to be made smaller to create the idea of distance. My objective is to create a permanent Christmas layout. Recently we had some snow in mid state PA and I took some landscape shots of snowy fields in front of mountains. As a result I’m contemplating getting that printed. Before installing I would cut away the sky so that once installed the blue from the paint would create a consistent color.
Jay
Hi Jay, That sounds like you have an overall plan and now just need to follow it. With everyone's responses, I get the idea that using masonite is a good idea when you go to sell ( which I will not be around to see) and more effectively if you print a backdrop and then need to glue it to a surface. Not gluing to drywall and using masonite makes a ton of sense in that situation. After the last time I removed wallpaper I vowed NEVER to wall paper again! And a printed backdrop is the same principle, maybe worse considering backdrops seem to use spray adhesive and not a removable paste. I am leaning towards the cheap lazy route for painting directly on the walls. That may change when I see how terrible it is coming out and switch to printed backdrops!
Great job on the sky and clouds, shame you may cover them with a print.
Thanks for everyone's responses.
John
@mike g. posted:John, sur3e sounds like you have been really busy! I sure hope you will be posting more photos as you go along! With me having to build a new layout I am going to need all kinds of ideas!
Hi Mike,
Been somewhat busy with getting over Covid more than working on layout. At least it has me responding to everyone's comments, which are immensely appreciated. And I will keep posting photos when there is positive or negative progress. lol
Thanks for your support
John
@ScoutingDad posted:@Aegis21 John, I presume you have drywall walls. When I sold my house the buyer wanted no trace the room ever had a layout in it. Fortunately I had used Masonite for my backdrops and only had to remove a couple of screws to de-layout the walls. Can't imagine how many coats of Kilz would be needed to cover over painted drywall.
I've got concrete walls in my layout area so 1/8 Masonite hung from the ceiling joists will do the trick for me. Trying to decide if I want a 90 degree corner or curve it.
interesting that you are planning to hang your masonite. Is it that hard to work with that it deserves to be hung at high noon? LOL just my dry dad humor, your plan sounds good and gives another way to use masonite as a backdrop. I will consider the masonite in the 9 foot section that is void of walls.
Thanks for another great idea!
John
@mike g. posted:Thanks John, I have been doing some studying this morning and think the PLA is the way for me to start. Here is what I am looking at right now, but that could change by the time I get moved and a train room up!
Bambu Lab A1 Combo
I have spent all day researching them and this one seams to come up as the easiest to set up and use! Plus reading all the reviews and tech remarks Bambu Lab sure seams to stand behind their products!
Thanks again for your input and when I get one I will probably bother you even more! LOL
Well printers have come along for sure. I am envious of the nozzle change ability and auto calibration with flow rate control! That is a very impressive unit for sure!
John, I can agree if I wasn’t planning to move, painting the walls sounds like a good plan.
I hope you get over Covid soon and are feeling up to par to continue working on the layout.
@Aegis21 John, I did basement waterproofing decades ago and the experience led me to an aversion to drilling holes in basement walls unless absolutely necessary. The Masonite is easy enough to hang, the only thing is how to handle a curved corner if hung. Going out to buy 3 panels today to start the process. Not really looking forward to it, but tired of looking at the concrete walls.
Jeff here is a thought, if you put a 2x4 attached to the back of the layout about 2' in from the corner on both sides and then you can force a bend into the section that needs to be curved. Just an idea. Then continue hanging the rest of the backdrop.
@Hannibal-St Joseph RR posted:I like the brick! And I understand your Paralysis by Analysis - it is intimidating to constantly do things we’ve never done before! But that’s also the joy of this hobby - learning and growing. I’m also finally moving ahead on my layout. Choose to have a bias for action!
Thanks for the encouragement! It does help a lot!!
Here are a set of update pics of layout. I am hoping the layout is functional and will keep operators interest for a long time. I am still wondering/confused on the yard and which tracks and where they should have cross overs. I'm sure I am leaving things out that were some of the features I was looking for, however I need to get this project rolling. Pun intended.
Thanks in advance for all the help everyone has supplied.
John
More layout pics
Here is the latest scarm file, I hope! lol
John, very impressive! I sure hope we find a new house with a big basement that the CEO will let me have most of for my train room and layout.
@Aegis21 posted:I am still wondering/confused on the yard and which tracks and where they should have cross overs.
John, there's nothing magical about crossovers in the yard. They're simply placed wherever you think they might be useful based on how you intend to operate.
In this example, there's an engine on the Lt Blue track waiting to use the turntable. There's another engine on the turntable coming out of the roundhouse. For whatever reason, it wants to leave the yard using the Lt Blue track, not the Red track. So, it can use the crossover to do just that.
In this example, a train pulled into the yard on the Yellow track. The engine needs to get out, so it dropped the cars before the crossover and can use the crossover to the Blue track to "escape". The same is true if the train had come in on the Blue track. The engine could then crossover to the Yellow track to escape.
In this example, the small Blue yard engine just finished assembling a consist of tanker cars on the Lt Blue track. It now wants to combine the 2 Brown cars on the Red track with the 4 Brown cars on the Green track. It can use the Blue/Red crossover to pick up the 2 cars on the Red track, then move through the Red/Green crossover to attach them to the 4 on the Green track.
Of course, if you don't intend to perform these types of yard operations, then you don't need any crossovers. The idea is to provide some interest moving cars around to build consists, rather than just watch trains run. Or you might have a friend who enjoys yard operations. Or if you have friends over for an actual operating session where one will build consists while others run trains to various points on the layout delivering full loads and picking up empties, etc. Due to the limited size of the yard, these may not be totally prototypical, but hopefully they give you ideas for why crossovers are included in yards.
Great pics and great progress. But I’d offer two observations: 1) it looks like you haven’t left much room for scenery or structures; 2) I note you’re using a Lionel bascule bridge. It’s a great accessory, but many modern scale locos can’t pass through it because it’s too narrow. Just to be safe, I’d check it out with the engine’s you expect or want to run. I had the same black version you have but sold it because of this issue. I’m looking forward to seeing more photos as you progress.
Rubin
Great examples Dave! I like how you spell it out!
John, side note/question. Who is the maker of your Topside Creeper?
Looks good, John! Nice description, Dave!
Always remember, if you don’t like something later after track is ‘permanently’ fastened down, you can change it. Look how many times I have changed things. Yes, the pristine wood now looks chopped up, but lots of screws hold everything solid. 😄
I will keep that in mind Mark for sure.
I unfortunately will be in bed with a case of covid-19 rebound, so progress is definitely on hold.
THANKS for all the help from everyone.
John
John , I'm so sorry your still under the weather with Covid! I wish you a speedy recovery!
John, I'm praying you get over this rebound once and for all!! You have a railroad to build!!
@DoubleDAZ posted:John, there's nothing magical about crossovers in the yard. They're simply placed wherever you think they might be useful based on how you intend to operate.
In this example, there's an engine on the Lt Blue track waiting to use the turntable. There's another engine on the turntable coming out of the roundhouse. For whatever reason, it wants to leave the yard using the Lt Blue track, not the Red track. So, it can use the crossover to do just that.
In this example, a train pulled into the yard on the Yellow track. The engine needs to get out, so it dropped the cars before the crossover and can use the crossover to the Blue track to "escape". The same is true if the train had come in on the Blue track. The engine could then crossover to the Yellow track to escape.
In this example, the small Blue yard engine just finished assembling a consist of tanker cars on the Lt Blue track. It now wants to combine the 2 Brown cars on the Red track with the 4 Brown cars on the Green track. It can use the Blue/Red crossover to pick up the 2 cars on the Red track, then move through the Red/Green crossover to attach them to the 4 on the Green track.Of course, if you don't intend to perform these types of yard operations, then you don't need any crossovers. The idea is to provide some interest moving cars around to build consists, rather than just watch trains run. Or you might have a friend who enjoys yard operations. Or if you have friends over for an actual operating session where one will build consists while others run trains to various points on the layout delivering full loads and picking up empties, etc. Due to the limited size of the yard, these may not be totally prototypical, but hopefully they give you ideas for why crossovers are included in yards.
not sure what image doesn't show, however you have answered several question i had wit this excellent write up. es I would like to have yard operations for interest and if they aren't prototypical , well that is the way it is. lol
Dave, Rubin previously mentioned that the black bascule bridge is narrow and some engines may not fit. That pointed out a glaring fact that is the only access to/from yard. Except for the crossover switches from Main line 2 to yard. Can you suggest better access to yard? I am bummed about bascule bridge as it has sentimental value. My Dad and I would go through the bascule bridge on the way to our fishing grounds. 
I cannot recall who inquired about topside creeper, it is a Traxion 3-100 which is solidly built and I use it ofetn, it works out well so far.
John, I don't have a solution for the bascule bridge. As I understand it, the problem is that some modern equipment, such as double stacks, double-deck passenger cars, Schnabels for oversized loads, electrics with pantographs up, etc., won't clear the top. If you don't have those, you shouldn't have a problem, but you may have to limit future purchases or swap out the bascule. You can still run that equipment, you'll just have to use alternate methods to get them to/from the yard. I don't see anyplace you can move it that would make sense. So much of your design is dual-tracks. In fact, there are 2 places where you have single-track bridges that need to be looked at.
First thanks to all for the well wishes! I think I am turning the corner and symptoms are waning.
Dave, Thanks for your input on the bascule bridge, I do not have anything that is as large you have mentioned, and if I do then another route to yard maybe a good alternative to keep those options opened. Two single track bridges that need looked at is the bascule bridge and a single track MTH bridge. The bascule bridge needs to be with the MTH dual track bridge as shown for simulating the River and the single track MTH bridge should be somewhere around the main street town. It is very hard for me to visualize each section, landscaping, buildings, roads, industries, towns and the like. I am taking the approach suggested by taking one section at a time, however it would be so much easier to do backdrops first then build out, so to speak. Maybe that is another reason masonite makes sense. It can be removed to be painted, although having nice finished seams would be another challenge. If I am feeling a little better I will look into adding another yard access without adding even more track to an already crowded layout.
Thanks again ALL
John
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
