Hi Dave, Thanks for getting the grades under control so to speak. I thought I had the tracks on the bridge the same level as the first pic shows??? Is this the area you are referencing? Great idea on the 096 curve turnout, that certainly makes a lot of sense. as does moving the other curved switch and getting grades in check! Will the bridges work with the height differences? Having a 4 inch height difference is 16 feet added vessel clearance which gives the Bascule bridge a purpose.
John, yes, you did have the bridge tracks the same height, so poor choice of words, but the grade to the switch at 2” was 3.5% and 3% in the other direction. The other track was 3.1% to the top. The grade from the yard switch to the curved switch was 2.9% and the single track before the yard switch was also 2.9%. Now, if you put the switches on the grades you might be okay percentage-wise, but I think you’re asking for trouble if you include switches on the grades, especially the more complicated curved switches. I also try to avoid beginning and ending grades on switches because all grades need an easement and including the track connected to the switch might result in you ending up with an actual grade higher than you want or flexing the switch itself.
Even though it makes sense to me, my color-coding scheme might be causing some of your difficulties. Unlike RR-Track, I don’t know of another way to select tracks on a grade except 1 at a time or by color-coding. For me the former is tedious because I edit grades a lot. I suppose I could stop color-coding all the other tracks, but it makes it a lot easier to keep things straight on layouts with dual mains, etc.
My rationale for posting them with color is so folks can readily see things. My expectation is that you would then make or copy the changes to your file. I add the color to make my editing process easier and quicker. I add the Daz to the filename to distinguish my file from yours. If you want it to be your new file, I expect you to rename it and drop the Daz. If it would help, I can remove the colors from the photos and SCARM files I post.
FWIW, grade tracks and only grade tracks are colored purple. All other “flat” tracks, regardless of height, can be clear, a single color or the multiple colors I use. To get rid of my colors, all you have to do is set the track color to None, then Select All in the Edit menu and hit the Track Color button. The color button only affects tracks, so this is what you get.
Thanks for clearing things up for me. I am learning everyday and you are an exceptional teacher. The colors are great and I see the advantage when selecting track for grades. I agree with keeping switches level and hopefully that will reduce trouble areas. I feel like it is getting close to a final plan, which as Mark says, will be modified as needed when unexpected issues arise. And I will swap names when I post a drawing I altered (messed with) so as to keep things orgainized.
John, it’s up to you what you do with the names, I was just offering my thoughts so you understand why I do what I do. In some threads we have multiple people offering suggestions, so we add our initials or something to the filename just to keep versions straight.
I have started putting a copy of your drawings in a separate folder named Daz Gold so I do not alter it and can always go back to the correct drawing without my 2 cents added. 
Another topic: Dave, I know you have the 3" rule for getting track close to walls. Can you or anyone else chime in on how much room is needed between track and wall to build a mountain going up the wall? I know it could be a straight vertical cliff, however there still needs to be some room to have a bare minimum base. Thanks All
That made me laugh out loud, Daz Gold. 😂😂😂
In programming I always kept a version that was considered GOLD until the new version was fully de-bugged and tested. Glad you laughed!
Well, I did/do too, just never referred to it as Gold.
Our computer manager always said, “Back up your gold!”
That’s what I was taught when I was starting to learn how to model in solid works.
John, Missing your updates. Anything new?
I’m curious too. I was going through my files today and realized it’s been awhile since you posted. Hopefully everything is okay.
All is ok with me, needed to focus on family a bit. Thanks for asking
Hello All,
It has been a busy time for us and will still be to a certain extent, however some railroad building can start next week. Took a trip out to Conn. to move our daughter out to Pa. Long time coming but worth the wait for sure. I did squeeze in a stop at Ross Custom switches and picked up a 27" turntable ,which Steve put together for me to pick up in just two days! Steve HUGE Thanks!!! Now to be able to have some bench work completed so it can be installed. It was great to see Steve and he was as hospitable and friendly as always. Steve is a Great guy, and great to do business with, not many people can accomplish what he has done. Steve constantly delivers HIGH quality American made products at fair prices. That combined with his support and the backing of his products with follow up service is just outstanding! Many kudos to Ross Custom Switches and Steve for making them possible.
Now back to unloading the U-Haul LOL
Glad your you and your family are healthy. I look forward to following your build.
John, I assumed you had been busy with something or other. I'm glad you got your daughter moved from Connecticut. I hope all goes well for her here.
Congratulations on getting the turntable from Steve! That will be a great feature on the layout. I wish I had room for one. I never even had room when I modeled in N scale. 
Steve seemed like a great guy when I met him at York, and everyone says so. I, of course, was buying some Ross switches. I went to C.T. McCormick a few weeks ago to get the last 3 Ross switches I needed. That was the third time I got some from Jeff.
@Mark Boyce posted:John, I assumed you had been busy with something or other. I'm glad you got your daughter moved from Connecticut. I hope all goes well for her here.
Congratulations on getting the turntable from Steve! That will be a great feature on the layout. I wish I had room for one. I never even had room when I modeled in N scale.
I hope I have room! LOL
First, thanks to all who have helped and inspired me along so far. For some reason I am struggling to get an overall table height. I will have some unreachable areas that I will use a topside creeper to access for the build and for running trains. The lower I have it the easier the reach, however I do not want to have it so low that the main perspective is looking down on roof tops. At this time I have an L-girder design for the most part and legs are 40" to 42" high (they are adjustable) So my question is: Do I cut existing legs lower than 40", or use the 40-42" height or consider cutting new legs longer than 42" The 40" maybe a little low, however for myself I would sit on a rolling stool and run trains from that perspective. All opinions are needed and welcome.
Also has anyone used a 27" Ross turntable? And if so which roundhouse did you use? (Korber, Brennan, Altoona etc.)
Easy question to answer: 42" unless you are under 25 years old. The ease of working under the table is more important than a few inches difference in perspective. You can increase table reach by standing on a small stool.
Thanks Bruce
How much time is spent underneath the table during construction and after construction. I do have some difficulties with underneath work.
Thanks in advance
John
My layout is 42” high, and I wish it was 48 or 50. Trains look better, and it’s easier to work underneath. Also, more storage underneath. JohnA
John,
Of course it depends on the type (duck-under or walk-around) , overall size, and whether or not you want to hide the wiring under the surface. Most of my time spent under the table has been associated with the track and accessory wiring.
I originally picked 36" legs for my duck-under style table of 22 legs. I soon realized that was a colossal mistake once I started wiring in the track. I used an automobile tire jack, going from leg to leg with a lot of shims and 2 x 4's, to raise the table surface to 41 1/4". (Leg is actually 40 1/4" now)
Everyone has a different situation and physique so it's hard to make a one-size-fits-all decree. But since you have the option to use a leg in that 40 to 42 range, that's what I would consider.
John, I agree with 40 to 42 inches. I have tried to make as much wiring as possible accessible from the aisle while sitting on my roll around stool. I have managed pretty well considering I haven’t had to pull with stuff under the layout of wire. I wouldn’t have been able to reach in as far if the top was lower.
John,
Roundhouse and turntable placement, and the space needed based on choices, has been previously discussed on this forum. See:
https://ogrforum.com/...plan-design-part-two or
https://ogrforum.com/topic/turntable-7
I found these by advance searching for "roundhouse turntable angle," and there are lots more. If you read all the way through track-plan-design-part-two, you will see there is a lot of math involved to find what combinations will fit your available space.
Chuck
Thanks Dave, Bruce, Mark, and everyone else's input for table height. I will be using the 40-42 inch height. This is adjustable with bolts drilled into bottom of legs for adjustment. The build will have a similar lift bridge as Mark has on his layout. So I have to be aware of how high the bridge clearance needs to be for full up position. So in that respect I have a height restriction. Of course the bridge is in the area of an I-beam holding up the house, so that will not be moved. 
Again Thanks to all
They always put those pesky I beams where you don’t want them. 😉 I think you are making a good choice and looking at all the obstacles. Just don’t buy a 48” long bridge when your opening is only 26” like I did! 😄
Ok here is the first baby step on L-girder bench work. I am still not set on the top material, as plywood prices are outrageous to say the least. Extruded foam (2" thick) is getting a lot of points from what I have read in the forum. Having essentially two main lines at different heights will have me make some supports from plywood as Mark and many others have done. Not sure how that interfaces with foam board. The more I read, the more questions I have and then learn I know even less than when I started. 
lol
John, it is a good start. Yes it is bad lumber prices have gone so high. I use a 2” sheet of foam for my Christmas layout. I would certainly hold out for wood on a permanent layout and using foam for scenic supports.
I could be wrong because I used 1” rigid foam for my holiday layouts, but I thought it was noisy. Most use it for landscaping on top of a plywood base. The 2” might be quieter and it let’s you carve out rivers, valleys, etc.
Yes noise is a concern of mine. Also how to secure track down and elevating the track. I was also pondering homosote base and rigid foam on top of the homosote.
Central and Western HomaRoad Supply is offering precut pieces to accommodate O gauge. I intend to use it.
Hi Jay,
This looks like a good place to start with road bed. The price seems reasonable.
Thanks
John
Why would you place a potential "noise maker" (rigid foam) on top of what is usually considered a "noise suppressor" (homasote)? Most put homasote on top of plywood for its sound deadening qualities.
Chuck
I agree with Chuck, put the Homasote on top. Also, I just learned about C&W Homaroad here on the Forum recently. I would definitely look into Jay’s link if I still needed roadbed.
One of the owners, Russ Chilton is very responsive.
I do appreciate the expertise and experience everyone has and gives freely to newbie's like myself. My original plan had 1/2" plywood with 1/2" homosote on top for sound deadening. My heart skipped several beats as the big box stores are asking 50.00 for 1/2 ply and 35.00 for 1/2 homosote. needing at least 10 sheets each. Yes, I realize this is not an inexpensive hobby, however $1000.00 just for the top might put a halt to the project. If this is my only real option for stability and reasonable sound deadening then I will be forced to go this route. Could I "get away" with using 1/2 ply and then just use the C&W homaroad for deadening or is that fool hardy?
Thanks to all in advance
I used 1/2” ply, but my joists are on 16” centers. How far apart are you putting your joists
Think of it this way. Other than the yard area, most of your layout is comprised of grades. That makes it ideal for cookie-cutter style construction. This style places plywood and homasote just under the tracks, not over the entire layout. If you cover your layout with sheets of plywood, you’re still going to need to support the tracks on the grades. This means risers and probably more plywood roadbed under the tracks. Cookie-cutter requires a lot of “cutting” and a lot of planning to minimize waste, but it’s something you should consider. It’s also partly the reason L-girder bench work was designed.
Always excellent insights Dave. In developing my design, which I changed again this week, I’ve considered this concept for a portion. I have to hash it out on my laptop instead of paper.
Thank you
Jay, some folks lay a sheet and then cut out the track design to raise the grades with risers. This method makes it easy to add straight walls or cliffs. Full cookie-cutter requires filling in the spaces between tracks with cloth, chicken wire, etc., to craft the landscaping.
I’ll have a stretch along a wall of about 20’ for elevation. So, I was contemplating open bench work in this area with a painted cloud backdrop enhanced with a blown up landscape photo and some flats to create depth. But, I’m sure things will change. This weekend I will use painters tape to mark off the dimensions on the floor.
@Mark Boyce posted:I used 1/2” ply, but my joists are on 16” centers. How far apart are you putting your joists
They are planned for 16 to 18 depending on interferences
@DoubleDAZ posted:Think of it this way. Other than the yard area, most of your layout is comprised of grades. That makes it ideal for cookie-cutter style construction. This style places plywood and homasote just under the tracks, not over the entire layout. If you cover your layout with sheets of plywood, you’re still going to need to support the tracks on the grades. This means risers and probably more plywood roadbed under the tracks. Cookie-cutter requires a lot of “cutting” and a lot of planning to minimize waste, but it’s something you should consider. It’s also partly the reason L-girder bench work was designed.
Hi Dave,
I'm not skilled in cutting plywood with curves. I also do not have the concept of where to or how to layout the track for cutting the supports. Do I layout track on plywood and trace out the cuts???I
Also what thickness plywood and how close are supports needed for raised track?
I agree most of the layout is on grades which will need support, the yard area and turntable roundhouse area is almost all flat. My thought would be to plywood the yard area at zero elevation and leave the main lines on cookie cutter supports
help
John, I’m not either. I’ve seen videos of people using elaborate templates to draw curves on plywood, then cut them out with a jigsaw. They drew the curves next to each other to minimize waste. Then they glued segments together using a router and spline inserts. In some cases they just glued the ends together and added a support piece underneath. In other cases they laid the track out, drew around the edges, then removed the track and cut the outline with a jigsaw. They then added risers underneath to create the grades. This is probably the easiest, any the way you pictured, but it doesn’t save any plywood. And to be honest, unless you really do a good job of laying out a cutting plan, I’m not sure how much plywood you can actually save. And when you add in the extra work to splice pieces, I think it might end up costing more. I’ve put off construction until prices come down. In fact, if prices remain high next year I might just sell what little equipment I have and forget the whole thing. Or, use rigid foam and deal with the noise. Fortunately, mine will only be a display layout for the Bedford Falls collection of buildings, etc., with a train running around it.
There are a variety of ways to connect and run multiple levels. One way that you've already mentioned is cookie cutter tables using joists, risers and plywood cuts to support trackwork. This seems to be more commonly used in scales other than O, but should work just fine here, using properly sized materials and supports. There is a small Kalmbach publication by Linn Westcott (sorry, I forget the name) that provides many details about cookie cutter building. Three tips that I would offer are:
1. Use thinner plywood for track support (underlayment) because it will flex easier for the rise and falls;
2. Try to keep the cleats from underlayment joints away from where the risers support the underlayment; and
3. Curve cutting for this approach doesn't have to be close to perfect as long as the outside edge and inside edge are far enough apart to hold your curved track. (Note that bridges built for curving track are normally still straight-edged.)
One of the other ways to elevate tracks (from a single flat table-top) is to use risers like those provided by Woodland Scenics and others. You may have to double stack, or triple stack, them for O scale separations, but they can be used. Of course, you always have the option of mimicking that product with some custom cut rigid foam.
Once the track reaches the desired elevation, if you wish to maintain that elevation, you just need to use any variety of support that looks right for your railroad. I've seen people use trestle trusses, elevated train line steel supports, dowels to simulate concrete piers, and just plain pieces of scrap wood until they decide what they finally want to do.
Hope this helps.
Chuck
John, yes I agree the yard being at zero level makes sense. In the past I used the cookie cutter on track. My saw cuts go all over the place, but worked. This time I used Woodland Scenics risers on top of flat supports. It worked, but I had to do a lot of trimming and shimming too get the vertical transitions good enough to run engines reliably.
If I build another layout, I will either go back to cookie cutter or just have the track on one level with no grades. The second scenario is if I’m just not up to the work of cutting and fitting anymore.
Of course with lumber at an unprecedented high price it puts a wrench in the works and decisions like Dave has made come into play.
@DoubleDAZ posted:John, I’m not either. I’ve seen videos of people using elaborate templates to draw curves on plywood, then cut them out with a jigsaw. They drew the curves next to each other to minimize waste. Then they glued segments together using a router and spline inserts. In some cases they just glued the ends together and added a support piece underneath. In other cases they laid the track out, drew around the edges, then removed the track and cut the outline with a jigsaw. They then added risers underneath to create the grades. This is probably the easiest, any the way you pictured, but it doesn’t save any plywood. And to be honest, unless you really do a good job of laying out a cutting plan, I’m not sure how much plywood you can actually save. And when you add in the extra work to splice pieces, I think it might end up costing more. I’ve put off construction until prices come down. In fact, if prices remain high next year I might just sell what little equipment I have and forget the whole thing. Or, use rigid foam and deal with the noise. Fortunately, mine will only be a display layout for the Bedford Falls collection of buildings, etc., with a train running around it.
Hi Dave and everyone,
Sticker shock was the reason I looked at foam board to lower costs. Not sure what pre pandemic prices were, however I doubt prices will ever get back there and I am not getting younger. So I might have to bit the bullet and go the plywood route. I have a 10% discount at home depot till July so that will help a little.
Now the question for everyone is 1/2 plywood and Homoroad by C&W strong enough and will it provide good noise reduction or will I need 1/2 ply and 1/2 homosote? The homoroad is enticing since it provides a road bed and noise reduction right where the noise is generated. Theory sounds good, however does anyone have experience with this method?
Also around my yard and round house a flat plywood/ homosote sandwich would be the easiest since it is all one flat level. And use supports for the main lines which get elevated in the back of the table.
ALL input is greatly appreciated!
Thanks
John
@Aegis21 posted:Now the question for everyone is 1/2 plywood and Homoroad by C&W strong enough and will it provide good noise reduction or will I need 1/2 ply and 1/2 homosote? The homoroad is enticing since it provides a road bed and noise reduction right where the noise is generated. Theory sounds good, however does anyone have experience with this method?
I used 1/2" Baltic Birch multi-ply and 1/2" Homasote, and it really knocks down the noise. My elevated section is 1/2" plywood, and the difference is very noticeable. All of the track is on 1/4" foam roadbed. I'm installing 1/2" foam under the elevated section to minimize the sounding board effect there. One thing that really helps, or at least I believe it does, my track screws on the main level don't go into the plywood, they are just through the track, roadbed, and into the Homasote. They hold really well, and don't transmit the noise to the plywood.
If I was very energetic, I'd probably pull the elevated track and add the Homasote layer, but I'm not going to, that would be a lot of work.
FWIW, I have no issues with my main level supporting my 175# weight when I have to walk around on it.
Also has anyone had success using MDF and if so what thickness. It is heavier than I woud like to deal with, however it comes with a lower cost.
@Aegis21 posted:Also has anyone had success using MDF and if so what thickness. It is heavier than I woud like to deal with, however it comes with a lower cost.
No contest, go with plywood, you'll thank me when you finish the layout!
You'll end up spending thousands of dollars on the layout, don't cheap out on the foundation for a hundred or so bucks! MDF is softer, weaker, and sags more than plywood, no contest IMO.
John, Dave, Mark, and Chuck,
you confirmed what my bank account feared. 1/2 plywood then 1/2 homosote with maybe using 1/2 ply and homaroad on elevated track
Thanks john
John, why not use the HomaRoad all around? GRJ introduced us to a 1/4 piece of material that conforms to where you want to lay the track and then HomaRoad on top of that.
Also be aware that when you ballast your track, the overall noise level will generally increase. This is due to the greater acoustic coupling between the track and its base (typically homasote) due to the hardness of the ballast stones and glue combination.
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:John, why not use the HomaRoad all around? GRJ introduced us to a 1/4 piece of material that conforms to where you want to lay the track and then HomaRoad on top of that.
Good Question! Anyone with a reason not to do this?
Thanks
@Bruce Brown posted:Also be aware that when you ballast your track, the overall noise level will generally increase. This is due to the greater acoustic coupling between the track and its base (typically homasote) due to the hardness of the ballast stones and glue combination.
Thanks for the warning!
So here is the progress so far... Two L-girder benches 10 foot long 4 feet wide. They are set to where they will be used. I am going to bite the high price of plywood and get sheets of 1/2 ply and 1/2 homasote for the top. I am anticipating using cookie cutter for the elevations and foam for some of the flat areas to dig into or build up to break up the boring straight flat areas. I am still having a tough time getting my head wrapped around the general scenery construction. Here are a couple of pics.
Before you get too much further, consider a backdrop. It’s easier to do now than when things start getting placed on top. You can also use “flats” to create depth to the area.
John, it looks like you are well on your way. I seem to envision scenery, but can’t draw it and my thoughts don’t scale well. In the past I just kept improvising and changing as I went.
I agree with Jay’s suggestion on the backdrop. I put mine in at about the state your layout is now, but I didn’t secure it because I didn’t know exactly where to position it vertically. I finally shimmed and screwed it in place this past winter. It was very awkward to do then especially with the 8-foot section.
Wow, what a great community project going on here. Lots of back and forth in developing a really nice layout. Thought to jump in and add my .02 worth.
Be careful about just buying "1/2 inch plywood" That term can cover a wide range of material some of which may be considered not suitable to use on a model RR. The quality and composition of the plywood is more important than the thickness. Some of my best work was done with 6.0 mm (1/4") Meranti/Keruing plywood. The level of strength is in the framework design and assembly steps.
The material we used on Gunner's layout may be one of the finest practical choices available for 1/2" plywood. I have used many sheets of it with great success every time.
Some of the plywoods to avoid would be anything made of Pine. Any plywood with a __DX suffix. Any 1/2" plywood with just 3 plys.
Some markets count the veneers as a ply, some do not. You need to check it for your self.
You want to purchase plywood which was stored on a flat bed. NOT off of three finger big box racks.
Select from the body of a skid. Avoid the top 3 or 4 and the bottom 3 or 4 panels. The bands if not done properly can indent your sheet.
Set the plywood in the area in which it will be used so as to allow acclimation for a minimum of 72 hours, longer can be better.
Due to lumber prices some folks have resorted to OSB. This can be a satisfactory substitute when budgets are a concern. Being somewhat of a purist I have snubbed my nose at it early on until I ran across some really nice railroads, decades old using OSB with no negative moisture problems.
16' peninsula yard Homasote over OSB
In finally getting around to building my latest RR I used 1/2" (7/16") OSB under a 2' X 16' yard as a personal test. 10 years in a below ground basement with no problems.
As for 3/4" decking that would only be used in a flat application you may want to consider Advantech. It is absolutely FLAT, very strong. Is taking over the construction world as the go to flooring decking. Is almost waterproof. For model RRs I have used it on girders with 32" spacing for 11 years with no deflection at all. It also has a very attractive price point. It is rather heavy. I really like it!! Not suitable for portable modules due to weight.
21' yard, Homasote over 3/4" Advantech
This yard above is only supported on fingers spaced 32" with no front or rear longitudinal stringers.
Pine plywood can warp down the road. Any Pine wood can be a problem for a model RR, period.
In checking back in on the progress, if I could make any comment on the track plan my thought would be there seems to be a somewhat limited yard or storage provision. Is there any way that a track could tunnel through a wall to access a lengthy run for 4 to 6 tracks to hold cars? Maybe attractively finished hardwood edging as a display feature.
Over the years car storage has been one of the biggest concerns of folks building layouts. Usually it hits them when the basic construction is nearing completion and they start placing their collection on the rails and the sidings get clogged.
In your recent photos I find what seems to be duct mounted lights, interesting, you may want to run a local and NEC code check. One ungrounded wire or fixture could electrify your entire HVAC system to include registers. Imagine stepping on a 15 or 20 amp floor register in your bare feet. 
Or wet bare feet in the bathroom.
Just an out of the box idea. When you are tight on length and width space, consider utilizing vertical space.
Another way to create space for additional yards would be to reconfigure those 4' long cross members and drop a track down to a subway storage yard that could utilize as much of the benchwork foot print as you would need for wrap around storage tracks.
Plywood decking could be suspended from the main frame of the "L" girder benchwork. The grade down could be initially achieved by successively deeper notches in the cross members, then a vertical bottom sister that would pick up the leg of the Wescott stingers.
An entirely new world could await you.
@Tom Tee posted:In your recent photos I find what seems to be duct mounted lights, interesting, you may want to run a local and NEC code check. One ungrounded wire or fixture could electrify your entire HVAC system to include registers. Imagine stepping on a 15 or 20 amp floor register in your bare feet.
To address your concerns about the lighting - these are low voltage led lights which are safe to mount to anything except to high voltage conduit. They are powered with a 12 volt dc supply. The ductwork is all bonded to ground per code and has past inspection. I personally have rechecked bonding , grounding and ground leakage for my own piece of mind. Thanks for your concern, it is really appreciated as there are some very dangerous and serious consequences for improper electrical work.
@Tom Tee posted:Be careful about just buying "1/2 inch plywood" That term can cover a wide range of material some of which may be considered not suitable to use on a model RR. The quality and composition of the plywood is more important than the thickness. Some of my best work was done with 6.0 mm (1/4") Meranti/Keruing plywood. The level of strength is in the framework design and assembly steps.
The material we used on Gunner's layout may be one of the finest practical choices available for 1/2" plywood. I have used many sheets of it with great success every time.
Yes the baltic plywood looks great that Gunner used! I am looking at 12mm sanded hardwood-plywood which appears to be only 3 ply, however with homasote on top of that and L-Girder joist supporting that sandwich seems strong enough and I am trusting Lin Westcott's design has been a proven method for years. Let me know if I am totally off base with this idea before I purchase the plywood.
Set the plywood in the area in which it will be used so as to allow acclimation for a minimum of 72 hours, longer can be better.
Great advise on acclimation!
16' peninsula yard Homasote over OSB
In finally getting around to building my latest RR I used 1/2" (7/16") OSB under a 2' X 16' yard as a personal test. 10 years in a below ground basement with no problems.
As for 3/4" decking that would only be used in a flat application you may want to consider Advantech. It is absolutely FLAT, very strong. Is taking over the construction world as the go to flooring decking. Is almost waterproof. For model RRs I have used it on girders with 32" spacing for 11 years with no deflection at all. It also has a very attractive price point. It is rather heavy. I really like it!! Not suitable for portable modules due to weight. I haven't seen or herd of this flooring/decking. It seems worth looking into though, Thanks
21' yard, Homasote over 3/4" Advantech
This yard above is only supported on fingers spaced 32" with no front or rear longitudinal stringers.
Pine plywood can warp down the road. Any Pine wood can be a problem for a model RR, period.
In checking back in on the progress, if I could make any comment on the track plan my thought would be there seems to be a somewhat limited yard or storage provision. Is there any way that a track could tunnel through a wall to access a lengthy run for 4 to 6 tracks to hold cars? Maybe attractively finished hardwood edging as a display feature.
No other place in the horizontal domain to extend yard, however as someone pointed out there maybe a possibility to explore the vertical domain. That is certainly worth looking into at this point!
Your work looks great, the elevated track with it's own wall bracket support is smart on many levels. (no pun intended)
Over the years car storage has been one of the biggest concerns of folks building layouts. Usually it hits them when the basic construction is nearing completion and they start placing their collection on the rails and the sidings get clogged.
@Tom Tee posted:Just an out of the box idea. When you are tight on length and width space, consider utilizing vertical space.
Another way to create space for additional yards would be to reconfigure those 4' long cross members and drop a track down to a subway storage yard that could utilize as much of the benchwork foot print as you would need for wrap around storage tracks.
Plywood decking could be suspended from the main frame of the "L" girder benchwork. The grade down could be initially achieved by successively deeper notches in the cross members, then a vertical bottom sister that would pick up the leg of the Wescott stingers.
An entirely new world could await you.
Yes this is another idea worth exploring, using vertical area is about my only option at this point.
Thanks
@Mark Boyce posted:John, it looks like you are well on your way. I seem to envision scenery, but can’t draw it and my thoughts don’t scale well. In the past I just kept improvising and changing as I went.
I agree with Jay’s suggestion on the backdrop. I put mine in at about the state your layout is now, but I didn’t secure it because I didn’t know exactly where to position it vertically. I finally shimmed and screwed it in place this past winter. It was very awkward to do then especially with the 8-foot section.
Yes the backdrop has been on my mind as to how and when to paint it. Our daughter has a great deal of artistic ability and will be painting on the wall. Not sure if there is canvas options that can be put on wall, rather than paint directly on the wall. My concern is the town area and roads going into backdrop. Here is the chicken/egg question... Since I do not have an exact placement for buildings and roads, how is the backdrop painted to match the roads and buildings before they are positioned? My thought was to make sections movable with track, roads and buildings at least outlined. Mark the wall/backdrop with those positions, paint and then move the sections back against the wall. This is my current thought which I welcome ALL input, ideas, suggestions to an easier plan!
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:Before you get too much further, consider a backdrop. It’s easier to do now than when things start getting placed on top. You can also use “flats” to create depth to the area.
Hi Jay,
Could you give an example of "flats" to create depth. and yes much easier now than when bench work is finished and installed.
On eBay search o scale flats. Basically, they are narrow depth structures (1-2”) of varying widths and heights. They can be facades of factories, houses, tree lines, etc.
I understand the dilemma of not being sure of the end result. However, at the very least paint the wall a sky blue. I used Sherwin Williams “cloudless”, and I’m very pleased with the result. There are also cloud stencils which are reasonably priced.
We put this up before we built the bench work. Hung 3' X 8' Masonite panels so to have coved corners and a smooth bump out over wall irregularities. This backdrop is from Backdrop Warehouse. Not an easy website however we really like their product. They feature perpendicular photography, not a left to right panning scan. Very even viewing.
Back breaking work after the benchwork is permanent. We opted to use Velcro on the top and bottom edges and rubber cement for the overlapping seams every 12' . When the RR was taken down the Back Drop was able to be removed perfectly reuseable. The rubber seam cement removes clean.
So, you like the wall brackets?
Except for the peninsulas the entire RR is built on modules then set on wall bracket knees. You get six 32" X 36" knees from a 4' X 8' sheet:
Advantech is carried by 84 lumber, hard core genuine lumber yards and builder supply houses. For awhile Lowe's carried it under their house brand of Ameritech.
Be careful of a HD product labeled "Sandyply". It can be lumpy, have a washboard surface and have both voids and overlapping cores (which produce the lumps). I have seen delamination of these sheets.
When buying plywood always scan the sandwich edges. The layers should be even thickness, totally with out voids and not overlap the next core insert. Best to be a Northern or Russian Birch. Birch grown in Northern climates have a denser more stable grain. For economy there is a quality plywood called "Shop grade Birch/Maple". This panel has the same quality core however the surfaces are not stain grade.
For flat, stiff, strong and inexpensive consider Advantech.
John, Yes you have good points about the placement of any roads, buildings, etc on the backdrop. Since mine is all forested like Tom's I didn't have that consideration. I was just concerned about the height of my scenes.
@gunrunnerjohn posted:No contest, go with plywood, you'll thank me when you finish the layout!
You'll end up spending thousands of dollars on the layout, don't cheap out on the foundation for a hundred or so bucks! MDF is softer, weaker, and sags more than plywood, no contest IMO.
Thanks GunrunnerJohn,
Plywood it is and I'll also go with not screwing into ply with track screws!
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:On eBay search o scale flats. Basically, they are narrow depth structures (1-2”) of varying widths and heights. They can be facades of factories, houses, tree lines, etc.
now i understand ! I have seen those a couple of times and you are right, they do add depth!
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:I understand the dilemma of not being sure of the end result. However, at the very least paint the wall a sky blue. I used Sherwin Williams “cloudless”, and I’m very pleased with the result. There are also cloud stencils which are reasonably priced.
The walls are painted blue, one side a little lighter than the others. We plan on painting clouds and some hills with trees and such. Thanks for the good advise and i'll look into stencils
Thanks
Since your daughter has the artistic flare, you are covered. That will be some very good Daddy-Daughter bonding time.
Kalmbach's book on scenery has info on how to hide roads going into the wall in both urban and country settings. Vehicle road way placement IMO could very well be a distant concern compared to pivotal placement of turnouts, TTs and grades which could make or break smooth dependable operation.
Your artistic daughter can also continue roads up the wall and perspectively taper them into terrain or forest. Options are endless. You are very fortunate to have a resident backdrop creator.
I like your construction approach in which you are heading off issues before getting caught in a big "Whoops".
Sorry for beating this horse into the tracks... asking one final time before purchasing plywood. For the decking, using plywood with possibly foam on top of that plywood. And to have plywood then homasote for road bed. Plywood decking choices are
.688 thick 5 ply (https://www.homedepot.com/p/Ca...in-1077486/302610611 )
or
.472" thick => (https://www.homedepot.com/p/12...-in-454532/203414055)
So a little less than 3/4" versus < 1/2" The project will need 9 sheets and at the current prices there is about a $150.00 difference along with the weight of the materials for handling and cutting. I am tending to lean towards the 1/2" more because of weight than price.
Again all input is welcome as always and is greatly appreciated.
John
btw I have a 10% discount till the end of the month and could save on not only the plywood but the rest of the lumber and materials, so time is running out on my waffling LOL
I used 1/2 inch on my current layout and it is very solid.
I used the exact 1/2" plywood in your link 8 years ago (well name was the same anyway) and it's been just fine. Plenty sturdy for everything I have here. I'd save the $150 and put that toward some train stuff or something else for your layout.
@rtr12 posted:I used the exact 1/2" plywood in your link 8 years ago (well name was the same anyway) and it's been just fine. Plenty sturdy for everything I have here. I'd save the $150 and put that toward some train stuff or something else for your layout.
Thank you both for your recommendations, any thoughts on using homosote on top of plywood or foam board on top of plywood?
I would use the Homosote since there's not alot of space for hills and such. You can leave an open spot under the bbridges to make your rive lower. Others may say the opposite to each his own.
I’m a fan of Homasote, John. It is solid enough to hold screws, but also deadens unrealistic track sound from the vibration of a train running.
I don't have it, but would agree with the others about the Homasote being a good choice and quite useful. As Mark says above the Homasote is very good at holding screws for mounting things, fastening track, etc. good stuff. IMO, the rigid foam is only good for making scenery.
@Dave Ripp. posted:I would use the Homosote since there's not alot of space for hills and such. You can leave an open spot under the bbridges to make your rive lower. Others may say the opposite to each his own.
Thanks for the advice, I certainly will lower the deck under the two bridges to have a lower and deeper river
@Mark Boyce posted:I’m a fan of Homasote, John. It is solid enough to hold screws, but also deadens unrealistic track sound from the vibration of a train running.
Thanks Mark, well said
@rtr12 posted:I don't have it, but would agree with the others about the Homasote being a good choice and quite useful. As Mark says above the Homasote is very good at holding screws for mounting things, fastening track, etc. good stuff. IMO, the rigid foam is only good for making scenery.
Thanks for validating the other opinions, I will go with 1/2" plywood and homasote.
ok Have purchased plywood and Homasote for layout top and road bed, I would like to wire most of track power TIU AIU Terminal strips and such before covering up with plywood. My question is where would the control station be best located using my layout and MTH's star wiring recommendation? The ride at the right will e a lift to access center area. There is only access through that bridge to center walkway, the right side of the baseboard is the only section not against a wall.
John, I am no expert by any means. I would put it along the bottom shelf where the yard and turntable are. I would locate it near he double crossover, not that the crossover has anything to do with it, but it would shorten some long runs to the other side of the room. I'm hoping others will chime in who have more experience with medium size layouts. My experience is with small layouts.
Mark,
Thanks for your insightful reply. At least that is a starting point. I will need to finish the L-Girder around the room, which means moving boxes as the build progresses. I am intending to put in two drop leafs to give 36" access to all walls, or as much as I can. They will not have any track so it is just for buildings and scenery. One is along yard and the other is opposite side with the town area. I am hoping that will work out, so the backdrop can be painted without the need for the topside creeper. Now to re-read the MTH wiring information in my spare time, so I do not have to spend hours running wires then taking them out and running them properly. lol Thank Goodness I am retired, can't imagine having my full time job and doing this... Hmmm probably why I hadn't started the layout till now.
I really like the design of your layout. I wanted to avoid a lift out but now when I take a closer look at yours I think 🤔🤔hmmm.
Jay, we tried to avoid the lift up/out, but reversing loops would have had to be too small to fit the space and would have taken too much space, especially for the yard/round house area. Depending on size, a lift out is pretty simple while a lift up adds a bit of complexity and a tallish bridge adds a little more, but it can all be overcome.
John, I know what you mean by not starting a layout that size while working. I also had to keep moving boxes and materials around the room until I had used some up and was able to store some underneath the new layout.
Dave, you are so right about the increase in complexity going from lift out to lift up. However with two bridges at different heights, I’m glad I went to the trouble to make a ‘ganged’ lift up.
@DoubleDAZ posted:Jay, we tried to avoid the lift up/out, but reversing loops would have had to be too small to fit the space and would have taken too much space, especially for the yard/round house area. Depending on size, a lift out is pretty simple while a lift up adds a bit of complexity and a tallish bridge adds a little more, but it can all be overcome.
Hi Dave,
A ton of credit to you and everyone else who listened to what I desired and showed (did most of the work) what was practical and the best use of the area and layout. You are all too humble and deserve a ton of credit. Thanks for all the help!
@Mark Boyce posted:John, I know what you mean by not starting a layout that size while working. I also had to keep moving boxes and materials around the room until I had used some up and was able to store some underneath the new layout.
Dave, you are so right about the increase in complexity going from lift out to lift up. However with two bridges at different heights, I’m glad I went to the trouble to make a ‘ganged’ lift up.
Mark your layout is coming along fantastic and your challenges were many. With planning and your persistance, things are looking spectacular!
@Tranquil Hollow RR posted:I really like the design of your layout. I wanted to avoid a lift out but now when I take a closer look at yours I think 🤔🤔hmmm.
Jay,
As far as the bridge goes I will still have some ceiling clearance issues to deal with, however with the guidance from Mark, Mike and everyone else on this forum, I am confident they will solve whatever issues come along the way. Tremendous group on this forum with TONS of knowledge and experience. So if it will enhance your layout, don't worry about the details of making it work, members here will figure out something if you need them to lend a hand. Like Dave said it can all be overcome.
Thanks All
John, thank you! You are right, we will help you along with the bridges. You can even come down to see mine, and I can go to your house to see what’s going on. Mike G was a tremendous help with my questions and he lives 2500 miles from us!!! 😄
John,
Here's a diagram to generate some conversation regarding how best to wire the layout. It is by no means the best way or the only way, just something for discussion.
As you can probably tell, I put the control panel (gray) on the yard side of things. I then ran wires to the yard and to the left/top sides where terminal strips would be. The Blue, Green and Yellow sections would be further broken into power blocks and I'd block each spur so you could store an engine on each and turn off the power. You'd also want to block each whisker track. You'd then divide the Blue, Green and Yellow tracks into blocks being sure to limit the size of each to conform to recommended DCS lengths and number of joints. Remember, these are just for power feeds, so 2 smaller blocks are better than 1 longer one.
Some folks have had success using a common ground, but DCS guidelines suggest running individual common and power feeds to each block, keeping both wires the same length. Hope this generates some comments.
That looks like it would work out fine Dave. I agree, DCS recommends a common and power pulled to each block. Of course my layout is smaller, but I didn’t have any trouble with that. I ran everything from terminal blocks near the TIU. I have one channel on the mainline blocks and one on the sidings.
@DoubleDAZ posted:John,
Here's a diagram to generate some conversation regarding how best to wire the layout. It is by no means the best way or the only way, just something for discussion.
As you can probably tell, I put the control panel (gray) on the yard side of things. I then ran wires to the yard and to the left/top sides where terminal strips would be. The Blue, Green and Yellow sections would be further broken into power blocks and I'd block each spur so you could store an engine on each and turn off the power. You'd also want to block each whisker track. You'd then divide the Blue, Green and Yellow tracks into blocks being sure to limit the size of each to conform to recommended DCS lengths and number of joints. Remember, these are just for power feeds, so 2 smaller blocks are better than 1 longer one.
Some folks have had success using a common ground, but DCS guidelines suggest running individual common and power feeds to each block, keeping both wires the same length. Hope this generates some comments.
Thanks Dave!
I will be reading the MTH recommended wiring and comparing your drawings and advice with those and I will tend to go with your opinion and the groups as you all have experience with real world use of the system. I have found over the years, Theory is great until it is put into practice, then the change orders are generated. lol Also thanks for recommending the blocks, spurs, whisker tracks etc. I will also follow the recommendation of not having a common ground.
What do people use to control power to their blocks, like a spur? Relays, toggle switches, DCS controlled?
Thanks
John
@Mark Boyce posted:That looks like it would work out fine Dave. I agree, DCS recommends a common and power pulled to each block. Of course my layout is smaller, but I didn’t have any trouble with that. I ran everything from terminal blocks near the TIU. I have one channel on the mainline blocks and one on the sidings.
Mark, did you run straight from TIU to close terminal blocks and then split off from there?
John,
My thought is that it’s better to wire a single long run with larger gauge wire to a terminal strip so you can use smaller gauge wire for the shorter runs from the strip to the power feeds. I have no idea what length defines a long run though. 🤣
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
