Request Track Plan Help

My first impression after viewing the pdf's is the the upper level will cover a lot on the siding side. Will it be on a shelf or what will the upper level use for support.

I can convert it to SCARM. You don't get 3D using Play on Mac, but you'll have the rest.

Hi Carl,

My plan, at this point anyway, is to have the upper level on a narrow shelf. The lower level loop trackage would be under the shelf except for the "North" side. On the "South" side, my hope was that the upper level loop and the sidings could be narrow enough that only the lower level loop would be covered and the switching area could be exposed. As I learned with my current arrangement, drawing lines on paper does not begin to tell you how much space the track will take up. I really appreciate your help. Feel free to ask further questions if my response is confusing.

Thanks, Bill

Ok, shelf it is - we'll see how it looks.

What the lower level height from the floor?

Comment: If you wish to operate DCS or Legacy command, it would be better to use Gargraves track with Ross switches. if you want Ross anyway, I will use it.

Paper spacing - track and roadbed is about 3 1/4" wide, so half on either side of the center line, which would be your track line.

Here is you lower level table in SCARM. I  made a photo of your drawing and included it as a background image on the table. Click and drag the lower right corner to resize the background image. (gray)

Right-click the attached file and save to your computer. Then, open it with SCARM. Rename any new stuff you do and save it locally to keep the table file clean.

Hi Carl,

Lower level is 42" from the floor. I use DCS, but was not aware of  a difference between Gargraves vs. Ross track. Can you elaborate? Please use Ross for now, though. Can you convert the file to pdf or jpeg? I have never been able to get SCARM to work on my iMac so your file wouldn't open for me.

Thanks, Bill

OK, it's only the table. I thought that you had it working.

A professional layout builder has signal issues with the center rail coating on Ross. Perhaps, you could call Ross to determine if that's his experience only or if it's fiction.  I am building it with Ross as we speak.

What height for the upper level? 50" or 52" would provide easy reach under and leave room for low scenery. (8" or 10")

Hi Bill, Carl can probably do a PDF, but here is a bmp picture.

here's the upper level and a parts list. I hope you can see enough of the rulers to judge the spacing. It looks like it about 25" from the corners on the hypotenuse. The runs can be 5"-6" wide  W<N>E. The S shelf needs to be around 16" wide.

Edit: AT 19" and 19" top and side the hypotenuse is 26.25" allowing for roadbed and a little space.

With the lower level O72 loop about 6" from the wall all the around, it looks like this 3D shot. reducing the length of the straights could bring the loop out from under the shelf, except in the East, where you want the city. The corners will still be under, just less. This is a +10" on the upper level height. 

You tell me.

I forgot to ask - where are you entering?

Ok, Lower level

I had to make the branch line O54. I almost had O72/O54 curved switches and O72 curves, but it was a little large. Then, I recalled that said you had some O54. Anyway, O72 for the branch line pushes it close to the shelf and makes entry to the peninsula awkward.

I think it's very close to your drawings. You can adjust straights for wall and under/out of shelf spacing.

Any questions or changes, let me know. Want a parts list for the whole deal, let me know.

Hi Carl and Mike,

Thank you so much for your help. You saved me a lot of time and untold amounts of grief trying to do this on the computer by myself. I apologize for not replying sooner, but just got back in the house from a bunch of errands.

Carl: The pdf's look just like what I need. That one corner with a problem I can just add a diagonal piece there to make it work. Upper level height I was debating either 8" or 10". I want to see the lower level trackage down and visualize scenery before I make a final decision on height. The entrance is under the "North" side. I know everyone says to avoid duck-unders (funny note: spell check made that "duck udders" before I fixed it!), but as my wife and I get older we have decided to keep challenging ourselves. No one level house, laundry in the basement, take up running, put duck-unders in train layouts, etc. I'm not sure if we are smart or crazy, but we are still vertical.

And YES --- I would really appreciate a parts list.

Thank you guys so much. This has been incredibly helpful.

Bill

Hey Bill, Carl did all the work, He is a great guy and helps a lot of people here including myself. Just remember there is nothing wrong with a lift up section down the road if needed! LOL

BillinVirginia posted:

Hi Carl and Mike,

Thank you so much for your help. You saved me a lot of time and untold amounts of grief trying to do this on the computer by myself. I apologize for not replying sooner, but just got back in the house from a bunch of errands.

Carl: The pdf's look just like what I need. That one corner with a problem I can just add a diagonal piece there to make it work. Upper level height I was debating either 8" or 10". I want to see the lower level trackage down and visualize scenery before I make a final decision on height. The entrance is under the "North" side. I know everyone says to avoid duck-unders (funny note: spell check made that "duck udders" before I fixed it!), but as my wife and I get older we have decided to keep challenging ourselves. No one level house, laundry in the basement, take up running, put duck-unders in train layouts, etc. I'm not sure if we are smart or crazy, but we are still vertical.

And YES --- I would really appreciate a parts list.

Thank you guys so much. This has been incredibly helpful.

Bill

 

 

I think that you'll find the 10" height or more is better all around for access and viewing. What you have to do is determine the spacing from the walls and fit the straight runs when you build. it's 3 1/4" or better on the low level. You'll need to cut some straights anyway.

RailModeller pro is a mac ready train software. There was an online tool called Trax, I believe, that works by any browser(Safari).

Here's the parts list. Just ask if you need any further assistance. Post the build pics when you think it's worthy.

Hi Carl,

Got the parts list, thanks again. You have been extremely helpful and, undoubtedly, saved me a lot of time and angst. As things progress, I will post some photographs. This is a wonderful forum that OGR provides for all of us.

Bill

Carl/Moonman,

Not much progress for many reasons this year. As I got ready to order track this week, I did one final review of the track plan and thought about a couple of changes that would make construction easier and quicker. Basically, it involves elimination of the upper level. If you would be kind enough to take a few minutes to help again, I would be grateful. Hopefully, this would be quick and easy for you. Here's what I am thinking:

1. Eliminate the 072 loop and siding on the lower level, 2. Move the 096 loop and its 2 sidings down to the lower level, and 3. Connect the 054 branch line to the 096 loop. 

If I decide I want it, I can still add an upper level later. In the meantime, I can enjoy my N&W steam on more realistic curves.

Thank you very much for your help. You and the others that are experienced (and helpful) track planners are an unbelievable resource for this hobby! 

Bill

Hi Bill,

I think I have the changes here _ check it out_ if it is what you wanted I'll make some pdf's.

Moonman posted:

 

A professional layout builder has signal issues with the center rail coating on Ross. Perhaps, you could call Ross to determine if that's his experience only or if it's fiction.

Sorry Carl, but I believe this claim is fiction. As far as I know, Ross gets their rail straight from GarGraves. Personally, I use a Scotch-brite pad to remove the coating from the top of the rail.

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Moonman posted:

 

A professional layout builder has signal issues with the center rail coating on Ross. Perhaps, you could call Ross to determine if that's his experience only or if it's fiction.

Sorry Carl, but I believe this claim is fiction. As far as I know, Ross gets their rail straight from GarGraves. Personally, I use a Scotch-brite pad to remove the coating from the top of the rail.

The source was Clarke Dunham of Dunham Studios. When asked about a customer's choice of track for a layout build thread and why he encouraged the use of Gargraves.

I have had no Legacy or DCS issues with either track. Probably would be better to leave that to Clarke's opinion and not pass it on.

Hi Carl,

That's exactly what I was looking for. Thank you so much---Again!! Also, thank you in advance for the pdf's, they are very helpful. I plan to get my track order in this week and will post photos as things progress.

Bill

There are a lot of variables when it comes to command in 3 rail. I have always favored GarGraves anyway, but I use the flex and not sectional. I have ZERO experience with DCS. I wonder if Dunham is using the pins to conduct power and signal. That could be the problem.

I would also recommend flex for Bill's layout. Perhaps a little more work, but fewer joints.

Elliot, may I ask what is the tightest curve you've bent GG to? I have a double dogbone L-shaped design(18x18) with reversing loops and crossovers done in SCARM using Atlas O45/O54. I've also done the design using GG flex bent to those curve sizes. I'm just not sure I'll be able to make the bends. Also, the layout will be in the garage, so I've been leaning toward Atlas figuring it might be easier to maintain given the dust and heat we have here in Phoenix.