Final plan and design for a new layout: 03/05/2016

One thing I see is a disconnect between the 24' length along the top and the 6', 12' and 4' lengths adding up to 22' below and the unmarked width for the yard that appears to be another 4' section making a total of 26'.

Another thing I see is a reach issue, unless the layout is open along all sides. If it isn't, the reach in some areas is 4' and in others it's over 6'. Some of that can be overcome with access hatches cut inside the reversing loops, but most people have difficulty reaching much over 30".

It also appears that you have some straight sections between the yard switches. Those limit the number of tracks in the ladder and their lengths.

One final thing I see is the "S" curves where the lower center siding comes out the curves. You come out going in one direction, reverse direction going through the switch and then reverse again going onto the siding.

Now that I look at it, I also see a similar problem with where you've located the crossovers. You come through a switch and the go directly into another one. If it were me, I'm move both crossover switches to the center or at least closer to the center and away from the loop switches.

If you post the SCARM file, I'm sure someone can use it to offer some alternatives.

Thanks Dave...made a couple of updates and included the SCARM file as you mentioned...and so the process goes. I may just forget about reversing the trains and be satisfied as one directional...train or trains going clockwise on the outer and one going counter-clockwise on the inner. There will be an 18" to 24" space at the rear and the sides will be open, so I think that will make access OK from all areas?

3:00 PM - Changed quite a few things...not sure if the crossovers would now be better in the front instead of the rear? Also might put the yard enclosed in the right side loops and then add the additional yard at the bottom right at a later time? 

Paul, I'm fiddling with the SCARM file you posted and I'm finding quite a few problems. When I double-click to select all tracks in a given section, it doesn't select them all and I don't know why. They all appear to come from the same library, but I'm working my way around the layout to replace the ones that don't get selected with new ones. When I got to the lead switch for the yard, I found that the curves leading up to it are not the correct radius, so it is not going to connect. It appears that you laid the switch on top of the curve making it look like it was connected. There was even a curved piece under it.

Anyway, I wouldn't do too much more work with that file until I get it all fixed, it won't take long. When all the tracks are properly joined, you should be able to double-click on any track and all tracks should get selected. It almost looks like some tracks came from a different library, but the part numbers match. I'm stumped, but then I'm not as familiar with SCARM as I am with RR-Track.

And it's up to you if you take out the reversing loops, but I wouldn't, at least not until others have had a chance to comment.

Here's the new SCRAM file with some minor changes. I don't know how forgiving Lionel O27 is, so I don't know if everything will join properly. I kept the same filename, just add "DAZ" to it to keep the files separate. Now when you double-click on any track, they all get selected, except the trolley line of course.

No switching lead at the yard...

Nice layout 

Please don't forget some pretty nice Railroading Signals on Integrated Signals Systems.com 

Good luck, JOHN

O27 track geometry takes a lot of flow out a track plan. Have to cut curves to get 22.5° and 11.25° or 15° and 7.5°.

I would move the crossover interchange to the front.

Layout out some roads and building footprint rectangles in the industrial area then work out the pick-up and delivery tracks. That can wait until you get the mains worked out.

Carl, I have not been able to locate the part of SCARM that allows for adding of buildings, roads, bridges, etc., probably in there...just haven't found it. Guess I could draw them in and then take a photo to post? Here is the latest version with the crossovers moved...not sure I'm really satisfied with the returns on the inside rail...maybe it would look better and serve as added interest when on the layout? Paul

The small triangle at the top of the library list will let you select the objects or figures libraries. The roads are in objects and the figures, well, they are just that. make footprint shapes with rectangles and circles. ie., you have an MTH warehouse and know that it's 6.5" by 8.5", or an oil tank that's 6" in diameter.

The returns on the inside rail limit all engines to be able to run on that radius. I don't think you reverse direction enough to make it operationally annoying. It makes it a little fun. Train has cross to inside, change direction and turn around and cross back to outside without colliding.

If you make balloons on the out side loop it will cramp the inside loop. Turn it more into a dogbone.

Whatever you like.

Paul, the objects and figures libraries are at the bottom when you click on the small triangle to access the list.

perhaps the reverse track something like this:

I think you need some more 42 switches

This is the final design for my new layout?

Well...at least it is for today!

Let me know if you see any glaring problem areas that I have missed. There won't be the ability to reverse the trains and I think I can survive without that, having included enough points of interest along the way and some fairly long runs. The freight trains will run counter-clockwise and the passenger will run clockwise...both will have the ability to change from the outer to the inner lines and then back. Since I will be running Lion Chief Plus locomotives, I should be able to run 2 on the outer and possibly on the inner. Right now I have a LC+ Hudson, a LC+ Pacific and a LC+ NW-2...thinking about adding a LC+ A-5 when they become available or getting a LC+ Santa Fe FT instead...always wanted a Warbonnet and at 72...I should probably do it while the doings are good! There will be about a 18" access at the rear and sides for any maintenance issues that might need attention and I plan on having a 36" to 40" surface height.

Your comments are appreciated...thanks again. Paul

Hi Paul,

I only see a SCARM issue. It appears at the locations where the road crosses the track there is extra track pieces. You can tell by the connection points being open on both ends. Not a track plan issue, but will throw off the Parts Lists count, under Tools>Part List.

Double - click on them and only the unconnected tracks should highlight red. Then tap the Delete button.

When finished hit Save.

Nice job on the roads and placeholders. The layout will look nice!

Carl...once you and Dave let me know where the objects, roads and figures were hiding...then I had no problem using them. I'll take a look at the extra track issue at the road crossings too. Oh, and yes, more 042 switches are on the way. I have taped out the layout on my basement floor and will be basically doing a dry fit of the track plan...just to make sure that I don't come up short on real estate. Then the benchwork will start...looking forward to that part! Still have a 5 x 9 layout in an area adjacent to where the new layout will be...so get to play with trains on the old...while building the new. Can't ask for more than that!!!

Thanks again Carl, 

Paul

I took Dave's SCARM file to show how I would modified the yard.  It should be an easy mod to make to your design.

There is now a yard lead so you won't foul the main.

Jan

PDDMI posted:

Carl...once you and Dave let me know where the objects, roads and figures were hiding...then I had no problem using them. I'll take a look at the extra track issue at the road crossings too. Oh, and yes, more 042 switches are on the way. I have taped out the layout on my basement floor and will be basically doing a dry fit of the track plan...just to make sure that I don't come up short on real estate. Then the benchwork will start...looking forward to that part! Still have a 5 x 9 layout in an area adjacent to where the new layout will be...so get to play with trains on the old...while building the new. Can't ask for more than that!!!

Thanks again Carl, 

Paul

 

Paul, If you wanted to burn through paper and ink there is a 1:1 printing option in SCARM. The pain with it, besides the paper and ink required for an O scale layout) is that you need to label each page with a grid number so that you can assemble the sheets. I made a small oval to test and practice. I like it, but, I think the tape is a better idea for O scale.

Check out the 1:1 printing tips and techniques on the SCARM website.

PDDMI,  I like the 5 X 9 layout, especially the Michigan cars.

Well, this looks like the final plan...of course I said that yesterday...and then Menards came out with the new power plant, so as you can see at the top right is a building with a MPP designation...yup, its going there, thanks to Menards!!! Taped out the border dimensions on the basement floor and dry fit the track to make sure that the SCARM plan would fit as shown...and it does. I plan on starting and completing the benchwork construction this coming Thursday. Then on to tackle painting, track laying, wiring, building placement, background, lighting and so on. At an exciting point and looking forward to this with much anticipation...

Here is the 'new' final* plan for the layout: 03/04/2016

Thanks for the previous comments, Paul

*Subject to change?

I like it. My only concern is the "yard" in the lower right. A train coming from the leftmost spur has to navigate through no less than 4 "S" curves to get on the main vs a more traditional yard layout. I couldn't tell what turnouts you were using, but I'd consider something more like this. It still lets you service the businesses, but with a straighter route in/out.

Dave...I know what you mean...it really doesn't look bad though when laid out in real life. I am using 5121 & 5122 027 switches...they are clunkers and almost impossible to mix and match with each other, especially in tight quarters...I'm sure there will be some fine tuning to be done before I'm satisfied with the finished (?) product...may have to look into some Ross switches at some point, as they can be paired with 027 track using their connector...but for now what I have is free and the last time I checked...thats still cheaper than wholesale. 

Thanks for your interest. Paul

Moved the two 042 switches, coming off the main, back a little...takes some of the s-e-ness out of it...

Well, I'm sure you'll run slow enough in that area to minimize any problems. I just thought I'd mention it, but I get "free".

This is an alternate idea for the yard ladder to reduce the number of S-curves. I understand you have some O27 switches you want to use here and I know how the integral base-plates restrict some arrangements.

Ace posted:

This is an alternate idea for the yard ladder to reduce the number of S-curves. I understand you have some O27 switches you want to use here and I know how the integral base-plates restrict some arrangements.

Thanks Ace...I'll definately give that a try when I start to lay the track for the yard...

Please let us know if you do. I think you'd be much happier in the long run with that than all those S curves.

I like all these concepts.  I know little about designing a layout but I am fortunate enough to have a spare room.  My current layout is the MTH Norfolk Southern ES44 AC diesel with the ps3 and a 50 watt transformer that came with the set.  I have added enough track to fill my 4x8 bench.  I am building another 4x8 bench and I may use some of the ideas from the posts of PDDMI.  Do any of you know where I can get some ideas for 2- 4x8 layouts?   I would like at least 2 levels with a mountain and tunnels, a stream and a small town.  I am thinking about a L shape with a 4x12x4 bench. 

I would like to give a shout out to PDDMI for his inspiration.  I am long on ideas but short on cash so this will be a gradual process for now, and I am mostly confused about how to proceed. 

PS.

I  am now using MTH Realtrax.  Should I reinvest in another track system.  The Realtrax works fine but I had to fine tune the sections with a file to make the inside edges flush with each other.  Also, I have read some posts that sounds problematic for the Realtrax turnouts. 

John, I suggest you download SCARM and learn how to use it. Then search (Bing or Google) for "L shaped train layouts" to get some ideas. There are a bunch of designs on the SCARM website and all you need to do is copy parts of them to see what will fit your space. If your set included the limited version of RR-Track, you can use that, but I believe it's limited to RealTrax. If you want to try other brands, you need to buy the full version with appropriate track libraries. SCARM is free though, so that's why I recommend it. I started with a set much like yours. I upgraded RR-Track before SCARM was available. I still use RR-Track because I'm used to it and it has a simulation feature so I can run a faux trains through my designs to see if I like how the trains run.

When it comes to RealTrax, I expanded my set to a 6x10 oval with 1 turnout. I've used it for a couple years for Christmas layouts, but will be switching to Atlas (likely) or ScaleTrax when I start building my permanent layout next month. IMHO, RealTrax is too loud and the curve selection is too limited. In your case, the L shape will most likely necessitate loops on the ends and 4' is going to limit you to O31 curves if you use RealTrax. Moving to other brands can get you O36 (Atlas/FasTrack) or O42 (GarGraves) curves which will look a lot better. Atlas is one of the quietest brands, but also one of the most expensive, at least retail prices. O31 also limits the selection of engines you can buy, so you need to decide if that's important to you.

However, it's too early to decide on track. I suggest you enter the dimensions in SCARM and add a run of O31 RealTrax around the perimeter. SCARM has layers, so use a different layer to run Atlas O36 track and then another layer to run GarGraves O42. You can turn the layers on/off to compare what each looks like.

And even though you've already built a 4x8 table, if you outline the space you have, someone might suggest something different that 4x8 tables arranged in a L pattern, especially if the tables are going to be placed in a corner with access limited. And don't forget to start a new topic so that questions/answers don't get mixed up in this thread.

Thank you very much Dave, I have just discovered and downloaded SCARM.  I will figure it out as it seems to be a learning curve to the software, but that is just what I need.  I have read posts that recommend Gargraves track with Ross switches.  I have made a small investment in MTH Realtrax, but I want to do this right.  I have the basic 31x52 inch layout that came with the set and expanded it with 2 30" sections and 4-031 curved sections to make the layout bigger.  I am just about finished with my 2nd 4x8 table.  Should I stay with Realtrax now or go with Atlas or Gargraves for the long run.

Thanks again; John

John, I'm sorry, but I don't think we should continue this discuss in this thread, this is Paul's build thread. If you start a new thread titled something like "RealTrax, Atlas, GarGraves/Ross or another?", you'll get a lot more opinions and I'll be glad to offer mine. You start a new thread/topic by hitting the large + in the top menu bar and selecting "topic". Make sure it says the Track Plans ad Layout Design Forum, give it a title and repeat what you've said in your posts here. If you want to contact me, my email address is in my profile.