Reverse loops on a single-level Fastrack 5x9 without crossovers?

No, a tight dogbone is as close as you can get without grades.

Do you have stuff that won't run on the 15.5" radius FasTrack?  Regular O is 14.14", tighter than FasTrack O31.

The second plan is probably too tight with overlapping roadbed.

I know fast track has a larger radius than 0-27 but  Lionel had a 6x8 track plan for 0-27 with a reverse loop.  My wife thought the Lionel truss bridge would be cool on the layout, so in order to accommodate the rise in elevation I had to expand to 8x8 and used the bridge as a second reverse loop.  Using the Lionel graduated trestle set I had to leave one out on each side of the bridge to make it fit.  The increased grade and tight turns at the top of grade approaching the bridge meant my old 90 watt transformer had to pegged to make it up either side and then cut to about half on the downgrade.  Consists were limited to 6-7 cars max and car placement was crucial to prevent string lining.  But it did make for a fun layout.

I was able to squeeze a reverse loop in a 96"x60" rectangle on my layout. May need to adjust the crossover to connect the green line on your board.  Just offering another example.

Here is a pile of 4x8 fastrack layouts that you can expand upon...

http://www.thortrains.us/marx/48fastrack1.html

http://www.thortrains.us/marx/48fastrack2.html

@ADCX Rob posted:

No, a tight dogbone is as close as you can get without grades.

Do you have stuff that won't run on the 15.5" radius FasTrack?  Regular O is 14.14", tighter than FasTrack O31.

The second plan is probably too tight with overlapping roadbed.

Thanx Rob (@ADCX Rob). Much appreciated for the ideas.

I have the Harry Potter Hogwarts express set.

@coach joe posted:

I know fast track has a larger radius than 0-27 but  Lionel had a 6x8 track plan for 0-27 with a reverse loop.  My wife thought the Lionel truss bridge would be cool on the layout, so in order to accommodate the rise in elevation I had to expand to 8x8 and used the bridge as a second reverse loop.  Using the Lionel graduated trestle set I had to leave one out on each side of the bridge to make it fit.  The increased grade and tight turns at the top of grade approaching the bridge meant my old 90 watt transformer had to pegged to make it up either side and then cut to about half on the downgrade.  Consists were limited to 6-7 cars max and car placement was crucial to prevent string lining.  But it did make for a fun layout.

Thanx Joe (@coach joe)! I have been looking at two reverse loop layouts and all of them that I have planned or looked at have the elevation. Looks like if I do want a double reverse loop without crossovers, it will have to be greater than 5x9. (for the future then).

@Warthog_Driver posted:

I was able to squeeze a reverse loop in a 96"x60" rectangle on my layout. May need to adjust the crossover to connect the green line on your board.  Just offering another example.

Thanx @Warthog_Driver! The overall plan you have looks great.

@Dennis-LaRock posted:

Here is a pile of 4x8 fastrack layouts that you can expand upon...

http://www.thortrains.us/marx/48fastrack1.html

http://www.thortrains.us/marx/48fastrack2.html

Thanx @Dennis-LaRock! I have seen this site but as far as I could see none of the plans would handle the double reverse loops on a 5x9 and based on Rob's and Joe's replies, I would have go to a larger layout or go with an elevated loop.

Agreed given your preferences for 5' x 9' max layout size, your initial query may not be exactly possible.  However if the size were increased to 5' x 10' and if you were open to using a crossover, then something like this may interest you:

The main advantage of this layout is it would allow trains from the outer loop to crossover onto the inner loop to reverse direction.  Running two conventionally powered trains simultaneously would require breaking sections of the inner and outer loops into blocks with independent power switches to each block.  This could be a challenging and possibly fun exercise in collision avoidance.

Note that the left to right asymmetry is to demonstrate using wider curve easements on the left.  On the right, there is linear space savings using smaller curve diameter pieces throughout the entire inner and outer curves. If this layout's possibilities are of interest to you, it can be adjusted in numerous ways.

I also have the Hogwarts Express and it runs fine on O36 and larger curves.

.
Mahesh,

Since your criteria don't include the distances from the layout to walls, I'll make the (dangerous) assumption that this layout will be a free-standing table. If this is correct, you might consider the following arrangements.

Note that I'm not particularly literate in FasTrack, so those that are, please chime in and correct me.  These were drawn in SCARM using only FasTrack 0-36 curves and switches.

The basic arrangement.

Adding two switches gets you the ability to run two trains, but you'll need quick reflexes to keep them apart.

Twisting the first one a bit gets you a longer run between loops.

In all cases you may want to consider fence or other type of barrier to keep 'stray' trains from flying to the floor.

Perry

@SteveH posted:

Agreed given your preferences for 5' x 9' max layout size, your initial query may not be exactly possible.  However if the size were increased to 5' x 10' and if you were open to using a crossover, then something like this may interest you:

The main advantage of this layout is it would allow trains from the outer loop to crossover onto the inner loop to reverse direction.  Running two conventionally powered trains simultaneously would require breaking sections of the inner and outer loops into blocks with independent power switches to each block.  This could be a challenging and possibly fun exercise in collision avoidance.

Note that the left to right asymmetry is to demonstrate using wider curve easements on the left.  On the right, there is linear space savings using smaller curve diameter pieces throughout the entire inner and outer curves. If this layout's possibilities are of interest to you, it can be adjusted in numerous ways.

I also have the Hogwarts Express and it runs fine on O36 and larger curves.

Hi Steve (@SteveH), Thanx for the plan and the details you have provided; very helpful. I have a similar plan albeit using O36 switches and the X45 crossover that Moonman provided. The reason for the x45 is so that I can fold a 5x9 ping pong table when not in use.

I have updated the design to use the easement options you provided for the outer loop only. If I use easements on the inner loop (the left of my loop), it will be too close and could cause two trains to collide.

One question - with this plan, how would I be able to power each loop independently?

@REINDEERE posted:

.
Mahesh,

Since your criteria don't include the distances from the layout to walls, I'll make the (dangerous) assumption that this layout will be a free-standing table. If this is correct, you might consider the following arrangements.

Note that I'm not particularly literate in FasTrack, so those that are, please chime in and correct me.  These were drawn in SCARM using only FasTrack 0-36 curves and switches.

The basic arrangement.

Adding two switches gets you the ability to run two trains, but you'll need quick reflexes to keep them apart.

Twisting the first one a bit gets you a longer run between loops.

In all cases you may want to consider fence or other type of barrier to keep 'stray' trains from flying to the floor.

Perry

These are really great ideas Perry (@REINDEERE)! The "dangerous" assumption is perfectly valid - at some point (after major carpet use) it will be placed on  a 5x9 ping pong table.

@Pappu posted:

Hi Steve (@SteveH), Thanx for the plan and the details you have provided; very helpful. I have a similar plan albeit using O36 switches and the X45 crossover that Moonman provided. The reason for the x45 is so that I can fold a 5x9 ping pong table when not in use.

I have updated the design to use the easement options you provided for the outer loop only. If I use easements on the inner loop (the left of my loop), it will be too close and could cause two trains to collide.

One question - with this plan, how would I be able to power each loop independently?

Mahesh, you're welcome.  I'm glad you were able to incorporate the O-60 easements into the outer loop.

Before we get into discussing independent block power, it would be good to first determine what types of locomotives you intend to run.  Will you be using conventional locomotives (AC transformer throttle control), command control (includes Lionel's TMCC/Legacy, Lion Chief, MTH DCS, ERR, and Menards) or a mix of conventional and command control?  It may also be helpful to know what power source (transformer) you're using or have planned.

BTW, the crossover in this picture is a 22.5 degree crossover, I only mention this to make sure the one you have is not actually a 45 with different geometry.

Another issue you may want to consider with is the potential for derailments going into the convergent end of switches connected directly to a curve.  In the edited image below, certain locomotives traveling in the direction of the red arrows have a tendency to climb up onto the switch points and derail.  This can be avoided by inserting a short straight track section at the locations indicated by the red lines.  You may note that in my initial plan suggestion, there are 1-3/4" straights in all such locations, to avoid this derailment issue.

Is there a reason you don't want to have crossovers?  I just purchased a layout that is 5x10. You would only need to add 6 inches to the end of your 5x9 ping pong table.  It does loop back on itself for a long continuous run and you might be able to modify it to have 2 complete tracks but I haven't looked in to that yet.  I've attached a picture of how it was set up in SCARM but I don't actually have that program and the two sidings were never put in. 

I am running a 6 car train and haven't tested for maximum length yet but I think you could get in up to eight cars.

@SteveH posted:

Mahesh, you're welcome.  I'm glad you were able to incorporate the O-60 easements into the outer loop.

Before we get into discussing independent block power, it would be good to first determine what types of locomotives you intend to run.  Will you be using conventional locomotives (AC transformer throttle control), command control (includes Lionel's TMCC/Legacy, Lion Chief, MTH DCS, ERR, and Menards) or a mix of conventional and command control?  It may also be helpful to know what power source (transformer) you're using or have planned.

BTW, the crossover in this picture is a 22.5 degree crossover, I only mention this to make sure the one you have is not actually a 45 with different geometry.

Another issue you may want to consider with is the potential for derailments going into the convergent end of switches connected directly to a curve.  In the edited image below, certain locomotives traveling in the direction of the red arrows have a tendency to climb up onto the switch points and derail.  This can be avoided by inserting a short straight track section at the locations indicated by the red lines.  You may note that in my initial plan suggestion, there are 1-3/4" straights in all such locations, to avoid this derailment issue.

Thanx again Steve (@SteveH).

Re: Locomotives - in addition to the Hogwarts, I expect to get an LC+ (2.0) at the most and a bump-and-go trolley. (I know famous last words on what I want )

Yes, I should have said X22.5 as opposed to X45.

Took your suggestion of the short straight and added in a 1-3/4" on those sections. Due to that, the inner loop does not have easements.

In addition, I have been working on a 5x9 reverse loop with elevation and thinking whether I should open up a new thread to get feedback on that.

@lionelflyer posted:

Is there a reason you don't want to have crossovers?  I just purchased a layout that is 5x10. You would only need to add 6 inches to the end of your 5x9 ping pong table.  It does loop back on itself for a long continuous run and you might be able to modify it to have 2 complete tracks but I haven't looked in to that yet.  I've attached a picture of how it was set up in SCARM but I don't actually have that program and the two sidings were never put in.

I am running a 6 car train and haven't tested for maximum length yet but I think you could get in up to eight cars.

-----(deleted the images so the post does not get too long)

Thanx @lionelflyer. I have seen your post and pictures and looking forward to your updates/progress.

Re: crossovers - there is no particular reason and not opposed to them (as I have a plan above for that). I wanted to see if there are ways of getting single level in a 5x9 without those.  I have been working on a 5x9 reverse loops with elevation based off Lionel's 10x7 plan they have on their layout options document and might create another thread to get feedback on that.

Mahesh et al.,

Have been lurking and watching this topic. A question/concern I have is with the connections between the outer and inner loop. They seem to be using the dreaded "S" curve, albeit a short one. I think there could  be some limitations on the length of cars that will pass through those points reliably. Just a concern. Funny, as I have inner and outer loops connected but very seldom run trains between them. But I HAD to have that!

Jim K

Mahesh,

These are really great ideas Perry (@REINDEERE)!  Thank you!

I've continued to twist and add to the original loop-to-loop.  The plan does not give you unattended operation of two trains, but a single train could run on the outer loop while a second one is parked somewhere in the interior.  Or as mentioned in my previous post, good reflexes might allow the operation of two simultaneously.   Come to think of it, good manners and/or good operational rules could accomplish that as well.

The bump-and-go trolley doesn't fit well in this plan *unless* you perch it up on a constant-height trestle set, in which case it will have plenty of tracks to cross over.

Again, since I'm not as familiar with FasTrack, I have to assume what SCARM shows me is possible.  However, I have a strong suspicion that those two reverse loops come too close to each other in the middle of the layout, and that just a few more inches of length to the table will alleviate such a problem. (how many of us have seen/heard/thought those words before!)

Perry

@REINDEERE posted:

Mahesh,

These are really great ideas Perry (@REINDEERE)!  Thank you!

I've continued to twist and add to the original loop-to-loop.  The plan does not give you unattended operation of two trains, but a single train could run on the outer loop while a second one is parked somewhere in the interior.  Or as mentioned in my previous post, good reflexes might allow the operation of two simultaneously.   Come to think of it, good manners and/or good operational rules could accomplish that as well.

The bump-and-go trolley doesn't fit well in this plan *unless* you perch it up on a constant-height trestle set, in which case it will have plenty of tracks to cross over.

Again, since I'm not as familiar with FasTrack, I have to assume what SCARM shows me is possible.  However, I have a strong suspicion that those two reverse loops come too close to each other in the middle of the layout, and that just a few more inches of length to the table will alleviate such a problem. (how many of us have seen/heard/thought those words before!)

Perry

Thanx Perry (@REINDEERE). The plan looks really cool and as you mentioned would be great for a single train. I created your plan and your suspicion is accurate that the two reverse loops are too close to each other. Also, as you mention - with the roadbed in place, the tracks go over the 5x9 space. (attached).

@Bogart posted:

Mahesh et al.,

Have been lurking and watching this topic. A question/concern I have is with the connections between the outer and inner loop. They seem to be using the dreaded "S" curve, albeit a short one. I think there could  be some limitations on the length of cars that will pass through those points reliably. Just a concern. Funny, as I have inner and outer loops connected but very seldom run trains between them. But I HAD to have that!

Jim K

Jim  @Bogart, excellent point. I am not sure how many cars would pass through these points reliably since all I have today is the simple oval that came with the Hogwarts Express ready-to-run set. I would appreciate insights into this.

Also, your note about "very seldom run trains between them" - that is interesting. So, it seems like if folks have two trains with outer and inner loops, they usually do not use them too much?

Thanx!

@Pappu posted:

Hi Steve (@SteveH), Thanx for the plan and the details you have provided; very helpful. I have a similar plan albeit using O36 switches and the X45 crossover that Moonman provided. The reason for the x45 is so that I can fold a 5x9 ping pong table when not in use.

I have updated the design to use the easement options you provided for the outer loop only. If I use easements on the inner loop (the left of my loop), it will be too close and could cause two trains to collide.

One question - with this plan, how would I be able to power each loop independently?

You would cut a thin slot in the center rail of each crossover; using a Dremel and cut-off wheel or thin kerf saw blade, for example.

@Richie C. posted:

You would cut a thin slot in the center rail of each crossover; using a Dremel and cut-off wheel or thin kerf saw blade, for example.

Thanx @Richie C. Something to learn.

@Pappu  The reasons why I asked about control systems is, if you are only running Lion Chief on the two main lines, you would not need to create separate power blocks there.  Both LC trains could be powered from a single transformer with adequate power.  The trolley line would be isolated and would require a variable AC transformer (at a lower adjustable voltage) separate from whatever powers the mainlines.  Only if you were using conventional transformer control of conventional locomotives or DCS would there be a need for independent power blocks on the main lines.

If however you think you may later decide to run any conventional trains, there are several non-destructive ways to electrically isolate the inner and outer loops.  Cutting the center rail is also an effective way to do this.

Additional advice on power requirements can be simplified by knowing which transformer(s) are you planning to use with this layout.  I will add that powering the switches (turnouts) with the DC power packs that come with LionChief sets is not recommended.  In fact, many Lionel accessories are prone to failure/damage on 18V DC.

Questions:

1. What other powered accessories besides switches are you contemplating for your layout?
2. Which AC transformer(s) are you using/considering?

@Pappu posted:

Thanx @Richie C. Something to learn.

If you had the extra space, you could also just insert a 1 3/8" Fastrack fitter piece with the underneath wire disconnected, in each crossover. It's the same principle.

@SteveH posted:

@Pappu  The reasons why I asked about control systems is, if you are only running Lion Chief on the two main lines, you would not need to create separate power blocks there.  Both LC trains could be powered from a single transformer with adequate power.  The trolley line would be isolated and would require a variable AC transformer (at a lower adjustable voltage) separate from whatever powers the mainlines.  Only if you were using conventional transformer control of conventional locomotives or DCS would there be a need for independent power blocks on the main lines.

If however you think you may later decide to run any conventional trains, there are several non-destructive ways to electrically isolate the inner and outer loops.  Cutting the center rail is also an effective way to do this.

Additional advice on power requirements can be simplified by knowing which transformer(s) are you planning to use with this layout.  I will add that powering the switches (turnouts) with the DC power packs that come with LionChief sets is not recommended.  In fact, many Lionel accessories are prone to failure/damage on 18V DC.

Questions:

1. What other powered accessories besides switches are you contemplating for your layout?
2. Which AC transformer(s) are you using/considering?

Thanx Steve @SteveH.

The trolley line will come at a later time. At this point in time, my focus will be only on the LC+ (2.0) locomotives.

1. Powered accessories as of now planned are - automatic gateman, mainline crossing gates. Still not decided and assuming it is possible - track laying crew, floodlight tower. All these seem to be "plug-expand-play" which work with AC/DC (?)

2. Not yet planned for this. I was thinking if it was only DC then either use the one it came with or for the 180W PowerHouse

@Richie C. posted:

If you had the extra space, you could also just insert a 1 3/8" Fastrack fitter piece with the underneath wire disconnected, in each crossover. It's the same principle.

Thanx @Richie C.!

@Pappu posted:

Thanx Steve @SteveH.

The trolley line will come at a later time. At this point in time, my focus will be only on the LC+ (2.0) locomotives.

1. Powered accessories as of now planned are - automatic gateman, mainline crossing gates. Still not decided and assuming it is possible - track laying crew, floodlight tower. All these seem to be "plug-expand-play" which work with AC/DC (?)

2. Not yet planned for this. I was thinking if it was only DC then either use the one it came with or for the 180W PowerHouse

It's such a new product, I was unable to find the Owner's Manual for the Track Laying Crew on Lionel's support site.

The manuals for FasTrack switches, Automatic Gateman, Mainline Crossing Gates, and Floodlight Tower all indicate that they may work on 18VDC, but these same manuals recommend lower AC voltage sources, different ranges for different products.  Typically within a range of 10-14 volts AC is recommended for all of them.

Countless threads here on OGR have revealed that using DC may work for a while, but eventually leads to product damage, frustration, and other issues.  Add to that, these accessories will take a good portion of the limited available power from the Lion Chief power packs (wall warts) and lcause erratic train running.  These LC DC power packs are only designed to power one or two lightweight trains or one train and an accessory or two, depending on the type of accessory.  Accessories with electromagnetic coils like the uncoupler, operating track, and others with solenoids (like older style crossing gates and gateman) will typically draw so much power from the LC Power packs that the train slows drastically or stalls while those accessories are activated.

Lights are another issue, most people find that if powering them with 18 volts (AC or DC) they are way too bright and the bulbs only last for a short while.  Reducing their supply voltage, reduces their brightness and leads to longer bulb life.

The Powerhouse180W is a great transformer for powering command controlled trains (like the LCs), but for accessories, I would strongly suggest looking into one or more transformers with variable AC outputs.  The newest version of the Lionel CW80 may be a good choice for you.  If you opt for a used Postwar transformer, adding external instant circuit breakers to it is a really good idea.  TVS diodes are another thing worth considering regardless of which power source you choose.  More can be read about them in the instant breakers link above.

@SteveH posted:

It's such a new product, I was unable to find the Owner's Manual for the Track Laying Crew on Lionel's support site.

The manuals for FasTrack switches, Automatic Gateman, Mainline Crossing Gates, and Floodlight Tower all indicate that they may work on 18VDC, but these same manuals recommend lower AC voltage sources, different ranges for different products.  Typically within a range of 10-14 volts AC is recommended for all of them.

Countless threads here on OGR have revealed that using DC may work for a while, but eventually leads to product damage, frustration, and other issues.  Add to that, these accessories will take a good portion of the limited available power from the Lion Chief power packs (wall warts) and lcause erratic train running.  These LC DC power packs are only designed to power one or two lightweight trains or one train and an accessory or two, depending on the type of accessory.  Accessories with electromagnetic coils like the uncoupler, operating track, and others with solenoids (like older style crossing gates and gateman) will typically draw so much power from the LC Power packs that the train slows drastically or stalls while those accessories are activated.

Lights are another issue, most people find that if powering them with 18 volts (AC or DC) they are way too bright and the bulbs only last for a short while.  Reducing their supply voltage, reduces their brightness and leads to longer bulb life.

The Powerhouse180W is a great transformer for powering command controlled trains (like the LCs), but for accessories, I would strongly suggest looking into one or more transformers with variable AC outputs.  The newest version of the Lionel CW80 may be a good choice for you.  If you opt for a used Postwar transformer, adding external instant circuit breakers to it is a really good idea.  TVS diodes are another thing worth considering regardless of which power source you choose.  More can be read about them in the instant breakers link above.

Thanx Steve (@SteveH)! Will look at the link and also at the options you have provided. Much appreciated.