Rubin’s New Layout

Jeff,

Thanks again for everything.

I’ve spent the last couple of days pondering what to do. I’ve gone over several of the iterations you sketched out, including the flipped version.and my original drawing. I’m not sure that the flipped version achieves that much and it does have several issues that I’d like to address. There really is no yard lead and the S curve created by the yard ladder will probably prove to be problematic over time. Nevertheless, I did just get off the phone with Steve at Ross. I ordered two full circles of 064 and one pair of 072 switches and a pair of 072/054 curved switches to supplement what I own.

I’m toying with perhaps going back to something that has worked for me before: running two mainline loops (072 ands 064) around the entire perimeter to create a double track mainline, but raising their elevation to 8” so that ducking under at either aisle is not terribly problematic.

I also think that I will go back to Mark’s idea and begin laying out some track, just to see how things feel and work in 3D reality.

Thanks again.

Stay tuned.

Rubin

Hi, I've been studying iterations 17 and 18, and they both have what I consider to be 2 major flaws, one of which you have already noted, the lack of a yard lead.  The second problem 17 & 18 both have is that when a train enters the smaller loop running in one particular direction (clockwise for 17 and counter-clockwise for 18), there is no way to exit that loop to return to the rest of the layout EXCEPT by backing through the loop entry switch.

That will get "old" real quick; just my .02 cents.

Chuck

Thank you, Chuck. I always imagined that with a space this large, track plan design would be a breeze. Hah!

And this afternoon I put several more joists in place. When I illooked out at the layout I realized that things seemed uneven. They were! It turns out that several of the joists attaching the legs,,who were made by a friend, were made with cheap 3 3/8 wood, while the rest were done by me with high quality Swedish lumber and were 3 5/8. So I have; dismantle everything and start over or compensate for the difference when I add the joists. What a pain!

I know I should do it over, but…

Rubin

Been there done that. I assume you know not all 1/2 inch ply have the same  ¹⁵/₃₂ thickness? One of the many reasons I had to deconstruct TPRR1 several times.

BTW I used 1/2 inch foam and 1/2 inch homasote on 16 inch centers both were noisy according to a noise meter installed ion my phone. Solid 3/4 pine was the quietest by far. Challenge is isolating the track and road bed for the base layer. Plywood acts as a drum - one of the reasons I prefer narrow roadbeds as opposed to flat sheets of plywood.  Haven't tried 2 inch foam over a grid support - I have to believe that would be very quiet. sound

Rubin, with this many variations of the layout, my head is spinning as it was when we were going through revisions for my layout plan.    Yes, you'll have to make the call as to what's what, and where you want to take it.

Different dimensions on dimensional lumber!  Say it ain't so!  I ran into that as well, but it was my own fault using old and older lumber.  I didn't know what to do when I bought some poplar. 

Mark,

I’ve also used a lot of 30 year old lumber from my old layout. It seems so much better than most of the newer stuff. The premium lumber is still pretty good, but the garbage takes that word to a new level. The 1/16 inch or 1/8 inch difference among in 1x4 boards makes me crazy.

This group just makes the whole journey more enjoyable.

Rubin

Hi All,

I’ve been spending a lot of time pondering the various layout iterations we’ve created, especially you, Edward. The more I look and study, I see that the one plan we haven’t tried is the one I thought about early on and then discarded, primarily because it created a crowded four track “ mainline” at the passage from the left peninsula to the center one and would interfere with the bridge scene I’ve stuck too ( and still want to use - if only I could find two Atlas double track bridges). But the more I think about it, it might be the best way to go. Using plan 17 as a guide, it might just work, with other rejiggering along the way. My plan is lay it out on plywood after I come back Tuesday from an out of town wedding. As soon as I get this “3D mockup” done, I’ll send some pics for the group’s thoughts and ideas. In the meantime, any thoughts or ideas are welcome.

Have a great weekend and stay cool everyone !

Thanks,

Rubin

The mock up is a good idea, Rubin!  Have a great long weekend!

Hi Rubin,

I know I haven't commented on your plans much, but I think you should fallow your first idea and try to make other things work around it. If you want a four-track mainline, then I think that is the place to start and work out from there! I will have to go back and check out plan 17. But don't hold your breath on me as I haven't had much time to work on my own layout! LOL

Catching up on some unanswered questions and comments.

@RubinG posted:

Edward ,

Thanks ( you are one creative guy)!

I see a couple of issues  1) Did you mean “ double decker or double track? 2) In either case, it looks the yard lead will be obscured  Also, how do you suggest supporting the  track over the yard  ladder lead? 3) The spacing of the tracks crossing the aisle looks way too tight to fit in the real world  But perhaps I am wrong  

Looking forward to to the net set of insights  

Thanks again,

Rubin

In next version...

Eliminated upper level crossing yard to facilitate track support and remove being obscured.

Improved separation between tracks crossing lift gate. (Note they are at different elevations)

@RubinG posted:

Hi SD,

The latest iteration is right above your email. Further above is a group of Edward’s “iterationsThe passing tracks are short, but I am also a believer in running shorter trains to make the run look longer. If I can run 5 car passenger trains with AA diesels or even a Geep or RS-1 or 3, or a steamer, Ill be happy. Ditto for eight car freights. I’m a short line/branch line guy, I guess. I still wish some one would make 3 Rail versions of the Ma & Pa 2-8-0 #24 & 26 that I drooled over when they were made by PFM so long ago.

What I do want is more room for scenery and structures and minimal need to crawl under the layout. I’m going from about 170 sq ft to about 400 sq ft, but in O gauge nothing is ever enough!

Rubin

Passing sidings and yard length should be coordinated based on operational desires. Inside loop is almost 50% passing siding, so it almost is becoming a double track. Need to understand the effect you are going for.

@RubinG posted:

Edward,

To use 64” on the loops will work, but just barely. ( 64 + 4 on each side would mean that I’d have to extend out to 76” to protect against errant elbows. I’ve clamped some 1x4’s to the benchwork. The first photos show 72” and the third photo shows 76”. This doable, but a problem nonetheless. There will be a large angled area from the 76” area to the 36” deep area along the wall and I don’t know how I going to work on the mainline at the back of the benchwork nearest the wall..

The inside station loop is O54, add 4 inch to each side for CTC and you are at 62 inches as the smallest you can go. To make a 62 inch curve you can do a compound curve, easement, or flex. If you want smaller than 62, the inside loop needs to me smaller or eliminated.

BTW I don’t see photos.

@ScoutingDad posted:

Rubin, you may want to check the vertical clearances or adjust them when you do the build. SCARM is showing 6 inches between the decks - you lose the height of the lower track and roadbed and the thickness of whatever you are using to support the upper level. Clearance will be down to around 5 inches. Intermodal cars, Auto carriers and pantographs in the up position will not clear that.

Agree, but grades are at 3% already, so other parts of the layout need to be raised or lowered.

@RubinG posted:

Jeff,

Thanks again for everything.

I’ve spent the last couple of days pondering what to do. I’ve gone over several of the iterations you sketched out, including the flipped version.and my original drawing. I’m not sure that the flipped version achieves that much and it does have several issues that I’d like to address. There really is no yard lead and the S curve created by the yard ladder will probably prove to be problematic over time. Nevertheless, I did just get off the phone with Steve at Ross. I ordered two full circles of 064 and one pair of 072 switches and a pair of 072/054 curved switches to supplement what I own.

In my opinion the flipped plan uses the room better, and gives more room to work. Also gives more room for scenery. I’ll post a new version anyway, but it’s up to you.

New tweak with longer yard lead and using Ross yard switch. Can also build yard with other switches.

@RubinG posted:

Hi All,

I’ve been spending a lot of time pondering the various layout iterations we’ve created, especially you, Edward. The more I look and study, I see that the one plan we haven’t tried is the one I thought about early on and then discarded, primarily because it created a crowded four track “ mainline” at the passage from the left peninsula to the center one and would interfere with the bridge scene I’ve stuck too ( and still want to use - if only I could find two Atlas double track bridges). But the more I think about it, it might be the best way to go. Using plan 17 as a guide, it might just work, with other rejiggering along the way. My plan is lay it out on plywood after I come back Tuesday from an out of town wedding. As soon as I get this “3D mockup” done, I’ll send some pics for the group’s thoughts and ideas. In the meantime, any thoughts or ideas are welcome.

Have a great weekend and stay cool everyone !

Thanks,

Rubin

I find passing sidings and double track mainlines chew up too much real estate, upset the track scenery balance, and should only be used when necessary, but need to understand the effect you are going for.

I agree a mockup is always a good idea.

Keep the challenges coming and remember what Edison once said:

"Nearly every man who develops an idea works it up to the point where it looks impossible, and then he gets discouraged. That's not the place to become discouraged."

New version soon.

What’s new in version 17b &18b...

• Eliminated upper level crossing yard to facilitate track support and remove yard being obscured.
• Improved separation between tracks crossing lift gate. (Note they are at different elevations)
• Longer yard lead and using Ross yard switch
• Made the left reverse loop two-way. (It will require left side be raised 2 inches to maintain 3% grade max [17b only])
• Redesign main/branch connection for opposite direction exit.
• Replaced some O54 with O63 where it fits.

Good morning all,

As you know, I have a whole load pocket 3x8 3:4” plywood that I bought to use on my new layout, but can’t manipulate it my self and have no help. I’ve been toying with using 2” thick foam instead. It’s lighter and dimensional more stable, but I’m concerned about adequately supporting it. My L girder benchwork has joists roughly every 18”. The one inch foam is too flexible and doesn’t work.
Any thoughts, anyone?

Thanks, as always.

Rubin

Rubin,

I have never heard of 3x8 ply.  I always thought it came  4 x8.  No matter.  Determine the largest piece you CAN manage.  Then measure your benchwork.  Cut the ply to fit your benchwork so long  as the piece does not exceed the largest piece you CAN handle.  I can't carry a 4x8 sheet anymore either but I can slide it around so I can cut it into smaller pieces.

Hope this helps.

Ed

Rubin- the 2" foam should be OK on 18" centers. All depends on the weight it will need to support (will you need to climb/ lean to reach, etc.).

You can add stringers between the girders at 90 deg to add support where needed.

Before you abandon the plywood all together, what are the issues? Handling to run through a saw? There are great tools available for ripping plywood down with a circular saw. Kreg makes a fence system that makes easy work of cutting plywood.

https://www.kregtool.com/shop/...rip-cut/KMA2685.html

Bob

Thank you Edward and Bob. The issue is this :  I bought a half dozen 4x8 sheets of 3/4 inch plywood from Home Depot. I had HD cut 4 of them down to 3x8 and two boards into 2x8 s. This was done in order to get the plywood into the train room. All of the plywood is stacked under the layout benchwork. My plan had been to lay the sections of plywood on top of the joists, lay out the track plan using actual track, switches, etc, mark off the subroadbed and then cut it using Sabre saw. The problem I’ve alluded to is that, at least for the time being , I can’t lift the boards to put them on top of the joists, mark them, then cut them.  That’s why I’ve begun to think about foam.
I keep trying to find some help, but no luck so far.
Thank you , as always.
Rubin

Hey Rubin, i live the other side of cleveland. If you need help lifting the plywood on to your layout i would be willing to come and help you. You can find my email in my profile if your interested

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for your kind offer. I can’t find any contact info on your profile.
Where do you live?
Tell me about your layout so I can perhaps reciprocate your generosity.  
I look forward to hearing from you.

Rubin

Sorry thought my email was in my profile. i have since added it. sent you an email rubin

I’m certainly glad you two are getting together.  Once I’m able to drive 2 hours again I would be glad to help too.

I was out to help Rubin beginning of the week. we got some more joists cut and got all of the plywood up on top of the layout. He was going to work on getting them attached. He is trying to get some track laid out for grandkids that will be over in a couple weeks

Jeff,

First of all, THANK YOU! I meant to post this right after you left but I’ve been tied up with clients and just didn’t do it. You were a big help and representative of why I really value this group. The help and advice from like Mark, Edward, you and others is just outstanding.
Thanks again.

You're welcome, Rubin!  I'm glad I could help, and wish I had been closer to help with the construction.

That's excellent, Jeff!  It is so true that this is the value of this forum.  I'm glad you were able to help Rubin!!

Rubin  were you able to get trains running for the grandkids?

Thanks for asking and for all your help. Unfortunately, not yet. What I discovered was that the joists were badly off, depending on whether I used new wood ( 3.5”), old wood (3 3/4) or and some really old ones, that are actually 4”. Also, the issues with my right hand have made it hard for me to safely wield some of my heavier power tools. But I hope to get something going in the next couple of days, working around business commitments and meetings.

Thanks again. Your help is very much appreciated.

Rubin

I'm sorry to hear you weren't able to get anything running for the grandkids. Yeah lumber is that way. You would probably be best to use all new lumber for your joists and to save the other for another project. and yes the older lumber is more than likely better, but he doesn't have enough to do the whole layout. and doesn't have a table saw to rip them all to correct width

Rubin, I’m sorry you have that problem.  I ran into a similar problem and ended up shimming some to make them the same.  I don’t have a table saw either which would have been nice to rip everything to the same width.  I have some wood on the layout that one side is wavy because I tried using the fence with the circular saw but couldn’t keep the saw in a straight line.  😢

Thanks, Mark. I had no idea that my lumber stash would be a veritable history of the decline in the quality of wood production. But I’m  beginning to understand why people spend for Mianne, but I just can’t bring myself to waste all the lumber I have. I’m not sure whether this means that I’m stubborn, frugal, cheap, or??? But I’ll keep soldiering  on.

stay tuned.

I like to think frugal.  If you don’t use the stash on your layout, what else would you use it for.  If I had bought enough Mianne for my layout, I wouldn’t have enough money for the track, etc to get trains running.  😄

Good evening all,

Thanks to Jeff's help, I pulled some late nights and got an 8x14 loop ready for my grandchildren. I hooked up my trusty Z4000 and found that I could get sound and lights from my 3.0 locos, but I can’t get any of them begin to move. I’m running in conventional because they all arrive tomorrow. But I can’t any movement out of my engines..what am I doing wrong?

Rubin,  MTH engines can be a little finicky relative to the battery. If there is not a full charge, some stuff will work, others not, its rather hit or miss. If you have BCRs or PS3s, 30 seconds at 14 volts or more should do the trick.  If its a rechargeable battery, that can take quite a long time. I do not like to leave power to the track unattended so after 15 minutes if it does not run properly I replace the battery. I generally replace all my batteries prior to powering up with BCRs. All it took was one fried board due to an old battery - never again. Since you have guests coming tomorrow, you could use a new 9 volt for the day then take it out. (assuming you have either PS1 or early PS2 with the 9 volt style battery)   You may have better luck with the 3Volt batteries on the later PS2 engines leaving them on the track to charge.

Thank you. Both engines tried this far are newly bought PS3 locos. They are about 5 years old but bought new recently by me from one of the reputable dealers. Since both engines are producing sound, whistle and bell, but won’t move in either direction, even when I’ve pushed and held down the direction button, I’m puzzled. I’ve also tried using both sides of the Z4000, to no avail. It doesn’t matter which side or throttle I use.
im also amazed at how rusty my skills have become since everything has been packed away for the last three years. But the memory muscles are starting in as I do more on the layout, so that’s good.
thanks again for your response.
Rubin

look at this link - not sure if this may be your issue - Engine will not run

Thank you very much, SD. At least I know I’m not alone. I’m going to go down to the train room in a bit and see whether the  15 second wait you suggested may work. If not, i may resort to pulling out some of my original Lionel ( 2020, 736, 2383, etc,)so that there’s something to run. Then I’ll do some trouble shooting next week after everyone leaves.
Thanks again.  
Rubin

Glad you were able to get a track built for grandkids. Hopefully you will get the trains that you want to run going

Rubin, since you are running PS3, the supercapacitor charges pretty quickly. Some of mine light up in a couple of seconds, others are seemingly dead for 30 seconds or so until they come to life.  If you are using a TIU between the Z and the track, try connecting the transformer directly to the track (as if there is no TIU)   When I run my  MTH engines under transformer, I will move my track inputs to the transformer outputs, bypassing the TIU.   

As an aside I also have the capability to run TMCC and always forget to turn off the TMCC box when running under transformer. TMCC engines if they see a signal do not move unless addressed by the handheld.  Makes sense that DCS engines do the same, otherwise they would just take off as the tracks are always under full power.

Make sure the red output is connected to the center rail. I presume you have built the layout in powered sections?  DCS does not like its signals bouncing into each other from different directions, so there needs to be a break in any loop.  As a quick check connect the transformer to a short piece of test track, put the engine on and see how the engine responds. PS3 engines for me have been "bullet proof"  its the app controls that get goofy from time to time. Something I mess up all the time, the "Fixed 1"  input to the TIU needs to be powered in order for the TIU to work.

Rubin, I’m with Jeff; glad you got track down.  I had a dickens of a time getting everything working when I first got DCS, and I have no idea why it started working!  🤷‍♂️

Indeed!  If you don’t get it going quickly, resort to the postwar engines.  The grandchildren will love it either way!!

I do , too( love it), even if it’s not scale, etc, etc.  I also really appreciate this group more every day. Thank you, OGR!

Rubin I hope you got some engines running! I am with Jeff if not try putting one on a single section of test track and see if you can get it to work there!

Either way take your time and enjoy as you go!

Thanks, Mike. I got a train running by grabbing my old Lionel 665, putting on some mth cars. 5 year old gRand son loved it!  I still kept trying to get my PRR G-5 to run but no luck until I stumbled on a some good folks talking about how MTH had wired the switch backwards! I switched from “DCS TO DCC” and, to my delite the engine took off; fun for all.

glad you got them going