Still Hollow Junction - Version 2: Thoughts please

Oh, forgot to include... The dark spots in the center of the loops are the "lift out" panels for all around access within.

.

I like the plan. However, once you go through either crossover, there's no way to go back without backing up. The plan for my lower level is very similar. My space is smaller at 10' 8"x13', so I've opted to use tighter curves and a loop2loop for the inner oval with a double-crossover. The double-crossover allows one to go back and forth from either track. I'm thinking of changing the loop2loop to a double-main like yours so I can add a couple of spurs too. Like you, I'm more interested in running than switching, but the spurs add some visual interest even if they don't get used for more than storing some cars

I use a combination of O36/O54 curves for the outside run and O36 for the reversing loops. I tried shrinking the 20" opening so I could use O54 all the way around the outside loop, but folks talked me out of it. I can live with the O36 curves in the upper and lower left. Initially, the crossovers were separated at the top and bottom using #5 turnouts, but this looks less cluttered. All my engines will be MTH RailKing running short trains and rated for O31 curves, so I've opted to change the #5 turnouts to O72s. The lift-out bridge across the opening will simply let me pass a train taking the inner route. The lone #5 turnout at the bottom connects to a grade track (not shown) going around the right side to an upper level.

Looks good Daz. I was able to squeeze another set of O-72 switches in the top, so I can have a double crossover effect if I so choose. I've been thinking long and hard about a lift bridge similar to yours, but I wasn't sure I wanted to complicate the O-84 curve since Lionel doesn't have O-84 switches in FasTrack.

I started a drawing with GG and Ross, with those neat curved switches and a true #6 crossover (boy they are proud of those) and while its not at all finished and needs some moving around, you can get an idea of what it looks like with O-72 and O-80 curves. Of course, that crossover isn't any more expensive than 4 Lionel O-72 CC switches.

I think you have developed a fine plan, the crossover issue that immediately popped up in my mind has been addressed.  I would consider access to the turnout on the left side carefully.  It is a long way from the table edge.  Crawling is for infants, even with access panels.  

Phil, after some thought and urging from fellow OGR members, I have since decided to take out my bridge across the opening. I made several other changes, including adding back a hidden siding and adding a couple of spurs. That reduced the need for the bridge shortcut and made it more trouble than it was worth.

And while I agree with NECRAILS about the left turnout, I really like how you envision the landscaping inside that loop. Mounting the landscaping near the turnout on a removable panel will give you access, but only you can decide if you want to deal with ducking under to get to it. At my age, I'd have to find an alternate design.

You are both right, that far left turnout is, well, far out.... I will address it this evening, and hopefully post up something new.

Thanks.

.

Played around with the Fastrack version again because of the large investment already in it. So here it is.

Nice compromise, Phil. Obviously, I'm prejudiced because it's awfully close to the design I have for the layout I'll start building next month after a vacation. The difference is I don't have room for concentric mainlines, so I have an O31 loop2loop inside a combo O31/O54 mainline. I like how you landscaped it, especially the water features, and I'll probably steal some of those ideas. I had a river until I placed the double-crossover in the center. May I ask what you plan to do for benchwork? Tabletop style with plywood and foam? Or cookie-cutter open style? I'm now leaning toward plywood with 2-3 sheets of 1" foam so I can form elevations.

One observation if I may. At first, I thought the single crossover might be a waste of money. Once you go through it, you can't go through it again without backing though it. I assumed you planned to run 2 trains in opposite directions; one clockwise to service the spur on the left and the other counter-clockwise to service the spur on the right. Then I thought that you might "want" to back through the crossover at times so you can service each spur with trains running in either direction. Having the single crossover with the spurs nearby gives you a reason to turn your trains without needing reversing loops. I didn't think to use a single crossover that way and opted for the reversing loops, I may have to rethink that.

Phil,

If you want to add another crossover so that you can reverse trains traveling either direction on the inner loop, you can add the crossover on the right where all four tracks converge.

Jan

Jan, like this?

Dave, I went back to the double crossover as you first suggested, and I think you've got a good idea there. While a single does certain things, the double does fit in the space, and give more options. All my switches are Command Control anyway and I don't use the wires, so they're easy to set up or move around. Yes, I like to run them in opposite directions.

The moved spur is a compromise to get the switch back into reachable territory, and I'm not sure I'm happy with it right now, but it works. I have to rethink my village too.

I really like your layout design so far, and excellent use of the space. I'm still thinking on multi-levels too, because I want to run as many as I can in the space. I can run two with the above, and if I'm really careful (and I don't think I want to be that careful) I can run 4 short trains with Legacy.

Getting there.

Like this.  Add the crossover between the interloop tracks.

The only obstacle is the availability of switches for the curve radius.

Jan

Phil, it is a compromise, but you could try running the spur along the curve and then turn into the center like the original. I don't know what that would do to your buildings though. They'd have to be moved to the right, but your landscaping would be closer to the original and might still work the way you envisioned.

And while I like Jan's idea, I'm not sure it will fit. I don't think it will work with FasTrack and maybe not even with a curved turnout using GarGraves/Ross. If it doesn't fit, leaving the extra crossover out will simply force you to back up at times. You will have to remember that any train you take through will change directions and you'll have to back through to get back to the original direction. I missed that it formed a single reversing loop when I first looked at the design or I would have mentioned it then. However, I'd rather see it kept and used sparingly than altering your design too much to fit in another crossing to complete the reversing loops. I hope you'll try it though. You might even try moving the spur down a little bit. That might let you put a turnout on the straight track after the bridge instead of messing with a curved turnout.

I tried and tried to fit those in Jan. Just wasn't going to work at all. Moved that spur over, and it looks good from what I can tell. Getting there.

and from the front

I like how the changes turned out Phil. How long before you can start to build? I can't start until mid-April, so I'm going to try mine with Atlas O36/O45 to see what it would look like. I'm leaning more toward Atlas and away from ScaleTrax every day. Atlas seems to be discounted more and that lowers the price difference.

FWIW, my 2nd level is going to be an elevated train with most of it on a shelf about 14" higher. The 2 reversing loops will be open and supported by pylons to minimize obstructing the view. With my hidden siding on the lower level, I'll be able to run 3 trains unattended and control the 4th. I tried lowering the 2nd level and connecting it to the lower level, but that just never worked right, so I've given up at least until I get the benchwork built and can better visualize the space. I currently have a 6x10 oval of RealTrax on the floor and the space is smaller than I thought it was going to be. My trains will only be 5-7 cars, so I may be cable to run 2 on each loop, but I'm not sure I ever will.

Phil,

Here's another option.

Jan

Looks nice but you need to somehow hide the train on the main. Seeing the train 100% of the time will wear on you. Hiding it during a certain % of its run makes it a bit interesting... psychologically.

I like this plan very much but agree you need to break the view.  Think about terrain changes, the track can remain level, either raise or lower the terrain in certain locations to add visual appeal.  It will go a long way towards making the layout seem even larger.  That is why I love Pink foam, you can do all sorts of things to it simply and easily.

What type of motive power are you running?  If steam, you may want to rethink the engine house as it won't hold many of the scale steamers as it's too short.

Regards,

Greg

Thanks to Jan, I was able to fix the reverse loop problem on the inner loop, and even the outer loop can come inboard and turn around if needed, though it takes the whole run to do so. 

I agree that some breakup in visual is needed, badly. My old layout had a trestle setup toward the back, and went a long way to hide the outer loop from the main viewing area. I will work on that today, and see where it all falls out.

Greg, the engine house is "what I have so it's there." There will probably be a bunch of scenery change overall as this all works out. I currently run all sorts of engines, but I do have a few articulated steamers that would poke out both ends of that house. In some ways, that sounds rather cool too.

Dave, I close on the new place Good Friday (God willing ), and will move the next week. It'll take some time with the new place to unpack and all that stuff, so I likely won't be able to start benchwork until late April or maybe even May, and I'll have to think out exactly how I'm going to do that.

Thanks everyone for the continued input. It is really appreciated.

Flat track plans can be very realistic.  Look at Norm Charbonneau's posts on his new layout.  Here's a link to his T1 blasting around his layout.

Norm's T1

He uses buildings of various heights and changes to terrain heights to give the viewer the impression of hills and valleys.  Reviewing his posts will can give you ideas on how to scenic your layout.

Jan

looks like the Layout has a lot of action that's great.

Good luck , john 

Everything is a compromise.

Got moved, pretty much unpacked. Awesome home. But..

The spousal unit has required space for her LEGO. I've offered up my new train room, because I don't want her to give up on it, as she and the grandkids enjoy it so much.

So it seems I'm back to my 8x12 layout space. Cool thing is the Mianne benchwork moves really easy and sets up just as easy. I've got a bit more room than before even with the Lego tables eating the right wall. I'm contemplating a semi-round the room set up coming off the left wall with an open table, so maybe 10x13 total might be available. Certainly bigger than before. Check out those curtains that came with the home.

Playing with new designs now around 8x12 to the 10x13. We shall see. Stay tuned.

.

Glad to hear you're all moved in and ready to move forward with the train room, Phil. I've had to compromise myself and am currently in yet another design phase, so I completely understand what you're going through. After I saw how much space my original design took in the bedroom turned train/craft/sewing room, I decided to move outside to 2 bays in the 3-car garage. I think I have a nice around-the-room design for the 18x19 space, but it requires a lot of work reorganizing the garage, dealing with both a lift-out and a swing-out section as well as giving up a lot of workspace. So, I'm having 2nd thoughts and am now looking at shrinking the design to 12x13 so I don't have to deal with those negatives. I expected to be in the landscaping phase by now, but life gets in the way sometimes. Fortunately, these are not life or death decisions and I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Really in a quandary. Space allocation seems even less than the old house now, but in the spirit of compromise, it is what it is. Here's a drawing of the room, and all reworked table space that I can possibly use while allowing all that Lego somewhere to go. It's enough to make you want to take up gardening

The Gargraves O-120 loop is just to give an idea of what will fit at its biggest. Almost at a "writers block" stage at the moment. The Muse ran off with the drummer, it seems.

.

I must admit I'm at a loss too, you're space is now close to what I was originally dealing with. It's going to be difficult to do something beyond glorified ovals and satisfy your desire for O72 min curves.

Well, I might/will be able to use the media room, and have a more dedicated space. The room below has the basic layout of what's there, with several false pillars built into the room that I would need to work around, but I could go around the room easily enough. The room is 18x13, and it can be just trains...

I would build in shelving below all the trackage for train storage, and the lady of the house would be able to use the game room for Lego, sewing, the TV and whatever she desires.

Surely I can figure out a really cool setup in there. Looks like there will need to be a lift section at the doorway upper left though.

And... I think I will forgo the Fastrack, and start it all over with Ross/Gargraves, and "do it right" from the get-go this time. I've laid some O-96 and O-72 just to see what it's going to eat in space... Might still be stuck with O-72 max unless I have a very simple plan.

.

well good decision on going the gargraves and ross.  I have a 10x19 and have used 072 on outer mainline and 063 on the inner mainline its an around the walls layout one side is 3' wide and other is 4'5" wide with a lift up that has a 26" walkway to gain access inside layout while running trains.

included a few pictures maybe it will give you a few ideas.