Track Plan Vote and opinions please

Add switches and track to create a reversing loop.

Bob Nelson

Have you ever looked in the back of Greenburg's Repair Manual? There are a number of Standard Gauge track plans in there. Otherwise, I would say the first plan.

I prefer my cross overs coming off a corner. This eliminates S curves. One switch in my photo is ross 72 the other is MTH 72. Your drawing would be using MTH 42 or original Lionel.

For operation I run one train on the outer loop and 1 on the middle loop. As a option I park the middle loop train between the turnouts on the on the middle loop over the 280 bridge and in front of the Hellgate bridge. I set the non derailing on the outside loop on the right side of the Hellgate to throw the turnout on the left side of the Hellgate in the opposite direction.

The outer loop train travels counter clock wise because of right hand running rules (gotta be a little scale even in tinplate) When it hits the right hand switch it throws the left hand switch to open making the train cross to the inner loop. The non derailer on the inner loop flips to straight and throws the other middle loop switch to straight. When the train hits the non derailer on the outer loop it throws the other outer loop switch to straight. This causes the train to continuously travel around both loops.

note: Ross switches are not non-derailing and the middle loop has to be thrown to straight. Without the ross switches a 2nd route can be made by parking the outer loop train in front of the 440 signal tower and making the middle loop train travel over the Hellgate and 280 bridges.

Space is the problem for me, plus, it may sound nuts, but I like the vibe of vintage track and switches. It's part of the pleasure for me. So, with those two issues and good ol' math, plan #1 requires "S" turn switches. Plan #2 is a way around it, but it requires cutting track.  On that note; Railmodeler has a glitch: Going from the outer loop to an inner loop (with back to back switches takes a minimum of  4 lengths of reg. Standard gauge track (including switches.) However what it does not account for is the extra two or three inches of track on the outer loop that it requires. It works fine on the computer, but not in reality. 

How does the 2nd plan eliminate S turns? My plan eliminates S turns and the trains will still go clickety-clack. It can easily be done with vintage switches.

BTW an unwritten rule is to always put a least a half straight between back to back switches.

F&G RY posted:

How does the 2nd plan eliminate S turns? My plan eliminates S turns and the trains will still go clickety-clack. It can easily be done with vintage switches.

BTW an unwritten rule is to always put a least a half straight between back to back switches.

Yeah, misnomer... the second plane eliminates 1 S turn, and 4 switches together. The half-straight between switches works on one side, not the other. Strict space confinement.

PS, I just 'real-worlded' plan number 2. (Rail Modeler really doesn't have the measurements of Standard gauge switches correct at all.) The only thing I gain with plan 2 is the elimination of one back to back switch. Being that all of the larger stuff will run on the outside, most likely the only thing that will transition from outer to inner and visa versa is smaller engines. My #8 was fine with back to back switches as were larger wheel 200 series cars. Funny enough, 500 series were iffy.

Here's another. There will be a lot of cuts but it does about all that I want. There may be one more siding added to this design. Again, center may be open, or a hatch.  140L tunnel will be in upper right corner. Hellgate is at rear, and large Power Station may be in the middle. Freight Shed is the red rectangle next to siding and inner loop.  I like this one.

You can still do want Jim C. is suggesting with your last plan using vintage switches.  Just put the outer loop switches in between the curve sections on adjacent corners.  That should allow you to also maximize the physical size of your inner loop if that is desired.

Thanks much Jim C (and Dennis Holler). Here's a stab at your suggestion. Looks to be great except Railmodeler is griping about matching up in some areas. Like always, I will work this out on the carpet first. Best to ya.

Looks like you will have clearance issues on the bottom 2 tracks. I suggest moving the half-straight between the 2 switches on the left to just below the lower switch. You will also need to replace a full straight with a half straight on the inner loop by the freight platform. This will move the inner loop track up far enough away from the outer loop.

Hope this helps.

ARNO

moderneraSG posted:

Looks like you will have clearance issues on the bottom 2 tracks. I suggest moving the half-straight between the 2 switches on the left to just below the lower switch. You will also need to replace a full straight with a half straight on the inner loop by the freight platform. This will move the inner loop track up far enough away from the outer loop.

Hope this helps.

ARNO

It's a good point and I will see (and test it) when I ay it out on carpet. The reason I am staying away from the top is that there is a 140L tunnel that will inhabit the upper right corner. It has a LARGE footprint. 

I think Arno has a good point on the clearance.  Maybe you could take his suggestion and then adjust the upper right corner of the inner loop to avoid the tunnel.  What if you took out each of the straights leading into the top right turn of the inner loop, replaced them with curves and then connected the curves with straights, instead of having the two curves directly connecting to each other? (So it kind of looks like the left top side of the inner loop but without the switches)

Just to be clear, my alterations did not touch the outer loop near the corner with the tunnel. Just moving the one half track on the outer loop which would move the inner loops lower track upwards. Then you would just need to shorten the vertical tracks of the inner loop. The top edge of the inner loop does not change its location. This is where the confusion may have set in. 

ARNO

moderneraSG posted:

Just to be clear, my alterations did not touch the outer loop near the corner with the tunnel. Just moving the one half track on the outer loop which would move the inner loops lower track upwards. Then you would just need to shorten the vertical tracks of the inner loop. The top edge of the inner loop does not change its location. This is where the confusion may have set in. 

ARNO

I understand your concept, but since I would be moving the whole inner loop up, then cutting and bringing down the top portion... I think just moving up the bottom portion (and leaving the top 'in situ') will be a quicker fix. (Probably some cutting involved.) Either way, the clearance alert helps and may have saved me some 80 year old paint. Thanks. Let me know if I am missing something.  (I attached the original design here so you don't have to scroll. )

F&G RY posted:

I prefer my cross overs coming off a corner. This eliminates S curves. One switch in my photo is ross 72 the other is MTH 72. Your drawing would be using MTH 42 or original Lionel.

For operation I run one train on the outer loop and 1 on the middle loop. As a option I park the middle loop train between the turnouts on the on the middle loop over the 280 bridge and in front of the Hellgate bridge. I set the non derailing on the outside loop on the right side of the Hellgate to throw the turnout on the left side of the Hellgate in the opposite direction.

The outer loop train travels counter clock wise because of right hand running rules (gotta be a little scale even in tinplate) When it hits the right hand switch it throws the left hand switch to open making the train cross to the inner loop. The non derailer on the inner loop flips to straight and throws the other middle loop switch to straight. When the train hits the non derailer on the outer loop it throws the other outer loop switch to straight. This causes the train to continuously travel around both loops.

note: Ross switches are not non-derailing and the middle loop has to be thrown to straight. Without the ross switches a 2nd route can be made by parking the outer loop train in front of the 440 signal tower and making the middle loop train travel over the Hellgate and 280 bridges.

 

I was going to suggest the same thing about switches in corners. Avoid those "S" curves!

Have fun!

John

The turnouts end up being back to back. I would adjust to have a half straight in between.

Here is a drawing with RR track. I used 72 turnouts on the main line to avoid back to back switches. a 72 curve and 1/2 42 curve equal 1 42 curve. I used the outer guide line 0f 3 1/2 straights for width a 4 straights for length so this should fit. Added a couple big accessories to show what will fit. Really room for a lot of stuff.

Dreyfuss Hudson posted:

Space is the problem for me, plus, it may sound nuts, but I like the vibe of vintage track and switches. It's part of the pleasure for me. So, with those two issues and good ol' math, plan #1 requires "S" turn switches. Plan #2 is a way around it, but it requires cutting track.  On that note; Railmodeler has a glitch: Going from the outer loop to an inner loop (with back to back switches takes a minimum of  4 lengths of reg. Standard gauge track (including switches.) However what it does not account for is the extra two or three inches of track on the outer loop that it requires. It works fine on the computer, but not in reality. 

report that to RailModeller. We had some issues with FasTrack switches when I was working with another member.

F&G RY posted:

The turnouts end up being back to back. I would adjust to have a half straight in between.

Here is a drawing with RR track. I used 72 turnouts on the main line to avoid back to back switches. a 72 curve and 1/2 42 curve equal 1 42 curve. I used the outer guide line 0f 3 1/2 straights for width a 4 straights for length so this should fit. Added a couple big accessories to show what will fit. Really room for a lot of stuff.

Hey Jim, thanks so very much for taking the time to plan that awesome version. Very cool and very nice of you. It all looks great. There is a lot of room, but my biggest issue is that there are threes sides against walls. The top and right are completely up against them, and the left has the top 3 foot against a wall. So, there needs to be open area in the middle or at least hatches. Because the left side is mostly open, I was thinking about putting the siding there. With the open middle and the mostly open left side, all three tracks will be accessible.  I am thinking about having the power station in the center on a sliding hatch, with the hatch sliding from top to bottom for access. Gotta think about the 'new' 72 switches. I know what they accomplish, I am just a nut for all vintage. Thanks so very much again.

Take a look at Alex Muller's fabulous layout build. In the 3/8/11 post, he details a very sweet hatch system that will allow for scenery (power station) to be on top.

Setting the layout height at 40"-42" makes it easy to get under.