14x24 Atlas-O Layout Plan. With 11x19 FasTrack Version. Short Video of Trains Running Added!

@Jan posted:

I liked this plan and followed its development closely.  When Ken published his 14' x 24' plan it intrigued me as being a candidate for the redesign of my current layout.  But my room is 24' x 28'.  How often does one have more space than what's required? 

I feel that the best use of the 4 feet is to increase the length of the yard.  An obvious use of the 4 feet.  I tried to enter Ken design into SCARM.  He used sectional track plus a couple pf pieces of flex.  I don't know what his max diameter curves were, but his minimum curve is O72.  All mainline switches were #5s.  He did have one O72/O54 curved switch which I eliminated.  My mainlines are O99/O108 the rest is O81 and O72.

If I adopt this plan, I will have to reflect this right to left.  I have my access door 6 feet from the lower right.

Jan

Jan, what grade did you end up with on the purple line, climbing from the yard to cross over the yellow line?  Looks steep - 6%?

So glad you followed this design thread, and were inspired to work up your own version for your space!  A huge compliment, coming from you, I have admired your work, and learned from your discussions and comments!😎

@GregHess posted:

are you going to use dcs or conventional or both.  Which track do you like best and why?  Thanks

TMCC/Legacy (already own), with DCS (already own), and conventional control option (of course!).  All good!

@Will posted:

Restroom? Isn't this near the house? I see you moved it to the corner, that is better. But why a restroom? That's a lot of plumbing and expense.

Actually, no longer need the restroom option.  We added another restroom/changing room with shower, for access to the pool and hot-tub, a short distance away from this proposed location (about 24'), access is paved, no steps.   But its a neat design element, and couldn't bear to just wipe it out, so it still shows as an option.   Good news for me!

Does your software auto implement different track for the layout or do you have to redo the plan?  I cant afford atlas and do not want fast track either.  I would love to see in gargraves and or scaletrax.

@GregHess posted:

Does your software auto implement different track for the layout or do you have to redo the plan?  I cant afford atlas and do not want fast track either.  I would love to see in gargraves and or scaletrax.

Ah, no, that would be an awesome addition to the SW!  But with different vendors offering different diameter curves, and the turnouts are shaped differently between manufacturers, I can see why that idea is not implemented.

@BurkusCircus52 posted:

I don't know how plausible this would be, but what if, to get some more over/under action, you extended the BNSF extension in front of the doorway (using a removable bridge), and then had it go down and reconnect just after the roundhouse turn? This would require going with the bathroom-less option and probably losing Deer Lodge and the On30. Basically, it's turning the BNSF Connection into the third main and making Three Forks the out-and-return switching short line. Just a suggestion. And please post any progress you've made over the quarantine!

Burkus, I guess I don't follow, sorry.  But thanks for the suggestion, and please feel free to clarify!

I could see extending the elevated BNSF to Great Falls, across the doorway at the bottom, with a long lift-out, and have it swing in the lower-left corner at Silver Bow to connect to the trackage now the UP junction, and so back to the outside mainline.  This would not be a completely independent loop, there would be shared trackage between the turnouts on the left (the one in the clear space between tunnels (with a stream), and the upper left turnout that starts the BNSF elevated line.  That could be worthwhile:  redoing Silver Bow to make room for the new mainline to pass through.  Usage would require that the door be locked, but that is OK; others do that sort of thing.

Deleting the bathroom option (no longer needed for me), would allow me more flexibility to retain Silver Bow in some form.

Exploring the idea of a connection across the front door (lift out bridge) to Silver Bow.  O72 minimum.  About 3% from Cascade siding at 7" down to mainline connection at 2".   Modern era: Montana Rail Link, BNSF, UP (and pretend to NS).  Ancient:  Milwaukee Road and NP.

I have thought about double-tracking the bridge across the door, that might be very useful, but I don't want to crowd the viewing area by about 6".

With all these great changes could you repost your Anyrail file?

Greg, I haven't made any changes to the 12x20 FasTrack version.

After a long delay, and much thought:  I have found a 15x26 garage plan with loft that I would like to build, but have been unable to find a contractor.  The site is a bit complex with a buried power line to the house to be relocated, and a tree to be removed.  So thinking that the complexity might be what is dissuading contractors (?), I thought perhaps an easier 14'x24' garage without a loft might be an easier build, no tree issues, but still the power line relocate.

So I am looking at this 14'x24' plan right now on a break.  Back to work today.  I recently looked at YouTube videos of a layout along these lines, and liked watching the trains running, and navigating the sweeping curves.

Comments appreciated!

Five hidden staging tracks are beneath the yard, 6" below.

Ken, my favorite track plan is the folded dog bone which is what you have above. That is because when a train leaves a scene it comes back from the direction it left in. I really like the track plan you posted above. My one concern would be if there is a derailment it would probably in the 5th staging yard track on the lower level furthest away from the layout edge and the other 4 tracks will be full of trains. Do you have a plan to have access to the lower staging yard tracks?

Phil, I agree. With this version, I have also added return loops, so a train can run both mains on the way out, hit the return loop, and then run both mains on the way back, for a nice long run, returning in the opposite direction.

Derailments in the worst location:  On the second diagram, the white area is open beneath the yard/turntable, and the hidden staging is 6" below.  So I can get under there on a low rolling chair, and access.  Not ideal, but doable and not too uncomfortable.

At the other end, the hidden staging is accessible from the access area in the upper left, and will be open, but not so easy with the outside main kind of in the way at an in-between height as it is climbing at that point.   

Thanks! -Ken

Phil, I also am planning to have a removable rock face, or wall, in the front of the hidden staging, which can be removed for reach access to the staging.

Hard to see, its directly above the MRL/BNSF logos.

Ken, that sounds great. You definitively got those issues covered. Good luck with your layout.

Great!  Good chat, Phil.

Here is the fellow that inspired my redo/new approach:  RBP Trains:  He is having WAY too much fun!!

Here, with some people for scale:

Wow!  It's been a year since I looked at this thread.

Ken, the grade of the Cascade line is 4.7%.  That'll mean short trains and/or helpers like at the Cumbers.NM.  There is about 7" of clearance where the grade crosses the Deer Lodge/Three Forks.  I got a great deal on a couple AtlasO Deck Girder bridges and thought of how I could incorporate them into your design. As you, I envisioned this design as a of a major Class 1 railroad and a short line serving mining and timber industries.  I moved the incline to be inside the UP mainlines as as not to foul the main line.

Jan

PS.  Typo, my room is 14' x 28'.

Jan, good to hear from you!  If you have a track plan you could share, that would be cool to see!

In this next, I am experimenting with On30.  I am trying an On30 loop around the town, running in the street, with structures around the hill.  And in the upper left, a decoration On30 alignment hosting a static loco and a couple cars.

Track diameter indications, and a little more scenery work: stream and tunnel portals and taller hill.

Control systems: Legacy + LionChief.

In general, I think that the 6" track centerline separation of FasTrack is TOO large, preferring the 4.5" of Atlas-O.  But here, I am taking advantage of the 6" with a track height difference of about 6" in elevation, so there is more room for a scenery edge between the heights.  Still, the 6" separation in the yard is too much.  I might customize the O72 FasTrack turnouts and remove the 1-3/8" separators between turnouts to compress it a bit, for the better visuals.

Just to see, removed the 1-3/8" sections between O72s in the yard.  Not a lot of difference, not sure its worth it.  But for now, I will plan on it, it also gives a better separation between the inner mainline runs and the yard.

I thought to re-arrange the industry spurs at the bottom.  The idea is to allow switching of the power plant and the cattle pen & milk can without fouling the mainline.  Switching can use the turnout and lead of each other's approach for backing up when switching the opposite industry.

The Morton Salt tower is a bit better, using the turnout off the Yard Lead track as length for backups.  Maybe not enough, but better than before.

Unfinished, but sketching in some On30 ideas.  Thinking that after mostly finishing the O-gauge, and I want something new to add to the layout, I may want to add an elevated On30 line to connect the town hill with the ridge in the upper left.  Something different to do, and it would look kind of cool, but not sure how to justify it logically.  But, anyway...

By extending the hill at Three Forks into a ridge, a separation occurs that makes a new locale, which I have named Cascade.  So that makes four "places" in the layout:  Missoula Yard, Missoula station on the left, Cascade industry spurs, Three Forks town around the hill.  That is a good thing, adding to the feeling that the railroad is connecting different places or locales together, and giving the visitor/audience a sense of more things/places to absorb and enjoy.

I was curious to see how it would look if the ridge from Three Forks extended to cross the mainlines.  Not sure.

Some decorating with trees of various sizes and types.  I ballasted the section of double-track that is at the same height.  The inside main is level at 6" everywhere, and the outside main rises and sinks between 0" around the turntable, and 6" around the hill at Three Forks.

And ballasted the yard.

I covered the 1/4 circle O84 alignment in the upper right beneath the area for a couple of houses, at 8" in elevation above.  The track is accessible from below.

10' Garage door at the right, facing the driveway and street.  Can be opened for open houses and bringing in materials.

There are a couple of challenges for reach/access that I have not resolved, deep in the Cascade area for one.

Checking how 4x8 sheets of plywood or foam would cover the layout efficiently.  7 sheets plus some pieces:

A side-by-side comparison of two 14'x 24' concepts:

(A)  Design goal: maximizing curvature: O90/O99 minimum mainline diameters with #5 turnouts, O72 in the branchlines, with Atlas-O track.

(B)  Design Goal: maximize mainline run length with sweeping curves, O72/O84 minimum mainline diameters, with O72 turnouts, using Lionel FasTrack.

Looks like (A) may have more human space. (A) has nicely defined towns for switching.

(B) Has the hidden five-track staging/storage yard under the visible yard. (B) has a better implementation of an On30 railroad.  (B) yard tracks are slightly longer and straight.  (B) is a better fit for a conventional garage space, with the overhead door opening into the human access area.

Both have an entryway space for visitors.

Added a long custom steel lift-out bridge with Atlas-O track, as a cut-off, connecting the outside line on the lower, with the inside line of the upper right.  The layout currently has one long passing track on the inside main at the left, which is the yard lead at the bottom running past the station and yard ladder to the inside main at the top.  This bridge may add some additional operational variations.  It does add a loop route:  starting at the station on the yard lead/bypass/arrival track, heading down;  take the crossover to the outside main; across the steel bridge; onto the inner main and around to the yard bypass/lead to the station.

Added another tunnel at the bottom.  Might look good, and might support the possible On30 connection.

Looks like the On30 might be able to make the grade to cross the mainline O at Cascade. 

I have the On30 roughed-in, without bridges and trestles and some structures.  The O-gauge grade is 2%.  The On30 had a grade of 5% on the approach to cross over at Cascade, from the loop at Three Forks.

I will do a test to ensure that the Bachmann On30 steam locos can make 5% with a few cars.  The minimum radius on the On30 is about 19.5", or 39" diameter, which is comfortable for On30 that can do 15" radius.

I am considering lengthening the garage by two feet, and adding a door on the other side.  On the site for the structure, there is a 10' easement to the property line, between the garage and a privacy fence with the friendly neighbors.  I need to be able to access this area to keep it clean, and to store kayaks and perhaps add a small shed for train stuff.

This does make the human space more pleasant!

UPDATE:  Well, construction is well underway, completion expected in a few weeks.

The building is my studio/train room.  I went with 15x25 OD.  It works as a detached garage for after I am gone, adding value to the property.   The attic loft is high enough to stand in, so lots of accessible storage there, very happy about that!

My boss asked me to stay on at the University through July 2022, so that is my target retirement date, at 65 years.  I can go earlier, if things change.

My health is much better, I had a stent put in one larger artery five weeks ago, which was 80% clogged, and the difference is amazing!  I can move and do things now, so the future for trains and etc. looks better.  I am working out in cardiac rehab, loving it!

Rather than one large layout occupying the entire space, I am thinking about this.  O layouts and an S layout, plus room for my computer desk.   Not sure I should attempt a really large layout, anyway, this looks more manageable.

Will have a mini-fridge, and maybe a microwave.  Bathroom is close by, we put one in a few years ago in the basement close to the pool, as a changing room with two-person shower.  About 20 steps away.

The large O layout is O72/O60 diameters, FasTrack command control + LionChief, with train staging tracks under the mountain.  On30 narrow gauge elevated.  The smaller layouts will be on wheels, perhaps lift-able to the ceiling (I have a suspended 6x12 O layout in the garage, not operating.)  Ceiling is just short of 9 feet, feels like a nice space inside.

Thanks everyone, I will keep you updated!

Ken I am happy the stent was a success! That's great news. Looks like a well planned and executed structure.

Your layout designs are top-notch, so whatever you do I'm confident you will enjoy it.

Thanks Jack, very much appreciated!  I am surly looking forward to moving in (which will be a ton of work itself!)

The smaller layouts imply you are more interested in sitting and watching trains and interacting with them.    Everyone has their own way to enjoy the hobby.    I prefer more interaction, making up and breaking up trains, and switching industries.     So I would look to the large layout, but from my experience, I would reduce the mainline to single track with passing sidings - double track takes up a lot of real estate in O.     Again that would require more interaction just to  run more than one train.

It might be a good idea to ask yourself, when you get the layout to the point of trains running - probably scenicked and all, what are  you going to do?    Are you just going to quit, and sit and watch stuff, or if you like building tear it all down and start another one with a different theme.

Hi Jim.

Fair question, I appreciate the thought.  I have been posting layout designs on this forum for quite a few years, and this thread dates back to 2019.  So I have thought much about what is the "ideal" layout for me.

Short answer is:  all or any of them!  I like so many features of many layouts, its hard to be sure what is the best for me, until I get to run the actual layout for an extended time.  A few things that are consistent:  I like to run trains.  Switching is OK, but not a priority.  I like to have multiple trains available on the layout so I can rotate which ones are running.  I also like new ideas and new layouts.  So having multiple layouts in the room will keep up the excitement and pleasure for me.  Obviously, smaller layouts are easier to complete, and know that I am haphazard about building layouts - I have many interests and activities that draw my time.

I also like single track roads with sidings, that is very cool to have a train wait for another to pass.  But I weigh that against the pleasure of having multiple trains running while I train watch.  I would love a long single-track scenic layout with three or four towns, but I am not great at scenery, and I don't think I could pull off a lot of scenery that I would be satisfied with.  One of my favorite Clint Eastwood quotes from one of his movies is: "A man's got to know his limitations."

Hmm, having a single track line perhaps in your dogbone configuration with a passing siding or 2 would be interesting.    To satisfy your interest for multiple trains, make a double ended yard along the back wall, call it what you will but use it for staging trains.    With 4 tracks you could have 4 trains ready to go, two in each direction.   Run one, than another, move one to a siding and then run another in the opposite direction etc.    These do not have to be hidden just because they are staging.    You could make the all open and scenic it as a yard.     Or if you are all passenger service, scenic it as a large double ended passenger terminal.     

This idea would also work with the double track main.

Jim, you are clear that you like more interaction with trains, and the single-track with passing sidings clearly requires this, unless layout automation is implemented.

Can you show us your layout?  Perhaps a diagram of your layout - so we can see and learn from you about your approach.  That would be very interesting to me.  Perhaps I can be persuaded to refine my ideas, lots of time for design changes before I lay down my first rails.  Or if not that, perhaps a diagram of someone else's design that you admire??

Here is a design that I did a few years back for a client, which I think, is closer to your vision.  Double-track rather than single track, but otherwise, lots of switching, multiple towns, a huge yard, lots of interaction, but one can still sit back and watch four or more trains run while you enjoy a cold one.  And the elevated line IS single-track with passing sidings.  What do you think?

I don't have that kind of room, obviously, and perhaps not the skills and time to pull off something like this.

Great Software! The animated trains are terrific! What is the name of that software?

I'm a SCARM user primarily.

L

I thought to add an update: the Train Studio has been complete for a while now, and I have most of my trains moved in.  Its 15x25 O.D. so subtract 8" for interior dimensions. Layouts are not far along yet:  I have O, S, and N layouts to fit if I can.  Interior look from the front:

I have my plan "finished" for the S layout, about 5x12.  But still considering ideas for the O layout.  I am working on this plan now with Atlas-O:

Looks great Ken! Like the layout.