Skip to main content

I have a layout using Ross switches and Gargraves track.  I am adding the section in the bottom left of the layout (scarm layout attached).  My smallest curves are O54.  My diesels that require O54 are having trouble on the O54 and O72/O54 switch.  I have 16 Ross switches and I don't see any issues with the switches themselves.  Thinking about changing my design so the large diesels can make it through better.  Worst case is I can remove the O72/O54 switch and make that curve wider.  I'm trying to avoid that because I want to keep the spur if possible.  Problem is that section is in a corner of the room so I can't go any bigger than I already have.

Attachments

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Hi Jim,

I took a look at your SCARM file and was having difficulty coming up with some alternatives since I don't know the shape of your table.  If you could add a baseboard to the plan it would really help us help you.  Also, forgive me if I've misunderstood, you used all Ross track in the SCARM file and said you're using Gargraves as well?  Otherwise it looks good to me so far though!

- Victor

Last edited by Victor D

Hi Victor,

Thanks for taking a look.  I'm using flexible Gargraves track on my layout but using Ross track in Scarm was easier for me.  I don't know how to add a baseboard, but I tried in the attached.  I put a red circle around the trouble area.  I will say I put a level on the 2 switches and saw that where they meet was 1/8 inch low.  I shimmed them up and that helped a lot.

Attachments

Images (1)
  • mceclip0

Jim,

Here's what I came up with as a first attempt.  The only O-54 switch left is the curved O-72/O-54 that you didn't want to replace.  I changed the two Right Hand O-54 switches to O-64 Ross switches and added some more segments of flextrack that are not O-64 (circled in red).  I did this in order to stay true to your original plan (operating under the assumption that you're well versed with flextrack and can radius it to whatever you need it to be).  Let me know what you think and if this could work!

- Victor

 

Attachments

Images (1)
  • mceclip0
Files (1)
Last edited by Victor D

Hey Jim,

That looks good! That curved switch ate up a lot of room in that narrow area there. I love the longer spur and how you reconfigured the wye portion.  I'm in the process of planning a new layout similar in size to yours actually and this is some great inspiration.  Hope it works out for you and that all your engines no longer have any issues. 

- Victor

Hey Jim,

After spending some time deciding what size and shape layout would reasonably fit in my space I came up with this.  Started with a 16' x 10' table at the top and then I added on an 8' square portion to complete the L shape.  I will most like use MTH Scaletrax with all O-72 curves and switches and #4 switches for the crossovers.  Also, I'll able to walk around the entire table in the space that this would fit, which is a plus. 

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 16x10_Revised
Last edited by Victor D

Jim,

That's an interesting idea, although I think I would like to have that split down the middle of the main table so it separates the mountain area from the town area.  A "hard" boundary if you will.  And since I'm a glutton for punishment, I just came up with this variation that expands the middle loop with some O-63 curves at the bottom of L. Call me crazy!

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 16x10_Revised_2
Last edited by Victor D

Add Reply

Post
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×