Layout help

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.

Jim J

Attachments

Original Post

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

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.

Jim J

Attachments

Photos (1)

Jim,

This pic helps a lot.  I could spend hours on SCARM messing around with track plans so I'll see what I can come up with.  Also, are you using the flextrack for ALL of your curves? If so, what's the radius you've set?  I'm asking so I can get a more accurate representation for your layout.

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

Photos (1)
Files (1)

Victor,

I keep having trouble with the O72/O54.  I think because it's right next to the O54.  I think I am going to do something like the below and not use the O72/O54.  This will also give me a longer spur for storage.  I think I have too much going on in that curve.

 

Jim J

Attachments

Photos (1)

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

Photos (1)

I have 0-54 smallest and have very few issues with large diesels.  Are you sure your flex track is really 0-54?  

I like your plan but it looks like the circled area is sharper radius.

John

Oak, Black Lab, Constant Companion, 12-4-1994 to 12-18-2006 TCA 03-55425

Thanks Jim.  I will admit, your reverse loop with wye was great inspiration. It's really a great idea if you have the room like we do.  Really glad to hear your addition works better now, it's great that you got it like you wanted it. Enjoy!

Victor,

I was looking at your layout.  Just an idea to put both reversing loops on the same area that way you don't need it in the middle of the main section.  You'd also have to move your crossovers.  Just thought I'd throw it out there as an idea.

Jim J

Attachments

Photos (1)

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

Photos (1)

Add Reply

Likes (0)
The Track Planning and Layout Design Forum is sponsored by

AN OGR FORUM CHARTER SPONSOR


OGR Publishing, Inc. PO Box 218, Hilliard, OH 43026 330-757-3020
www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
×