Skip to main content

Hello, all. As they say (sort of) on the radio, first time caller, long term listener.

I am working on my first layout in may years - my first foray into command control and a lot bigger than anything I ever did when the kids were young (25 years ago). As retirement becomes part of my life I am ready to get going again.

I am going to start simple, with a double mainline on one level which interconnect and on which the inner loop serves as two reversing loops. It will be set in the modern era, with a city scene, town area and perhaps some industry. It will also be my first time with anything more scenic than an unpainted piece of plywood, but Rome wasn't built in a day.

After uncountable iterations, I have attached three files - a PDF of the planned benchwork, a PDF of the benchwork with a track plan, and an RRT file of the plan using gargraves track and Ross switches.

I would like to build it in Fastrack rather than GG/Ross, but have been unable to make anything work that is similar to my current proposal. I was hoping that someone more facile than me would be able to convert the layout to Fastrack, maintaining the core ideas it includes (but with any improvements more than welcome). I recognize this is currently clumsy looking, though it will run in simulation.

I have used 42 inch curves at a minimum - I don't plan to run big equipment. Except for the double crossovers (which I know don't exist in Fastrack) I have stayed at 072 or tighter switches to make it work.

My initial thought is to do DCS star wiring for the track with separate bus wiring for accessories. I haven't bought any modern transformers or command control systems, but will probably run DCS and get a Cab3 when available. I have a 50's era ZW that was rebuilt by Charles Ro Co. and a KW(?) - I will use them for lighting and accessories after reading many posts about slow circuit breakers vs. modern engines. I only have a couple of MTH engines plus some postwar engines from my 1954 (!) and later trains.

In the pictures, the black areas are walls; I will set the layout a little further from the right wall to give better access to that edge. The other two sides are open - I have taped it out on the basement floor and can reach everything. My final benchwork will be from Mianne, who coincidentally is in the same city as I spent most of my adult life and who made me 6x8 benchwork a few years ago which I will use as part of this.

If people have ideas about modifying the benchwork plan within the physical constraints I have, they are more than welcomed. If someone can reimagine the layout using Fastrack, that would be phenomenal. Different ideas for the track plan are also welcomed.

Thanks in advance for any feedback. I have been reading the forum for many years and remain in awe at what people have created and the individual and accumulated knowledge it represents.

Attachments

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

@SouthCoastRocco  Congratulations on entering the adult model railroading phase. You have plenty of space to do a lot of things, careful if you fall for the Big Engines which require 072, then a big space gets small really quick.  Build it, run it, tear it down, then rebuild. Your likes and dislikes are probably going to change a lot in the next 2 years. Mine did.  This will be a common comment - make more space for yards / staging areas.   Taking cars off the track became tedious to me so I added more track and yards wherever I could on my last layout.  It would have been much easier to do it right the first time.

Also have enough space to put in backdrops and scenery and buildings. I have a double crossover and it was a real space saver. Looking at your space, you should be able to get away with pairs of switches at various locations if you prefer. 

I only have SCARM so can be of no help in revising the layout.  Enjoy!!!

DCS, Cab3, conventional that is a much longer conversation.

Here's a Fastrack layout that should work - the outer loop is O-72 and the inner loop is O-48 and O-36.  All switches are O-72.

The second pdf lists the track pieces.  May not be exact, but it looks pretty close.  Note there are 4 spots where the track doesn't perfectly line up.  It seemed to me that there are enough other pieces attached that the small discrepancies could be overcome with just pulling the pieces together.  Have fun!

Attachments

Last edited by Hannibal-St Joseph RR

Two comments:

1.  Be sure to read some of the forum commentary about FasTrack layouts, sound, and the proper (best) assembly and use of sound deadening material.  Unless you are already committed to it for some reason, Ross switches and GarGraves track are much better ideas.  (Side note, the new Lionel 3" piece of FasTrack might make this plan go together better.)

2.  I know you said you laid out the outline of the layout and have no reach issues, but in a couple places you have track right in the middle of a 6' wide section.  Being able to reach that far comfortably will be a factor of how tall you are and at what final height you set your layout.

Good luck,

Chuck

Welcome to the Forum. We were pretty much neighbors. I’ve been in West Mansfield for about 30 years.

I like your layout plan. Looks like you can run a train on the outer portion and be able to operate some switching moves on the inner portion. You also can reverse direction. The only thing I can offer. Where you placed the double x over in the center. There’s a short run around track. I maybe would incorporate some Ross curved turnouts and extend the length of the runaround.

Nice plan. Not a lot of complicated trackwork with room for scenery and structures.

Thanks again, everyone. The comments and suggestions are so helpful.

PRR's comment about Fastrack vs. GG makes me question my choice, and I am not invested in either yet.

Hannibal - could I impose on having your version of my plan back in GG and Ross? If so, could I get an RRT or SCARM (which I would have to learn) version to play around with - it looks like I could eventually get a nice yard at the top of the layout and use the limited spur now there for industry.

This is a terrific space to really put a nice layout. Your use of a folded dog bone inside an oval always makes for a good balance of Operations’s excitement and scenery space. A few questions and some confirmations to help me understand what you are looking for:

The bottom of the drawing, and the left of the drawing are the hard walls.

You want the layout to be a walk around plus a inside area for access.

I know you say you don’t plan to run big equipment, but do you want to see if we could push this to 72 minimum on the main lines, just in case you change your mind?


can you explain why you chose the shape of the benchwork - are there obstacles that need to be considered?

Do you plan to operate the layout from inside the access area or from the outside?

is there a viewing area for guests? What do you want them to focus on?

how many trains do you want to run simultaneously?

do you want to do any switching?

Current footprint of the layout is 18 x 13. Can you go to 18 x 16 to get to O72?

There are three layouts in the magazine you should check out for inspiration:

run157, February 1998, page 72

run 173 June 2000 page 100

run 208, June 2005, page 76

Also this layout from Ken-oscale is a fit for your space.

Layout by Ken 12x123204402A-774A-407A-99DD-4032D6D69473

Thanks, Edward and Craftech. I now realize I should have drawn in where walls are to avoid confusion. My apologies. The walls are shown on this new PDF which answers some of Edward's questions. Here are answers to the questions:

The bottom of the drawing, and the left of the drawing are the hard walls.

The hard walls are the long continuous one (15') and the side that connects to it at an angle (13'). There will be a space when it straightens out (12-18") for access. Funny foundation shape to fit my house on my small lot! I think the PDF finally clarifies this.

You want the layout to be a walk around plus a inside area for access.

See above and PDF.

I know you say you don’t plan to run big equipment, but do you want to see if we could push this to 72 minimum on the main lines, just in case you change your mind?

That would be great for the outside loop.

can you explain why you chose the shape of the benchwork - are there obstacles that need to be considered?

The shape and dimensions were dictated by the two walls and by the end result of negotiation, if you get my meaning. I'd be lucky to get an additional 6" on the two sides without walls, lol.



Do you plan to operate the layout from inside the access area or from the outside?

Both, with remotes or iPad. I am trying to decide where to put the transformers and control panel.

is there a viewing area for guests? What do you want them to focus on?

Guests will come inside and on the two open outsides.  The interest areas will be looking at the layout from inside, and along the side with the opening.

how many trains do you want to run simultaneously?

Two.

do you want to do any switching?

Not much at this juncture, but comments in this and other threads make me wonder if I may want to do more in the future.

Current footprint of the layout is 18 x 13. Can you go to 18 x 16 to get to O72?

As you can see from my comment above, I am maxed out, lol.

And thanks for the layout references. I will check them out.

Attachments

It looks like there is a different amount of gap from your picture and Hannibal's but if it is more like Hannibal's I think I would consider either moving that double siding on the inside loop or adding one to the top of the inner loop at the top.  It would make a much longer siding which is nice if you are trying to side longer trains or a train of passenger cars.

Otherwise it is looks pretty good, as you mentioned you may start building and decide you don't like something or multiple things and make changes.

Hi all. I have done some changes to my proposed layout after taking into consideration the comments several people generously offered:

- My attached PDF now shows the walls which constrain the layout in black. Sorry that I can't figure out inserting an image into the post.

- The RRT file is also attached.

- I decided that the flexibility of GG/Ross was a better way to go than Fastrack.

- The revision now has an O72 outer loop. It has the minimum number of switches on it so I can incline/decline it at some point in the future.

- The revision now has an 054 inner loop.

- The reversing loops had to be O42 to fit my space.

- Added a small yard which includes a runaround track.

I think there is continuity across all joints since the RRT simulation runs fine.

I still welcome suggestions for improvement and will post photos when Mianne finishes the benchwork and I assemble it.

Rocco

Attachments

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.
×
×