reverse loop plans for fastback

Though most tracks are similar, you should state what type of track you will be using.

Hi Dougie,

Do you want circles or teardrops?

Here's circles (attached)

Circles take up less space, but they have that "S" curve and limit the length of your trains more than teardrops.

Just 3 inches of extra length will allow a car-length of straight track to relieve the S-curve, which is much better for train operation and appearance. These arrangements also minimize the required table width/depth.

So for fastback 3 inches in the length would help??

moonman..For this year I am doing a top reverse loop on each end for the top level.  The one side will be the North pole outside the loop and the other "Who Ville" inside the loop.  bottom will be a small winter village with woodmen's and a siding or two..

Dougie fresh posted:

So for fastback 3 inches in the length would help??

Not just for FasTrack. Adding a straight to any "S" curve allows trains to run smoother with fewer problems and they look better doing it. Going in one direction through a curve and then going in the opposite direction after the curve puts strain on couplers and can pull cars off the track, especially light cars in long trains. It's just something to avoid if possible. It's bad enough anywhere on a layout, but it's particularly bad in reversing loops because a lot of the train is still going through the loop and tight loops strain cars the way it is.

What will the reversing loops do that a dogbone won't? A dogbone lets you run a longer train or multiple trains easier. Just saying....

Mmmmm well the layout is 8x4x8..its in a "L" with equal sides.   I thought if I did the reverse loop I would make the back corner easier and the elevated track not as wide......What would that look like?

Then the bottom track would run under the top in a tunnel till it came out in the center 4X4..

This is how I do it... with minimal "fitter" sections.

Something like this, assuming you want to use as much space as possible. You could shrink the ends by removing the straight pieces. Basically, both types use about the same space. The main difference is the turnouts vs the dual straights. I'm not pushing for either one. I myself vacillated between the reversing loops and dogbone on a design I was working on before I completely changed my approach for a permanent Christmas layout. I was leaning toward the dogbone because I like the idea of 2 trains passing each other on the straights making it look like they are going in different directions.

So, you are not going to do the spiral this year?

Dougie,

Daz has the teardrop shape and ACE's is the compromise. Sorry to hear you gave up on the mountain spiral.

it really comes down to what shape that you want or need (first question) for the buildings.

(Daz) he would run the r-loop into a single track behind the tree. Check out his 2015 layout The base stays the same 3- 4' x 4' in an L

Daz's that the idea but its 3 4x4 one in the corner and the other two on each end..  I like your idea and Moonmans..Just trying to figure out how to get two trains on 2 tracks going there???  I will have two levels..

Dougie fresh posted:

Daz's that the idea but its 3 4x4 one in the corner and the other two on each end..  I like your idea and Moonmans..Just trying to figure out how to get two trains on 2 tracks going there???  I will have two levels..

My example "L" is 4x4x4, it's just shown as a single tabletop, the grid is 5" squares.

I use DCS, so running 2 trains on the same track is pretty easy, though they do have to be watched to make sure one doesn't overtake the other. You might not be able to do that, so maybe the loop2loop is the way to go. It does use less space without the 2 side-by-side tracks. If the loops will be large enough for the trains you run, then it is probably the better option for you.

DoubleDAZ posted:

Dougie fresh posted:

Daz's that the idea but its 3 4x4 one in the corner and the other two on each end..  I like your idea and Moonmans..Just trying to figure out how to get two trains on 2 tracks going there???  I will have two levels..

My example "L" is 4x4x4, it's just shown as a single tabletop, the grid is 5" squares.

 

daz,

Your top length is 26.5 squares or 132.5", not 96".

Dougie fresh posted:

Daz's that the idea but its 3 4x4 one in the corner and the other two on each end..  I like your idea and Moonmans..Just trying to figure out how to get two trains on 2 tracks going there???  I will have two levels..

Dougie,

Ok, O31 doesn't fit inside of O36 naturally. Using 2 tracks on top eats up some center space and leaves only 32" for the tree in the center.

Here's 2 tracks elevated at 8". The road bed is a really tight fit.

Carl, you're right, sorry. In my hurry to comment, I forgot that my layout is going to be a little longer on the one end and I can see where shrinking it won't leave much room for trains to pass each other in the corner. So, that idea may be a moot point. FWIW, here's a corrected version.

And for the record, I much prefer your example with 2 levels and reversing loops on top of each other. I was just trying to show what the dogbone would look like and have no real idea what the end goal is, especially when it comes to how many trains will be run at the same time.

Carl: thats the winner.  Only I will have one track on top and the other on the bottom going through tunnels.  I won't be putting a tree in the center this year.  Will do a small village or such........thanks..