Hi Dave, I am still following your progress. To me the layout priority seems unclear. The challenge is the space the upper reverse loop consumes. If it were not there the size of the center peninsula with the yard and roundhouse could be greatly increased. Were it my layout I would move that loop by extending the upper track across the bridge as a double decked arrangement then stack the two reverse loops in the lower left of the layout. Of course the last thing I want to do is make more design work for you with these comments.

Tom

Tom,

Never worry about causing me more work, I truly don't mind and enjoy the process.

I understand your suggestion and we've tried that on a different layout where it didn't work out. Here though, I don't want to change Bob's design too much until he chimes in. You did give me a slightly different idea to get more space. I'm not sure why one reversing loop is larger than the other, so I simply made the upper loop smaller and moved it further to the right. I didn't change the baseboard yet, but you can see how much space it frees up.

I can also get more space by expanding the blue and green ovals, but that might result in too much of the blue line being covered. I'm waiting on Bob to comment on that.

dejohn 2019-08-10 alt

 

Attachments

Photos (1)

Dave, just for a reference point I pulled the dimensions that go with my layout pictures. The TT is 22" diameter, the RH is 24" deep. the tracks into the RH are 9.5" from pit wall to RH door. The angle between each stall is 9 degrees. The total distance from the points of the turnout to the back of the RH is 9'. Fewer stalls would not affect this dimension. There is no extra distance at all. The engines barely clear each other by the coaling tower. Upscaling by 64/48 it would take 12' to build it in O scale.  Using curved rather than numbered turnouts might save 6"; using a RH with a larger angle between stalls so it could be closer to the TT pit might save another 6".

Tom

Thanks, Mark. I just wish the area around the roundhouse wasn't so close to the edge of the peninsula. Even though I "think" the footprint is accurate, we won't know for sure until Bob has the equipment in his possession and can lay things out on the floor, table or something. He's not going to be able to build the bench work on the end of the peninsula until he knows for sure it's all going to fit as it does in SCARM. From the outer edge of the 34" turntable to the rear wall of the roundhouse is almost 8' and the whole section is almost 4' wide with the whisker tracks.

temp

 

Attachments

Photos (1)
DoubleDAZ posted:

Tom,

Never worry about causing me more work, I truly don't mind and enjoy the process.

I understand your suggestion and we've tried that on a different layout where it didn't work out. Here though, I don't want to change Bob's design too much until he chimes in. You did give me a slightly different idea to get more space. I'm not sure why one reversing loop is larger than the other, so I simply made the upper loop smaller and moved it further to the right. I didn't change the baseboard yet, but you can see how much space it frees up.

I can also get more space by expanding the blue and green ovals, but that might result in too much of the blue line being covered. I'm waiting on Bob to comment on that.

dejohn 2019-08-10 alt

 

Dave,

You can change the layout any way you want. I am open to all suggestions. Once we see all the designs then we will have the forum vote for the best one for my space. Did I tell you the reason I have a second level is for a logging area?  I have a Shay and several logging accessories. Thank you.

Bob

 

Bob, I don't believe you did, but I may have missed it. Either way, that suggests the upper level will be on a separate deck that will cover parts of the main level. Right now it's only elevated 6" and that's not going to be enough to reach under to deal with problems. Even with a higher elevation, you'll likely need some removable hatches in the reversing loops. Here's a version with the deck and tracks elevated 12".

dejohn 2019-08-10 alt 

dejohn 2019-08-10 60 alt3d

 

Attachments

Photos (2)
Files (1)

Hi Dave and Bob. Thought I would post this scale drawing of the structure of my layout in the room. At the maximum dimensions the layout is 17’x21’. Looking at the aisles the narrowest spot is 28” except for the very end of the one aisle. Some parts are 32” and the entrance area is 46” to accommodate the swing gate. The room walls follow the outside perimeter of the layout except at the swing gate.

I have been operating the layout for over 2 years now so I can comment on the space. At 28”+ this feels very tight and confining but works for three people operating trains. It is relatively easy for 2 people to pass each other. At max there have been six visitors inside the layout but only I was operating anything. I do not feel 24” would have worked for the aisle width.

One of the reasons this layout arrangement works is there is no control panel of any kind. It runs with Legacy and a comprehensive LCS installation. I have an iPad with the LCS on it for each operator and an iPhone or a Cab2 for each. The control cart is hidden under the peninsula, access is not required for operation. It holds all the transformers and power supplies.

There are 4 indicator panels built into the edge of the layout. These have block occupancy detection, turnout point clearance indication and a redundant turnout position indication for all hidden tracks. The layout has hidden track, reverse loops and a storage yard. Without these operation with hidden tracks would be much harder.

The layout has 4 levels of track but only one place, the peninsula, where it is double decked. The peninsula is 70” wide and the upper deck is 32” wide. The clearance is 12”, exactly as Dave recommends.

I think Bob’s layout looks good, especially with the 3D views. Ultimately the layout needs to match the operating desires of its owner, not us commenters.73F99DCF-6E07-48ED-BFC0-A2B31E89F164

Tom

Attachments

Photos (1)
TrainHead posted:

Dave,

Do you think I should add track to the lower level by my stairs? We would need to get rid the cross over (lower level) and the bascule bridge on the upper level.

I love the 3-D view of the layout.

Thanks,

Bob

Do you mean something like this?

dejohn 2019-08-14 60

dejohn 2019-08-14 60a

dejohn 2019-08-14 60b

 

Attachments

Photos (3)
Files (1)

Bob, I’m with you. IMHO, you’ll be operating from the larger open space and the aisles on both sides of the peninsula are just for access to deal with problems. One thing we haven’t discussed is what operating system you’re going to use and where you’re going to put a command center, if any.

My layout is an around-the-room with a center peninsula.  on the entrance side (with lift up) the aisle is 3 feet wide by 24 feet.  It is the intended viewing area and has stools to sit on.  Two people can pass the space.  Around the end of the peninsula and other side, the aisle is 2 feet wide which is enough for one person to operate and work on the layout but not pass another person..

One thought to remember is that you need to have sufficient space for viewers to stand, turn around, and move about.  You have about 24 sq. ft. which will allow 4 to stand comfortably.  You still have space in the aisles.

Are your stairs open to the train room.  It would be a great place for kids to view the trains!

Jan

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
330-757-3020

www.ogaugerr.com
×
×
×
×
×