Track Plan Recommendations

Here is a picture of what i have now with fast track. While it looks good, it has issues, i am not impressed with the way the fast track is working just doesn't seem smooth and most of that is with this lionel tressle and bridge

I'm not going to design it for you, but offer some suggestions.  Hide the top part of your oval (either under mountains (sounds like your preference) or behind a scenic backdrop) so you can still have continuous running.  Then use the remaining portion of your layout to operate as a port on one leg of the visible "U" while using the other "U" leg as an industrial area served by the port deliveries.  The space at the bottom of the "U" could be your town area.

I would highly recommend putting your hidden area where the entrance to the center of the layout is located, and then use light styrofoam (sp?) sheets to build a removable mountain piece.  Your "port" could just be a freight yard with  pictures of port facilities on the walls.  You might even use a port "facade" so that your continuous loop trains don't run through your port operation.

Finally, be sure to use your design software with the products you plan to use.  In what you posted, you used Gargraves switches, not the Ross switches you plan to use.

Chuck

Thanks for the tips chuck that’s why i posted on here was for tips or if someone had track planning recommendations or someone who does it for a fee would also be an option since i am more of a newbie and am trying to maximize space i have with switching and scenery. The gargraves switches are being pulled out and equivalent ross switches are being added i just have not made the change yet in any rail. I would have paid one guy i talked to but when he told me $2500 i was like i’m yeah too much

Updated track plan to reflect ross switches and gargraves track.

@davehall83 posted:

I am trying to get the best possible track plan/layout but i am a bit new at this. I am wanting to do O gauge but also have some scenery like mountains/tunnels etc. But i also want alot of switching while maintaing some continuous running lines. I am attaching my layout in any rail and pdf files. I am a looking for someone to help track plan but the last person i talked to wanted $2500 which is way out of my range. I just want something i can run my O gauge trains on and i plan to use gargraves track and ross switches. This was my first attempt to design something, maybe not the best design but it was a start. The files are attached. I would take help here or even a referral to someone that does track planning for a fee.  With the 10 x 11 space i have, its kinda limitied for O gauge i know but i want to get the most out of what i have and not make some bad mistakes that will cost me in the long run.

Do what I do sit down with a legal pad and draw it out. I make many changes and then settle down with the idea.

Download SCARM (computer aided layout design) it's free and will give you a very good start.  A lot of folks here use it and the learning curve is not very steep.  In learning it you will learn a lot about your layout.  There is a large library in SCARM that will contain the specific track you want to use and it will give you a parts list of all the track and turnouts needed for your layout.  Time well spent!

OH!  And, WELCOME TO OGR!!!!!@!!!!!

@Dennis-LaRock posted:

Download SCARM (computer aided layout design) it's free and will give you a very good start.  A lot of folks here use it and the learning curve is not very steep.  In learning it you will learn a lot about your layout.  There is a large library in SCARM that will contain the specific track you want to use and it will give you a parts list of all the track and turnouts needed for your layout.  Time well spent!

OH!  And, WELCOME TO OGR!!!!!@!!!!!

Very true, I like the pad first  when I am sitting outside or relaxing I can just write it down. Latter once I decide I transfer it, then it goes much smoother.

Have you looked into Ken Hoganson's book 21 Great Track Plans for Compact Layouts?  Maybe something for you to use or start with in there. I see Ken worked in AnyRail with FasTrack and Atlas O so you shouldn't have any trouble recreating his layouts. Ross and Atlas O curve turnouts are mostly drop in replacements length-wise for each other but there are some differences in curve radii so it is worth spending the time in AnyRail to fix the differences. If you plan on using sectional track I would recommend Ross over GarGraves.

Here's some food for thought.

I couldn't tell what size curves are in the FasTrack layout, but they appear to be tighter that the O-89s that are in the Ross/GarGraves version. You didn't mention what engines you plan to run and what size curves they need, but I'll assume they currently run on at least O-36.

Photo 1 is a quick (and crude) rendering of Chuck's idea to consider before you go too far drawing things on paper that simply won't fit the space or trying to use curves that also won't fit. The Blue tracks are the O-89 curves in your PDF version. The Orange tracks are O-54 curves. The Green switches and curves are O-42 with several curves cut to fit.

Photo 2 shows it separated into 2 runs with more tracks needing to be cut to fit.

As you an see, the O-89 curves will fit in either version and you can probably elevate 1 bridge over the entry, but not both. As you can also see, even using O-42 switches/curves, there isn't a lot of room for switches/spurs.

well this is certainly a cool layout you have shown me here didn’t even think of it this way. I wanted to run some engines that require O-72’s like the big boy. The fast track was just for christmas and consisted of O-72 and O-36 curves all over the place but it never got 100% working right so i plan to tear that down and put up the gargraves track with ross switches. The O-89’s with gargraves were the largest circle giving me the the best possible “outer ring” so i can run some big boys or fill scale O engines that run on O-72 min radius. The big engines will only be run on the outer ring as i know i only have space for probably one of those but like you said not so much space for switching. The rest of my engines run on O-31 or O-36 like the polar express, hogwartz express and other engines i plan to buy. The more expensive engines i get will probably be in the min O-31 to O-36 minimum radius range.  But a few bigger full o scale engines i like will have to be “outer ring” only engines since they will have the minimum O-72 ring requirement but that’s something i have to live with , with the space i have unless i start making an upper and lower deck lol which may happen one day.

Mia the blue track utilizing my ross 100 and 101 switches that join the orange track? i really love this ideas and i am definitely appreciative of what you did here for me. I took a while for me to figure out anyrail but any chance you can send me these layouts so i can buy scarm and see the parts list ?

The other trick is that open bridge area is a basically a piece of plywood on a piano hinge with a latch underneath that i will have to tinker with to figure out how to get it working.

But this layout would keep me happy for the time being  and i could run 2 trains if i isolate the electrical too. The wall on the top of your drawing goes into my office and is hollow if i ever convince my wife i was going to cut 2 tunnel portals into the wall and then make it look good with some scenery and portal graphic etc then i can expand into my office and have some track there too for switching and a storage/turn table yard and maybe more running track lol.

Thanks pretty far off before i do that though. I would most likely get room in the basement for a second layout before she lets me do that one

Dave, based on this new info, I’ll clean up the design some. I’m not pushing SCARM, it’s just what I use these days. If you want to use AnyRail, I’ll post a photo with track labels and a parts list so you can convert it to AnyRail. If you just have the trial version, SCARM also has a trial version. It does things differently, so be ready for a learning curve if you try it out.

ROger that, the one design on top that had a 3 way y was that a particular part? I may like the bottom design better though

Ok, here's a version with a lot of track and switching to show different configurations. Unfortunately, the blue crossover on the left only fits using GarGraves O-42 switches, not Ross, and O-72/O-89 curves as labeled. The purple tracks are grades from 0" to 6" elevations. The clear tracks are those that had to be cut. All green switches and curves are Ross O-42. There's was no 3-way in the other photo, but I added one here to show sizing. It does limit how many spurs can be easily added, but it's something I can work on. I added the Parts List to show you that the number of pieces is under the SCARM trial limit of 100, so you can install SCARM and fiddle with the file to decide if you want to purchase it. I think AnyRail trial limit is also 100. To download the SCARM file you need to right-click and select Save As or Save Link As.

@davehall83  Dave, your layout space is similar to what I have and what @Mark Boyce has on his Blackwater Canyon layout. Check them out for ideas.

You may want to consider having a main which will handle the BIG engines (make sure you have sidings - I've found once on, I do not want the hassle of removing them) and design the rest of layout for most of the other gear which usually handles 42 inch diameter curves.  Looks like you could easily fit in several long sidings to park the long engines. 

Be careful on the grade, I do not think you have enough room to get a 6 inch rise with a reasonable grade.  For a 6 inch rise at 2.5% grade you need 20 feet of run. Stacking track on top of one another will not work at those sections. You can reduce the run needed by have one section rising and the other declining to meet in the middle, providing more flexibility in layout design. Of course that is assuming you want too be able to connect upper and lower levels.

If you want to do switching, you should look at the ideas of "a runaround track configuration" instead of dead ends in a yard.

The only thing is, was there anyway to keep ross switches in here and use the o-89 outer circle like you had earlier? I really want the reliability of those switches and the layout your showing. If we can figure that out, this would work out well. I saw the black water canyon very intersting layout that is something of interest. I may get rid of the trestle/elevated track here just to get the layout on a level working layout and do some upper levels later instead.

Don’t have time tonight, so I’ll see what I can come up with tomorrow, but it’s going to limit the ability to elevate sections because I’ll have to try different locations for connecting the inner and outer loops.  It’ll reduce the number of spurs too.

Ok understood, if it will reduce spurs then o-72 is ok with me just mainly want the ross switches in there. The elevation stuff i may do without, i had some issues with mine on fast track

Not the O-72, using Ross switches.

I cancelled my Ross order for the 101 and 100 switches so we can figure out what i need switch wise no sense of buying the wrong switches. I just really want the reliability of the switches that ross has. The elevation i am not too concerned about and that doesn’t have to be apart of the layout.  Its just that one area thats open to the floor that was in blue highlighted line which we could just run track across and use the piano hinge drop down dooor without any elevations or i can make it closed permanent as well i just have to climb under lol. The blue area is an entire piece of plywood on a piano hinge.

The gargraves switches i mean i don’t have any issues using them personally but i have no experience with them and the dz2500 switch machine. I have just heard on these forums all the horror stories of why you should avoid any other switches other than ross and people who have gotten gargraves switches have regrets and ended up tearing them out and got ross switches.

But i agree with your note saying that it’s going to reduce space for spurs because they are bigger for sure.

It would be nice to run two trains at one time by isolating electrical but that’s a secondary requirement as we gotta figure this out first lol

Just to put it out there i appreciate everyone’s input and help here. This is most certainly saving me a lot of grief and mistakes and i plan to learn from this to be able to do this on my own. I tried tinkering with the layout i had for a few hours last night and yeah i didn’t come close to the nice layout you came up with originally

If i need to keep the gargraves switch design you created because i just don’t have the space to make ross happen i will do it but my big concern was the switching derailments and reliability. For example i had another thread out here where i had a problem with my brand new polar express and this fast track. Come to find out the front wheels of the berkshire doesn’t like going into a switch unless it’s complete straight which made me have to tear up a bunch of secured fast track to put straight sections in and then it started working. I have still one section that just doesn’t work in that train but works in other trains like the wizard of oz locomotive set i have. I also watched how the lionel graduated trestle kit and girder bridge just didn’t work so well with fast track when it was suppose to and made my trains act crazy like going too fast down a steep grade and slower up in the other side of the grade and yes i expected that for sure but not as much as it did.

The topping on the issue was when i ran the N&W 612 it didn’t like fast track at all it sounded as if it were having issues with it like a small dragging noise even though this thing ran fine on the floor months ago with fast track in a basic O-36 oval with a few straight sections. The train when it got to the other side of the gutter bridge and started going down hill on an O-72 curve just fell right off the track and it wasn’t going that fast at all a picture of the locomotive i have is attached here i am not sure why it acted up maybe the turn radius wasn’t efficient for it but i know i like this locomotive and want to get it running and have a decent track with some spurs and switching

Some engines have a lot of overhand in curves. Those 100 and 101 switches are yard switches, they are set for a 3.5" spacing and may not be the best choice for mainlines.  They could work with a straight section between two of them to space things out some more.

If you want to run larger engines on the main I would suggest using Ross #4 switches, 200 and 201 if they aren't entering a curve, otherwise the 072 or larger should be fine. The #4's don't curve like 072 but they are very close in turnout angle. Facing each other they give a 4.5" spacing. They are also the same length as the 100 switches.

Dave, ordering those 4 switches changes everything, including any idea of elevating tracks now or in the future and I’m not sure how I’m going to fit an inner loop so you can run 2 trains, much less spurs for switching. Those switches let you move larger engines off the outer loop, but then what do you expect to do with them? Granted, Ross switches are arguably better than other brand switches of the same size, but if an engine doesn’t like tighter switches, simply buying Ross switches isn’t going to solve that problem. Neither is switching from FasTrack to GarGraves going to solve your problem with elevated tracks. You said you were just going to run your larger engines on the outer loop, but buying those switches suggests you have other ideas. At any rate, I’ve gone this far, so I’ll see what I can come up with, though it won’t look anything like what I posted yesterday.

Well i didn’t really have other ideas i just picked those switches to get some switches in the loop but after playing with them it looks like they aren’t going yo help us at all. Yes i would love ross witches but if we have to settle with gargraves then that’s what we have to do. I did like what you posted yesterday very much so. I’m not saying i will get rid of elevated track for good but having a level layout may be good for starters. Let’s remove my 4 ross 101s from the equation then and 100s then see what we can do with ross switches. I like what you posted yesterday it was defiantly up my alley i also looked at scouting dads layout and it was awesome the twin pines railroad with the very first post he had. a pretty good one there i’m assuming in the same space i have or maybe i am mistaken

the larger  engines yes they will run in the outer loops which is fine with what we had there after tinkering with it i see why you had to go from O-89 on one side to O-72 there was no way to fit in those switches without doing that but i did like your outer and inner loop concept with spurs and things

Don't forget that you can actually put crossovers on curves with curved switches.  You could use either O120-O96 or O96-O72 on your curves and have the ability to run your big equipment on two mainlines, although it would obviously look better on the O120 side.  Due to your room size, though, you will probably be limited to O96-O72.

Chuck

I was looking at that last night actually but got stuck with circles and couldn’t seem to get out of the circles to make something similar to what dave made but i also am being an amateur i’m probably missing some concepts or ideas in my thoughts

@DoubleDAZ

made some changes above to what i wrote also i have cancelled all ross switches, any gargraves track i had etc so we have a fresh start now to make it work. We can also goto ross track as well if we want. Let me know what you think

Dave, don't pull the trigger too fast, give me a chance to see what I can some up with. These designs were all done to show possibilities since it didn't seem like you knew exactly what you wanted and I obviously didn't know you ordered the switches. Twin Pines is 9x13 and I believe the largest curves are O-72. Both of these elements make quite a bit of difference. His base elevation is 4" and the lower tracks for the overpasses descend to 1" while the uppers rise to 7" accounting for the 6" differential. That means he lowered some 3" and only raised the others 3" to get grades he could live with. I assume he designed all that BEFORE he built his bench work. You've already got tabletop bench work built, so you'd have to add layers of foam board or something to raise much of the track. I don't know what Steve's lead time is for shipping, but maybe he can hold your order a bit.

Here's some quick examples to show the difference the size curve makes. While they all fit your space, as shown in the 1st photo, note the difference they make in the length of straight sections and where switches have to be placed in the 2nd photo. Now, when you add certain switches to the mix, you limit the options even further. I added O-96 because Chuck mentioned the O-72/O-96 curved switch. When it comes to curved switches, you really have only 2 options; O-72/O-96 and O-54/O-72). I have no idea how well they operate, some users have problems, others don't. Regardless, if you want the option to move large engines that need O-72 curves between loops, you're going to have to compromise on other things. And taking large engines off/on the layout is going to get tiring real soon.

.

@DoubleDAZ

Dont worry i cancelled the order with steve so were good to go to get this fresh start. We have all the time we need to do this right so we get something going that will work. I like having a big outer circle like the 0-96 or O-89. We can even design this with ross track and using gargraves flex if needed in places where we need flex sections. I also need to decide if i want stainless or tin rails i understand the tin you can solder wires to it which makes that a benficial factor. Your right i didn't know exactly what i wanted but the more i have seen on this post the more i start to realize what i want. So i know with that benchwork mistake i have to live with that, its sievers modular benchwork. They also have elevation studs you can buy to incorporate into the benchwork to raise the track all i have to do is pick sizes and bolt on and just get a skill saw and cut the benchwork to flex to the track. I will give you all the time you need, i appreicate you and everything your doing to help me, i owe you a case of track or something lol. If we can get ross working then we can if we cant and need to do gargraves switches then im cool with that. I found out my N&W requires min O-54 curves which makes sense why it fell off my trestle. But that could run on my outer ring and im ok with that. If i have to move the loco's and i know it gets old i will take them off and put back on if need be since my space is limitied. One day if i can go through the wall maybe ill have a storage yard and a turn table to store these guys off some spurs. I am also a bit concerned with curve switches as i have experienced with the polar express but maybe the ross stuff is good enough where they just work i havent tried them. But let ssee what you come up with but remember if we have to go back to your original idea the post with the track parts and gargraves switches we can, maybe the gargraves switches wont give me any problems which would be nice too. We dont have to do elevations either but down the road i may add that on by adding another level like you said

If we have to run the O-72 to get the right straight sections or even O-89 on one side and O-72 on the other like you did then we have to do it that way at least O-72 i think will run the big boy with a min of O-72 raidus. But if we need to do pure O-72 all the way around then thats what we have to do, otherwise i need to obtain a bigger room which i will down the road but this will at least get me into the rail roading stuff and modeling and the ability to watch my locos run, i love watching the steam thats my fav, i love loco's, i love the flashing lights, crossings , siginals i love that stuff.

Ok, see what you think about these. Photo 1 uses the 4 switches you ordered along with O-72 curves for the outer loop and O-42 curves/switches inside. The Gray tracks are cut tracks. Photo 2 changes the outer loop to O-89 and shows what you have to give up. Ignore the 3-way, forgot to take it out. You can elevated the right side, 2" gives a grade around 2%. You can do the same on the left, but 2" gives a grade of around 3.5%.

@DoubleDAZ

Wow it looks like we got a winner here so both of these uses all ross switches i see the small differences compared to the gargraves but if it where you which one would you pick gargraves option or all ross? Also would you go with stainless gargraves/tinplate gargraves or ross track? I see we have O-42 for the inner track which is cool. I take it i can run just about all locos on either the O-89 or O-72 radius? The O-72 looks a bit cleaner IMO, but what are your thoughts, i like them both lol

You might be asking the wrong person, but I favor the O-72 version because it looks more symmetrical/cohesive and makes better use of the space. The O-89 loop is too close to being a circle for my tastes and the left side seems "off" with that open space, though it depends on what you have in mind for landscaping. I also don't like the shorter spurs. Bear in mind, I added the spurs mostly to fill the space and show possibilities.

Here are a few thoughts:
- The Red crossover tracks will let you store a large engine set to run in opposite direction while running a 2nd on the outside loop. That way you can keep 2 large engines on the layout and not have to manhandle them each time you want to run 1. You could also add 1 or more spurs to the 4 corners of the Blue loop to store even more spare engines and hide them with tunnels.
- The Orange track lets you run another engine on the inside loop.
- The Orange tracks also let you switch cars around on the Green tracks while a train is running on the outside loop.
- The Green tracks that loop around the center let you service a factory, though the spur is only long enough for maybe 1 car and the engine. It could also be used for engine storage by adding another switch to 1 of the curves.
- a train going clockwise on the Orange track would service the lower spurs by backing in.
- a train running counterclockwise on the Orange track would service the upper spurs.

Oh, and here are the parts lists for the O-89 version and the O-72 version. You can see all switches are Ross and all tracks are GarGraves stainless with wood ties. I honestly don't know which tracks is better, but I do know the lengths of some are different, so if you want Ross, changes will need to be made. The layout won't change, but tracks aren't a straight swap.

Got it, this looks great, what kinda switches would be needed to add spurs off the blue loop or would it create problems with trains running across those switches? I imagine your thinking the curve section going into each corner of the table for that blue spurs. For the green spur for the factory area where you thinking adding a curve type switch to the curve? The top of the layout the upper most spur could it be extended to the left as well have it going to the right like we did on another layout you did or is it limitied by type of switch?

Overall this looks really nice. Now its just down to parts/type of track. Ross track? Gargraves stainless/tinplated? If you send me the scarm file i can open it too. How did you get the nice look in scarm that shows the blocks instead of just track lines? Its definitely an adjustment i think thats why i went with anyrail as scarm is really advanced lol

Admittedly I just tried an O-72 switch with the straight going out. But, you're right, going through the curve all the time might cause problems. I tried the O-72/O-96, but that has the same problem and because the curves are close doesn't really add enough space to store something large. I'm not sure the O-72 switch does either depending on how long your engines are.

Here are some different ways of adding spurs to the center Green tracks. You don't need to do both. I don't know if you plan to landscape and add accessories, just note how little empty space there is if you do all of this.

I didn't realize you installed SCARM, so here's the file.

@DoubleDAZ

Got it at least i can delete or take all on this i really appreciate your help, if i ever bust through the wall which would be at the top of the layout perhaps on the very left side since that's where the portal would be maybe that would be an option for a curve switch or a way into the next room. I am not worried about that right now though thats like an after thought. I could also experiment with a second level in this room to get more going if i can get some type of shelving to go up above this benchwork which would be a totally separate layout wont be connected

If you ever go through the wall, the current left side can become a passing siding or storage  and then standard O-72 switches would be fine.

If you need any help with SCARM don’t hesitate to ask.

@DoubleDAZ

Did you have an opinion on tin plated vs stainless gargraves and same on ross track what was your opinion ? By the way you must have alot of time outside of your railroad to help folks like me but its much appreciated, i dont know what i would have ended up with if it wasn't for everyone on this forum so much thanks to all.

I see on what you mean on the left side that would be cool.

My scarm looks like this instead of the nice easy to see sections you have, is that a setting?

I could be wrong, but I believe GG stainless with wood ties is what most seem to use, possibly based on price, I don’t know.

As for time, I’m retired, this stuff doesn’t take me long after years of using SCARM and I don’t have a layout at the moment. I’ve had temporary layouts, but a number of factors have kept me from building a permanent one. I may get to it next year, but it’ll only be a display layout for our collection of Bedford Falls buildings, etc. I don’t have the space for anything more than a 4x8x11 L-shaped layout. I always wanted to use ScaleTrax, I have 10 pieces of Flex, but nixed that idea when I had to downsize and the lack of availability. Atlas would be my choice because it’s quiet and looks nice, but I’m actually thinking of going old school with Menards track to support them for supporting the hobby.