I’ve spent the past month or so learning Cadrail and I’ve finished the upper level of my two-level track plan. Before going on to the next level, I wanted to get some thoughts on how I was doing so I can adjust my methods, etc. before getting too far into it. Anyway, the image is attached and below are some upfront comments to explain things a little better:
The upper level represents the Minneapolis to Duluth/Superior line of the GN/NP. I also have a branch line (in blue) that represents the track from the iron ore mines in N. Minnesota to Duluth/Superior. The branch will be elevated above the main line until they intersect near the ore dock.
The circle on the central peninsula is the helix to the lower level.
I intend to add a few additional sidings between Minneapolis and Duluth but figured I could do this during construction. I’d be curious how many people would recommend adding. I would like to run a local between the two cities.
In terms of minimum standards, I used 24" radius curves and #5 turnouts and the passing tracks and yard tracks are designed for 6-foot trains (~10 cars).
I realize that the aisles are narrow (~2 feet). My space may grow by a foot or so in which case I will try to relieve this constraint but otherwise I’m skinny and don’t know other model railroaders who would come over for an operating session so I think I can deal with it.
Anyway, any and all comments welcome and appreciated.
Can’t expand it to get a better look at it. Do you have it posted somewhere else (e.g. Railimage.com) so that we can “blow it up”…uh…make it larger? [:)]
Hate to be “size-ist” but I don’t believe 2’ aisles would work over here let alone over there… I’ve had to admit to a 42" middle and 240lbs… we aren’t getting any more flexible either…
More on plans… If I have 3 x 6’ roads packed together I can see the sides of 12 ,40’ cars and the roofs of 24… if I re-arrange a little I maybe get 2 x 7’ - 8’ roads and can see 14- 16 sides and more of the next 14- 16… so at best I get a good look at say 24 cars out of 32 instead of 12 out of 36… better view of my modelling work (I can see 2/3 instead of 1/3) and I don’t need so many cars (about 25% less)… shame i’ve got so many already…
I blew it up in Cadrail as much as possible and then reposted it: As you might have guessed, this is my first image posting so apologies for my struggles here.
Well, that didn’t appear to work very well. I think the problem is that photobucket resizes any large files and so the image size shrinks dramatically (the original file is 1.6Mb). Any ideas on ways around this? I suppose this thread should be renamed how to post a track plan online.
From what I can see so far, though I have to squint [8D] I see a pretty decent plan. Please enlarge when you can and we will pick it apart [}:)][:p][;)]
Is this plan up against any walls that would restrict accessibility? The turnouts I would be worried about are the one in the lower right (under the terminal), and the two under the turntable. There are a couple of tracks that could create a reach problem, but the turnouts are the bigger worry.
Also, save and rename the file and give it a shot letting CadRail use easements on the curves. That will take a bit of redesign, but with 24" curves might be worth the effort.
The plan is to put the layout in the garage and arrange it so that the door would be on the side where the roundhouse and ore dock are located. While I’ll have to reach over the backdrop to get to the places you mention, the distance from the edge would be no more than two feet. For the lower level on this side I was going to put the backdrop down the middle of the four foot area and use the space between the backdrop and the garage door for staging.
It looks quite good so far. I am wondering if you wouldn’t prefer to have some runaround capability in both the far left staging area and in that great central butt-end yard. The way they are, it is in or out, no classifying except with the overhead 1-4-0 loco.
As a thought, you could put a lead into the small turntable, at the lower left, from one or more of those butt-ends. That would give you the runaround as well as the turnaround.
That’s a good idea on connecting the purple staging tracks with the small turntable.
On the central yard I’m not sure I follow. There is a switch lead that is (barely) long enough to work the stub-ended tracks. The idea would be to use the six stubbies to assemble the North and South-bound locals and expresses (1 track for each plus a caboose track and an icing track) and then to pull an assembled train out onto one of the two double-ended tracks that connect to the main where you could connect the engine and caboose and depart.
You have a black circle drawn at centre with track in & around it. The only other track in the circle, at the top, are butt ends of a yard…or is it team track? Anyway, it is those tracks that are strictly in and out. I agree that the part of the classifying yard just above those have runaround capability…and that is good. It is the track inside the circle, the black coloured track.
This is just me, but I prefer to either have a double ended yard or a reverse loop right next to the yard. You might, if you get a lot of cars, want to add some staging, but unless you won’t stop buying cars, it won’t be necessary. Also, if you get that many cars, you might also be getting a large number of engines, again with the ‘ifs’, you might wan to add some loco tracks outside of the roundhouse.
None of these are anywhere near musts, and the only must I can think of is to make the aisles larger, as has been said before.
trainboy
I’ll definitely be adding some locomotive tracks outside the roundhouse. I’ve built the machine shop and need to get around to measuring and inputting it and then can figure out how much space I have for loco tracks.
On the yard, I played around with the configuration for what seemed like forever trying to squeeze more double-ended tracks in but ultimately couldn’t figure out a way to keep both the double-ended configuration and 5-foot body tracks and opted for the latter so I could run decent length trains.
Doesn’t look like you can get into the main yard directly from the main … are you missing a turnout somewhere?
As has been mentioned, you’ll find two foot aisles to be most restrictive, and benchwork 3 feet wide is too hard to reach in the back. Better is 2 foot wide benchwork, and 2.5-3 foot aisles. I’ve standardized on 3 foot aisles if possible (still some pinch points down to 21" in order to get something to fit, but these pinch points are only a couple feet long).
My experience with my latest layout, my HO Siskiyou Line, I narrowed the benchwork and gave more space to the aisles. I also raised the benchwork up so the track is in the 50" to 65" range off the floor (no more than 58" off the floor for major switching areas, however).
This turned out to be an excellent approach, with the high benchwork making the narrow scenes easier to scenic, and the closeup view of the trains has turned out to be very enjoyable.
And I use a special double-deck layout configuration called the mushroom, which uses two decks facing opposite directions where the layout doesn’t look double-decked. If you use a raised floor on the upper deck side, both decks can be at near optimum viewing height. So a mushroom makes great use of space and doesn’t look double decked. You can see more on my website (click the link in my signature).
