I had a layout a few years ago and i didnt use any roadbed it looked good and ran good i was wondering do i really need to use road bed on my new layout i am going to build
No, you do not. I do not use road bed. I used it on my last two layouts, but decided to get rid of it. It is easier to rework tracks alignments without it. It is also cheaper. I used Celotex for may base table, but that particular product has not been available ever since the advent of fire codes. (The company makes lots of other products). Homosote is a good choice.
Here is some of my track work without roadbed. Unless you model a high speed main line, me thinks that cork roadbed makes too much of a roadbed.
PS: LIONS do not glue ballast down, gravity works just fine.
PPS: LION buys his ballast at Walmart, it comes in bags of 25# and needs to be sifted. You will find it marked as “Cat Litter”.
ROAR
Operationally it isn’t required. Visually it depends on the look you are going for. If you are modeling a branch, yard or industrial area then many times the tops of the ties are even with the ground surface. Not only do you not need roadbed, you would need to recess the track into the layout surface.
On the other hand if you are modeling a main track on any type of line haul railroad, the track would be elevated bove the surround area on ballast. Look at pictures of railroads in areas in which you are interested. The track is sitting a foot or two above the normal ground level on ballast or roadbed material.
Your choice. What do you want it to look like.?
Roadbed can help reduce noise, but if you lay the track on homasote board or something similar, that will reduce noise too. FWIW I use Kato Unitrack which has simulated roadbed included. I like that you can lay it out and test run the layout with it before permanently fastening it down, and make changes before you’ve spiked down the track and added ballast.
Hi!
In my opinion, roadbed is a must. However, my yard and terminal tracks are mounted directly to sheet cork, which is on top of the plywood base. Roadbed gives you a smooth flat surface that will take you over seams and what have you in your benchwork, raise the track for a more prototypical look, and to some extent, reduce noise.
For those that run subways or trolleys, roadbed is probably not desireable.
I realize that putting in roadbed is extra work and expense. But, the results are well worth it.
Of course it can be done. I bet many of us did just that when we got our first ever train sets.
Moreover, there are or have been prototype rail lines that have basically just laid tracks on the ground – logging railroads often did that, and from photos I assume some the very early American railroads seem to have done that. Some industrial spurs certainly can look like that. But most rail lines of the sort we model use roadbed, and remember that what passes for roadbed on most model railroads – strips of cork nailed or glued to the plywood – is a pretty crude approximation of what goes into the real thing.
Quite apart from appearance, the greater ease of attaching track to roadbed, prototypical accuracy, noise control, and other factors mentioned by others, I think another very considerable advantage to roadbed is that without it, on a flat table top type benchwork your track is seemingly at ground zero. Roadbed, and subroadbed beneath that, on a table top benchwork basis gives you a considerable available depth BELOW the bottom of the ties for such things as culverts, scenic features such as creeks and rivers, the natural undulation of the ground, and the ability to have sidings and yards at a lower level than the main line.
Dave Nelson
Keith,
Let me cut right to the chase here. You only NEED two things in this hobby: a locomotive and some track. If you want that locomotive to actually move (some don’t), you need to add a power pack, some wires, and electricity. EVERYTHING ELSE is up to you.
So, there are various reasons – many explained above – why you might or might not WANT to have roadbed under your track, but you don’t need it. Ask yourself what you’re trying to achieve – do you just want to run trains, or are you aiming for prototypical fidelity? Not to say either is better, but the latter requires significantly higher consideration for what “looks right”.
I think the folks who’ve replied previously have done a good job of explaining the tradeoffs, but only you can say whether their worth it.
First - what kind of railroad do you want to simulate?
- Rails in a local switching district, buried to the tie tops and basically flat as a pancake.
- Rails on the class 1 mainline that feeds that switching area - about two feet of crushed rock on top of built-up fill.
- Rails in a poorly-maintained PC yard before Conrail - sunk over the rail tops in mud!
So if you want the through tracks of a well-maintained railroad, you need roadbed. If you are trying to model a line that’s struggling along on a frayed shoestring, or a place where the `ground’ has to be at tie-top level for worker safety, then roadbed is unnecessary.
Then, second - how do you get the visual effect of roadbed?
- Use commercial products labeled `roadbed.’ (Cork, Homabed, track on fake ballast…)
- Form the under-track fill with sheetrock mud, ground goop, mounded plaster or any number of more solid products. (I personally do some creative whittling on fan-fold underlayment, an extruded foam product used under metal and vinyl siding.)
- Lay down thick foam tabletop and then get creative with carving tools…
It isn’t important to use a particular material. It’s the final appearance that counts.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Most of my layout is on cork roadbed, like the main line shown here:
…while tracks in the industrial district are laid directly on plywood:
Here, mainline, passing tracks, spurs, and industrial sidings are all laid directly on the plywood, too. Keeping things here as level as possible makes for a safer working environment for the LPBs.
Wayne
You don’t really need roadbed. Others have mentioned the looks aspect for well maintained mainlines. And the noise dampening properties of cork. If you lay track on plywood, the noise issue can be compelling. If laying on something resilient like Homasote or foamboard, less compelling.
Another issue is how well the roadbed takes track nails or spikes. Cork doesn’t hold nails well. For this reason I went to the trouble of making my roadbed from soft pine which I laid on top of foamboard, which doesn’t hold any sort of fastener. In fact the popularity of Homasote is due to the way it holds nails, as much as to its sound deadening properties.
Without the road bed I would have had to glue the track down to the foamboard, which is a zero defects kind of process. If the glued down track develops a kink, or needs to be re aligned, peeling it up from adhesive is not fun. Doable, but not fun. If you go the glue route, ordinary latex caulk will stick nicely to the plastic tie strips and to roadbed. For extra good stick use the Phenoseal brand of caulk, but the other brands work too.
Only the double track mainlines of monied railroads had that nice built up on crushed rock sort of roadbed. Sidings, spurs, yards, and a lot of secondary track had the track laid right on the dirt. Plenty of poor and falling apart railroads had shabby mainlines laid right on the dirt too.
Think about your benchwork and your sub roadbed and whether you want to nail your track down or not. Be aware that the glue layers in plywood are so hard that you cannot drive track nails into it.
My experiences differ from those of David, as I only very occasionally found it difficult to drive track spikes and nails in plywood. As for the nail-holding properties of cork, it seems to hold things very adequately until applying ballast, although I applied ballast in most areas within a year-or-so of laying the track. I do have about 45’ of 2.5% grade to an as-yet-unbuilt second level of the layout which is on cork and unballasted, and it’s still secure after almost 20 years. I really should get busy and finish that extension. [:$][swg]
Wayne
Henry Ford once said, “Railroads don’t need a stone roadbed!”
Two weeks later the train derailed.
Stone Roadbeds help tamp down (absorb vibrations) in the track,. They also serve as a stable base as it distributes loan, and effectively carries water off.
On industry sidings they aren’t such a big issue because big trains aren’t careening down them at 60MPH. But some stone underneath them is still recommended for run off so the ties don’t sink into the mud!
You can pick up thin cork sheets uber cheep at walmart and a number of hobby craft stores. They are good for yards, service facilities, and industry sidings. Or you can go straight to plywood/foamboard if you want.
As everyone said, it’s your railroad, do it the way you like. But prototypically a road bed is almost a necessity.
.
I say, use roadbed for mainlines, for yards and branchlines, don’t. Have a look at real railways, and copy that.
I like the look of roadbed on main lines it makes the track stand out especially in flat areas.
As others note and as is always the case with such questions, What are you planning to run, in what era or road do you wish to model? The other sage advice was to look at the reality of what you wish to model and see how it is or was done in real life.
I model a fanatasy narrow gauge line based loosely on the RGS and D&RGW. Road bed was not a big thing and especially in yards, the tops of the ties are flush with the earth with zero ballast. There is no such thing as a narrow gauge main line in the sense of any modern concept of railroading. everything was just slapped together, especially in the early days. So, roadbed on these roads was whatever was at hand.
I made a big mistake in using cork roadbed at first on my still birthing road and am currently planning to rip it all up and go straight to the homasote table top. Narrow gauge stuff isn’t supposed to ride high off the land, but just follow it the best it can. No hard working old mudhen looks right 4 scale feet off the surrounding land with tons of nice, steep ballasted roadbed underneath.
Roadbed, if any, should match the traffic, the era and the motive power tonnage rolling over it.
Richard