Well I havn’t posted on here in quite some time since I have been busy with work and life. Things have slowed down so now I can get back to modelling
I always see people posting pictures of this beautiful hand drawn layouts and was wondering how one goes about hand drawing (accurately) a layout. I have tried some programs for running the design and I really dislike them.
I would appreciate any advice in this area! I think it would be great to doodle designs anywhere I am and when I have 15 minutes of not doing anything.
I don’t like using software to draw plans either. I use graph paper, a scale ruler and a compass. Maybe keep those in a box with some pencils and take them with you.
Yea, I do what Rob does too. I also find something that will make a circle of a specific radius in the scale I am working with, like a bottle cap or something. I also make the radius on the paper plan a little larger than it will be on the actual layout so I know that it will fit.
I have found a radius template and a C-Thru ruler to be invaluable helps. I use a Pickett #1202 template that has circles from 3/64 dia to 7 1/2" diameter. I have used both 18" and 12" C-Thru rulers. They are available from drafting and art supply stores. You can easily search for them on the internet.
I started out using graph paper, straight edge (usually a ruler), pencil, and pen. With the pen I lay out the space for the layout. I use the the graph lines for units that allow for using most of a sheet for the layout. Then using the compass I draw in the curves (I use the graph paper lines to set the compass) and connect them with straight lines. Then I add the turnouts - mark the intersection, count the turnout number along the main line and then go one to the side for the angle of the line for the diverging leg of the turnout.
After a few years, of doing this I got to where I could free hand pretty accurately.
My most useful technique, back when I was sketching plans, was the use of, “Armstrong squares.” By chopping the available space up into squares that can hold a quarter-turn of double track of a desired minimum radius it’s easy to see if a desired configuration will work.
I’m fortunate in that I visualize in three dimensions and have no difficulty transferring my visualizations to paper. Part of that is training - mechanical drawing, machine drawing, descriptive geometry, even naval architecture appear on my high school and college transcripts. The rest is practice - close to seven decades since my first freehand attempt to draw the Third Avenue “L” with crayons. Any skill improves with practice, including sketch-planning layouts.
So, do I make freehand sketches of detailed, small-area track plans for my currently under construction layout? Yup. Then I reproduce them, full scale, on card stock track templates.
I used to enjoy doodling trackplans, but my last effort never made it to completion of the benchwork before someone decided that our kids needed a rec room. With a third of the layout room suddenly gone, I moved the partially-completed benchwork into the remaining space, modifying it as needed to form an around-the-room design, while still leaving adequate aisle width. I then cut a number of pieces of curved roadbed from a sheet of 3/4 plywood, varying the radii in 2" increments from 30" to 48". These were tried for the best fit (largest radii possible) at all ten corners of the room, then I simply connected the curves with straight-ish lengths of roadbed. Passing tracks and sidings were added where they fit.
As you can see, there’s still no trackplan. I suppose I should draw one for the next time somebody asks to see it, but this was one of those chicken/egg scenarios. It works well for my operational interests, but probably isn’t to most peoples tastes.
I musta saved a bundle on paper, though. [swg][(-D]
There are precise ways of doing it. I’m not very precise. Graph paper and compass works best for me. I try to get the proportions right by using the curves as the standard and keeping some rules of thumb. For instance, a perfect 90 degree turn takes exactly two squares for a 24 inch radius curve (assuming 1 foot per square of course). An Atlas #6 turnout is about 12 inches, or one square, long.
And don’t try to fit too many spurs into one spot, because you’ll invariably make the frogs too sharp and fool yourself into thinking that it will all fit.
Are sure about this? Almost all plans showed on this forum are drawn with CAD.
For myself, before using CAD as a final and saveable rendering, I started a plan by using Armstrong-squares. After decades of experience I can do without them. (A square has the length (and width) of the minimum mainline radius plus 5 or 6 inches in HO. So you are able to add another parallel track outside the one with the minimum mainline radius.) The trick is the knowledge what fits into a square or how many squares you’ll need for e.g. a passing siding or a yard-ladder.
Track Planning for Realistic Operation by the late John Armstrong reveals all the secrets, and probably many others. Exactly 50 years ago his “bible” saw its first publication. The beauty of his system is you DON"T even have to use a compass or a ruler. It’s the ultimate way for doodling.
Since the 1950s, one of my favorite things to do was sketch out layouts. Over the years the process evolved to where it really became a fun thing to do. May I suggest…
Get a piece of quadrule paper - 1/4 inch squares is my favorite.
Determine a scale on the paper (1 square = 3 or 4 or 6 inches).
Draw the outline of your layout space or room or whatever the max layout area could be, using a dark marker.
Make several copies of said template, and use them for your sketching.
I ultimately got to using compases for curves, and bought a track template for turnouts, and the result was the basis for my previous and current 11x15 two level HO layouts.
One thing… be conservative in your drawing of turnouts and easements for curves. Shorting yourself to “make it fit” on paper will give you nothing but grief if/when it translates to an actual layout.
The results of drawing layout plans with computer sofware really look cool, but the learning curve is high and the required amount of time to produce the final track plan seems high.
Like others who have replied to your question, I use graph paper, a pencil and a straight edge. I convert a 1/4 inch square on the graph paper to a 2 inch or 3 inch scale equivalent and go from there. For a larger layout, that can result in two or more sheets of graph paper taped together, but it is the best way for me to lay out a track plan.
I have also resorted to using Microsoft Excel. I convert the elongated rows of cells to shorter ones to match the height of the cells, making them squares. From there I can draw straight lines, radius curves, crossovers, turnouts, whatever. It is not exactly precise, but nothing really is until you get down to actually laying track. Then, all bets are off concerning the precision of any drawing, computer-based or manually drawn.
Wow… I wasn’t expecting such a response! Thanks guys You all have great ideas and methods so I will try out a few and see if any work better for me over the others.
In regards to turns outs, how does on measure where it ends and how long it is? Would I just take the length of said turnout and then draw that length and then measure how far out the turnout goes? I am sorry if that didn’t make any sense. Not only am I new to drawing layouts, but MR terminology is still pretty sparse in my world!
Frog # is based on width of “opening” vs run. So a #4 turnout will have the diverging route being 0.25" from the through route when it’s 1" from the tip of the frog. And a #6 turnout will have the diverging route being 0.25" from the through route when it’s 1.5" from the tip of the frog.
Simple? Sort of. The problem is that manufacturer’s often don’t make their frogs at the stated angle. So it pays to at least get templates of the actual turnouts you intend to use to confirm actual size.
Speaking of templates, the ones to draw different size circles have been mentioned. There also used to be model RR specific templates, which included curves of various radii and little turnout templates. I’ve seen them in both plastic and brass.
And French curves are good for adding easements to the beginning and end of curves.
If you are just doodling without any tools, that’s fun too, that’s basically how I designed my layout.
I use some rough “rules of thumb” for my doodling. I rough in the footprint of the benchwork. I take twice the nominal width of the benchwork and an aisle to figure the room footprint of an aisle That lets me know how many aisles I can fit in a room. My room is 12 ft wide. If I have 18" deep benchwork and 36" aisles, then 2x18+36 = 72" or 6 feet. I can fit two aisles in my 12 ft room. Another rule of thumb is to take the nominal width of the benchwork and half the aisle width and divide the square footage of the room by that number to get a rough idea of the main line footage on a single level. If I have 18" bench work and 36" aisles, that is 18+36/2 =36" or 3 ft. My layout room is 12x23 or 276 sq ft. 276/3 = 92 ft. I can expect to have about a 90 ft main track in my room.
I doodle the trackplans for the stations and then estimate the length by counting switches. A #6 switch in HO is about a foot long. So I roughly figure that a a switch is a foot long. If I doodle a crossover from the main to the lead and then a yard with 5 tracks, the longest path through those switches is 6 switches, so the whole stretch including the crossover will have a footprint 6 tracks x 2" per track + 2" on either side or 16" wide and 6 switches x a foot /switch or 6 feet long. By knowing the rough footprint of the room and the approximate length of each station, I can estimate whether staintions will fit on the footprint. If not, then I have to revise the trackplan.
I may also envision the trakplan schematic as a “wet spaghetti noodle” and drape it around the benchwork in different ways, in different directions, starting in different places to see how it fits.
You’re not designing an airplane or spacecraft, so the degree of precision needed may vary depending upon the situation.
If you get to the point to where you will build one of your plans, you’ll likely adjust it slightly as you build. Replacing a smaller building with a bigger one, adding more bow to the mainline,etc…Things that might change the angle of the mainline or spur, thereby changing the angle of a diverging route off of a turnout, which throws everything else off of your plan going from there. That situation makes placing a lot of effort in achieving tremendous precision with your plan kind of a waste.
If you are going to design a table top layout, and even place risers on the table top as you go, you have the flexibility to make changes as you go, and need less effort in being precise with your plan.
If you are going to build a layout, say, with deep canyons and mountains, where the plywood subroadbed isn’t much wider than the roadbed itself, you’ll need to be more precise in the design phase because you can only cut the plywood once. You don’t really have as much flexibility to change the plan much.as you go. It may be wise to invest in one of the CAD programs if you get to that point.
None of this matters if your just doodling ideas.
Having said all of that, I think its more fun to try to be as accurate and precise as possible when doodling.
I would take a clip board with graph paper on it to work as sometimes as I would have down time to doodle. As I got closer to a workable plan I would transfer it to this larger pad of graph paper. On here 1" equals 1’. You can buy a pad like this for about $7.00 at a good stationary shop.
If drawing track plans is going to be an on going interest then go all out on a CAD program. For me I would rather spend the $ on a couple of good boxcars or something else. I use a Cad program to do Architectural home designs for fun, so I am familiar with them. However For the MRR, sitting at the kitchen table with this big pad, a compass and ruler were preferable.
On another note my room had a fireplace, a large window, three doors and a large opening into the room to deal with. I could not come up with a workable track plan. So putting the cart before the horse I filled the room with bench work on paper and a good track plan soon followed. Making adjustments to both the bench work and track plan gave me something I am quite delighted with.
Despite the fact that I built my layout without having a trackplan, I think too many people rush into the “track” part of the planning without paying enough attention to some of the more important parts.
Aisle width is one of those, and what’s required will depend on the layout builder’s own size and also on the way the layout is intended to be operated. I’m slim and could get away with one or two tight squeezes, since my layout is designed for only a single operator. For multiple operators, they’ll likely need room to pass one another, and if they’re large, you should take that into consideration. Don’t assume that some arbitrary width will be sufficient - set up a couple of chairs or other solid objects in the room and see how easy (or difficult) it would be to move around the layout or pass someone else. If your layout is going to be at eye-level or you’re planning multiple levels, consider that the height may make the aisle “feel” narrower than it actually is.
Layout depth is another area worthy of attention. Mine varies from about 18" to 42", but almost all track is within easy reach. The deeper sections are there mainly for the scenery, and once that’s in place, there’s little need to stretch when operating the layout. My room is approximately 560 square feet, with 195sq.ft. of that aisle space, leaving about 365sq.ft. of layout. When I finally get around to completing the partial second level, layout area will be about 500sq.ft., with no reduction in aisle width.
Curves are another important element, so set yourself a realistic minimum for the mainline and stick to it. Despite the minimum you choose, try to utilise wider curves where possible: it’ll improve operations and trains will look better, too. I set my minimum at 30", and used it only on the wye used to turn locomotives. All of the line on which full trains are run is 32&qu
The more one doodles out layout designs the better (more accurate) one gets at doing it. I started in 2nd grade. By the time I was out of College I drew a layout (while traveling for work on the back of a cocktail napkin) that was accurate enough to build from.
The length’s of the straights is not the same for turnouts made by different producers. Nor is the curved part the same. However the angle of the diverging route is identical. Since the distance between two straight parallel routes usually is 2" , most commercial turnouts are made with an offset of 1"; so you don’t need filler tracks or have to trim turnouts when they are used in a crossover.
If the spacing is 2" and the “angle” or frognumber is 6 the length of a “#6 turnout in a ladder will be 12” to minimalise the need of trimming or the need of adding extra pieces of track.
In a crossover a straight is needed between the curves forming an “S” . So straight “3” should be kept as long as it is. The differences between turnouts are rather small, so for drawing them by hand the last exemple is easily done. As long as you keep the 5, 6+1, 1 ratio. Using 6, 6, 1 is even easier.
BTW dimensions in O-scale are then 12, 12, 2 and in N-scale 3.5, 3.5, 0.6.
When using Armstrong squares you only have to know that 2 turnouts will easily fit into one square.
Nice! Thank you Paulus that is super helpful Thank you everyone for you input again. I am going to ask one more question and that will be it… in scale feet, how many feet are there between the ties of one track to the ties of one next to it assuming it is a yard and this is the minimum distance. I am build a 2.5’ x 7’ layout just to give you guys some context of what I am doing.
