Building first layout and have had major frustrations with getting a layout I like. I went and purchased MR’s 48 Top-Notch Track Plans and really liked Buzzard’s Cove. Thought this would be a great starter especially since it listed all the parts.
The first issue I ran into was that I could not find Atlas parts 25821 and 25831. I am assuming they are parts 2700 and 2701 standard turnouts?
I used both RTS 10.0 and AnyRail 4 and no matter how I place the pieces, they do not line up in the end, especially the center tracks.
Has anyone run into this issue with the track plans? It would of been nice if MR editors would of actually marked on the layout part numbers or some kind of indicator of which track part is being used on the overall layout graphic.
I noticed a few other HO plans were the editors actually put indicators of what pieces to use and were. This is very helpful for people that are getting new to the hobby but don’t have a lot of time.
I don’t have access to the plan until I get home. I’m assuming it’s a 4x8 type plan. The question would be whether it’s a plan that was actually built as a project layout, or is just a plan drawn from somebody else’s drawing. Model Railroader uses graphic artists to do their drawings, especially since CAD software didn’t exist when the layouts in the plan book you cite were drawn. Some inaccuracies are bound to creep in.
Actually, it’s quite normal. If you choose a different make or model turnout, chances are it won’t fit as published. And when you actually go to lay the track, chances are it won’t fit exactly as published or drawn in your software, even if you use exactly the same pieces. This is why most Model Railroader project layouts warn you in the article not to try to build an exact copy of the layout.
Many-to-most of the designs that were actually built as 4x8 project layouts always had a couple of spots where track - and especially turnouts - had to be cut, trimmed, curved, or otherwise altered to fit. If the cutting information was included (it was on the Turtle Creek project), it’s only in the articles and not in a track plan compilation.
Many (most?) published track plans for sectional track don’t fit exactly in CAD. That’s because the builder is required to scoot things around a little on the benchwork and possibly trim some parts slightly to fit. This often results in little gaps and tiny misalignments that can be pesky – which is why many folks opt for flextrack after having built one sectional layout.
As Stein and Fred mentioned, flex track is great for areas where otherwise several small “fitter” tracks would be needed. Electrical conductivity between lots of little pieces of track can also be a challenge over time. The fewer joints needed with flex track really help.
Finally, that center section isn’t all that critical except for the crossing. Beyond the crossing, you can simply lay track to look good to your eye. The ability to put a gentle curve in the flex track would also make it easier to link-up with the crossing.
IIRC that book was initially published at least 17 years ago. I remember reading it when I was in middle school. So the part numbers might have changed between then and now.
Thank you all for the tips and the use of flex track. This is the crazy thing about the entire project. I have no issue with landscaping, no issues with wiring… BUT the layout design…LOL driving me NUTS.
Thanks to Byron’s link, I was able to view the track plan. It’s an N scale layout designed to fit on hollow core door. You mentioned HO layouts in your post - are you trying to build in N or HO?
Atlas currently has 2 different lines of N track - one code 80 and the other code 55. The code 55 track would not have been in production when the layout was drawn. And the code 55 track has different geometry turnouts than the code 80 line. So which track library did you use? And that assumes the code 80 part numbers or geometry have not changed over the decades (the plans in the book are generally from the 1980s).
Putting the explanations for your problems aside, Byron correctly pointed out that an exact fit in the center of the layout is hardly critical. Let us know how you resolved the issues, and what you are actually going to build.
Here is a quick attempt using XtrkCad to draw Buzzard’s cove with Atlas Code 80 N scale track on an 80" x 30" hollow core door. Seems to fit together reasonably good for a track plan made with sectional track:
Stein,
Thank you so much, it helped get my mind in order after seeing your quick throw together. I really appreiciate it. I now see were I can put in flex-track to fix some spots. I put your design into RTS and it worked great.
Thanks to all for the flex track suggestion. Not sure why I am nervous about using it but got to move over it and try it.
Over lunch I went to the Topeka RR store and ran into one of their members. We started chatting and explained my issues and he quickly piped up and suggested using KATO UNI Track for my first layout. he stated after I gain some experience and get a grasp on layout design, then move up to PECO switchs and Atlas Flex track. Not sure if I am going to do it but I think it would help lower my stress and allow me to ease into the hobby and learn.
LOL, kids told me to do Thomas the Tank Engine and forget the rest!
