There is a very nice double crossover in Unitrack, and I’ve heard nothing but good about them. The problem with all the straight line double cross overs is that they are just too long…and the only place I could remotely put one is where the bridges across the back are, and I don’t want to lose those. Actually, one of the previously rejected plans I came up with…a double track main with the Kato double cross over at the front…was rejected because of the double S-curves it created (one in the cross over and one between the crossover and the adjacent curve). Putting enough straight between the crossover and adjacent curve ended up overhanging my space. Is the configuration with the curved turnouts likely to be exceedingly problematic?
There are a few reasons I went with the Atlas remote turnouts back there…inconvienant access for ground throws (along that back side will be dining room chair storage when the layout is set up for operation), and surface mount switch machines making changes/replacement easy, and cost compared to other powered turnouts. For the most part, they will be hidden behind the solid and tree view breaks.
It’s only money. The cost of doing it your way: 1 double slip, 4 curved turnouts, 6 switch machines–maybe $400.
If it were me, I would put down the keyboard for a while and think and wait for an ah-ha moment in the shower or something. There are a million ways to build a layout and they don’t have to be the most expensive one just because you designed yourself into a corner.
You have only one chance to plan your layout without having to rip things out.
For the record, I’m not of the “just do it” mindset. Personally, I’m now 20 complete revisions and 4 months into my layout design. I’m not really putting off building, in fact, I’ve built the room and started the backdrop. I’ve got until the backdrop is finished before I start. But if there is one thing that bothers me, I’m not going to let a few pixels cause me to compromise.
Peco Code 55 Electro-frog Curved Right or Left Hand Turnout $18.38 x 4 = $73.56
Peco Code 55 Electro-frog Short Crossing $14.39
N scale Peco Code 55 Electro-frog Double Slip Turnout $57.59
It looks to me, but I really have no idea, that the double crossovers would require 4 switch machines, where the double slip would only require 2. Right? Wrong?
So far, I’m really liking the four curved turnout double crossover more than the double slip…maneuvers on the staging side will not foul the main…and with my tiny monthly train budget from here on out, I can get the main legs sooner, and be able to complete my main loop sooner.
The big question now is will the curved turnout double crossover (or any double crossover for that matter) likely be nore or less problematic, both on the main legs and for sawing back and forth on the staging legs, than the simpler and cheaper double slip?
Wow, that sure is a difference. My prices were for Code 83 HO…I had no idea N scale was twice as expensive. The most I have ever paid for a turnout was about CDN$40 for a three way from Walthers/Shinohara.
I really was not a fan of “just do it” either…and a big believer in the inspirational power of showers. After a career as a systems analyst, I have an overwhelming tendancy to over analyse and plan to excess. But after three months of planning, without sacrificing the pseudo-eased 15" minimum radius so the passenger cars don’t look too bad, all I come up with for my little postage-stamp space is an oval…just varying levels of convolutedness. I’ve tried taking the usual prescribed breaks…even took a no Xtrkcad week outside enjoying the beginning of spring and listening to the ball games. Now, no real progress, combined with “are you going to do something with this stuff” looks and comments from the family, and the repeated “Just do something” advice, my planning gene is growing weary.
Something I have to keep in mind is that this is goi
I realize this is a bit old now but I wanted to pass along that I had ordered and now received in a Roco double-slip n-scale switch that will be placed on my main line.
The testing so far has been very good and it matchs code 80 track perfectly. Couple downsides, the ties are brown where code 80 is black (it does have nail holes though). I got the motorized turnout and there is a 1 cm cube on the end of the wires (two electric selonoid type actuations). It has some special solder points to make the frog “hot” (or I’m guessing anyway). I’ve not wired it yet and the instructions are in German but they appear to be simple enough to follow.
Just thought I’d pass the info along as it seems doubleslip n-scales are less than easy to find and this Roco one seems very nice. Hopefully I’ll have the same experience once I move it to my layout. The testing has consisted of using several rolling stock that are prone to de-railments that seem to pass the turnout without de-railing
Thanks for the info. Have you tried backing through it? Do you have a feel for what the angle/curvature is on the legs of that unit? Please keep me posted on how it goes.
I haven’t actually wired it yet in yet and probably won’t have time until this weekend but I’ll update this thread as I get time to work on it.
This was a 15 degree double-slip and nearly matches perfectly the 15 degree atlas snap track crossover. I did test it forward and back but because, for now, I’ve got it isolated I’ve not thrown any loco’s across it, just the rolling stock. I’ve got a 4-8-4 that is my most track sensitive loco, I’ll let you know how it goes, hopefully sooner than later :).
When I first updated this thread I hadn’t look closely enough at the instructions but they do have english sections, it goes german, english, french, in every paragraph of the instructions I was expecting an entire english “section” not portions of paragraphs (not a big deal either way though).
I looked back over your past posts but could not isolate the previous post referenced in this current one but I am going to WAG that you are working with N-Scale; it really doesn’t matter since this response concerns benchwork but, depending on what scale you are working with. it will determine how much benchwork you are going to need at a minimum.
Your post leads me to believe that it is your intention to use the dining room table as a platform on which to lay your layout when you are operating it. This is, in my humble opinion, an open invitation for disaster. In the first place putting this up and taking it down is going to be a two-man job; in addition no matter how hard you try to avoid it you will get a certain measure of torque on your benchwork every time to take it down and put it up. This can be avoided but it is going to require a heavy structure to do it.
I have what I think is a better way, one which I have advocated before but which I will repeat here. My idea - and this is not new and Ian Rice talked about it in one of his more recent Kalmbach books - is to suspend and store your platform in an A-Frame mechanism. Unless something drastically changes in my life my next/future layout will be done in a slightly modified way which I will explain a bit later.
Now, I am assuming that you have a standard ceiling height of at least 96 inches and I will work with that figure; have your local building supply center cut a piece of ½ inch plywood to a length which will leave six inches at the top and six inches at the bottom. I will assume this to be 84 inches. Build your A-Frame mechanism from two bys and make it about 48 inches off the floor. Pivot this 4 by 7 platform at the apex of this A-Frame; a pipe makes an excellent pivot. You need to get a heavy duty one but they do make brackets such as are used to suspend shower curta
In total I think it was about 50.00 USD once shipping and stuff was done. I’ll agree they aren’t cheap but if you look at using normal turnouts, with each atlas remote turnout being around 17.00, I didn’t feel it was unreasonable and was the cheapest place I could find n-scale double-slips that are shipping from within the US and not from Canada.
The site itself isn’t setup very well as you can only find the item above via a search and can not find it via the menus. It took about two weeks from order completion to me getting the item in. All in all it was a pleasent experience just the web site isn’t very good IMHO.
I would think there is a tubular Track library. I used it to layout a 3 rail Hi-rail with Gargraves and Gargraves Phantom line was in the library of Track. You may want to ask up on the CTT or OGR forums. Dave
I looked back over your past posts but could not isolate the previous post referenced in this current one but I am going to WAG that you are working with N-Scale; it really doesn’t matter since this response concerns benchwork but, depending on what scale you are working with. it will determine how much benchwork you are going to need at a minimum.
Your post leads me to believe that it is your intention to use the dining room table as a platform on which to lay your layout when you are operating it. This is, in my humble opinion, an open invitation for disaster. In the first place putting this up and taking it down is going to be a two-man job; in addition no matter how hard you try to avoid it you will get a certain measure of torque on your benchwork every time to take it down and put it up. This can be avoided but it is going to require a heavy structure to do it.
I have what I think is a better way, one which I have advocated before but which I will repeat here. My idea - and this is not new and Ian Rice talked about it in one of his more recent Kalmbach books - is to suspend and store your platform in an A-Frame mechanism. Unless something drastically changes in my life my next/future layout will be done in a slightly modified way which I will explain a bit later.
Now, I am assuming that you have a standard ceiling height of at least 96 inches and I will work with that figure; have your local building supply center cut a piece of ½ inch plywood to a length which will leave six inches at the top and six inches at the bottom. I will assume this to be 84 inches. Build your A-Frame mechanism from two bys and make it about 48 inches off the floor. Pivot this 4 by 7 platform at the apex of this A-Frame; a pipe makes an excellent pivot. You need to get a heavy duty one but they do make brackets such as ar
I’ve got it all wired in and hooked up, it works good for what I’m using it for but I have another bad side effect that I’m not sure what I’ll do about it yet. It almost makes me want to switch to DCC but my n-scale loco’s just can’t fit the decoders (topic for another day though).
My problem is that I was using this doubleslip to save some space simliar to what you are trying to do. However in my use it is between my two mainlines, so what this doubleslip has done is connect power to both mains from one powersource. I’ve wired my control panel to compensate for this but with the doubleslip in, I’ll never have a choice but to use one power source.
It is hard to explain without a pic and I’m on the road for a week. I’ll try to post a pic later (next week) to better explain my issue.
My plan for the double slip (or the 4 turnouts and a crossing), was to make that bit of trackage an isolated block on it’s own, which could be switched to which ever powersource (Main or staging in my case) that was powering the train traveling through that bit of track at the time. As you indicated, with out pics it’s hard to tell if that approach would work well for you.