Good day all.
I have started to plan for a future layout in my basement and I am looking for a good layout design program. I currently have AnyRail and it does an ok job if you don’t plan to change elevations to much. I do have a layout currently started in that program, but I am having issues building a helix in that software.
I am curious as to what others have used and if they are any good.
Thanks
Terry
I liked the (free) XtrackCAD for my relatively simple 6’ x 10’ two-level layout. But I can’t comment on your specific helix needs as I didn’t use the level feature a lot.
I use WinRail 8.0 by Blumert Software, bought many years back. It is identical to the former Atlas freebie RTS, which is not available for download anymore.
Over the years, I have come to like the drawing feature of this program, allowing me to draw 2D views of my track plans. I also use the program to draw templates for structures I intend to scratchbuild.
Here are some examples:
Hi Terry!
I use 3rdPlanIt. It comes at a cost but there isn’t much it can’t do. I have tested it for accuracy with things like actual turnout sizes and it is accurate, at least as far as Peco Code 100 turnouts go. It has a 3D viewing function that lets you get a reasonable preview of what your terrain and elevations will look like. It allows you to separate various elements of your plan into different layers so you can focus on individual items without background clutter.
There are too many options to list. Bottom line for me is that it has allowed me to design a layout that will actually fit into the space I have available. For the sake of clarity, I do not have a layout yet, but as I said above, I have done some limited testing for dimensional accuracy and it seems to be right on.
I’d say it is worth the cost.
Dave
Hi Terry,
learning a CAD program for this plan only usually is not worth the trouble. Though it will give you a neat rendering that can be uploaded on here. It will also keep you from being overly optimistic.
Planning with Armstrong squares and being a bit conservative will do the very same to you. The beauty of his system is you don’t even need a ruler or a compass. Besides in his Track Planning For Realistic Operation you’ll find his idea’s presented in some other Kalmbach publications, like in 102 Realistic Track Plans.
A helix in CAD can be rendered by just a circle. More important however is the chosen minimum radius for the layout as a whole, but especially within the helix. Anything under 26 to 28 is asking for trouble. The LDSIG (layout design special interest group) tells you to use a radius about 3 times the length of your longest piece of equipment for getting trains tracking really well. Which might be translated to a radius large enough to prevent string-lining (a train climbing the inner rail of a curve) and as a result prevent a train from derailing. Stringlining is caused by the angle of cars on a curve, but depends heavily on trainlength, carlength, the weight of cars, the grade of the tracks and your hand on the throttle. You’d better be a bit conservative here then building a helix with awkward properties.
Smile
Paul
No offense Paul, but this statement leads me to believe you’ve never used any sort of comprehensive CAD system for layout design. I use CadRail which, like 3rdPlanit!, is a fully operational 3D design package. A helix is NOT just a circle. It is a HELIX. Elevations, or one elevation and a grade, can be assigned to the helix (or any other trackage, for that matter). In designing my old CB&Q in Wyoming layout, with it’s multiple decks, multi-track helix and elevation changes within each deck, CadRail was instrumental in making that complex design workable. It would have been easy to mis-calculate elevations by hand, and wind up with tracks crossing (or just plain colliding!) with too little vertical clearance.
Paul is probably right in his assertion that “learning a CAD program for this plan only usually is not worth the trouble.” For small-to-medium-size layouts I agree completely, unless you have a particular interest in learning CAD anyway. For large, complex layouts, I’d say learning a CAD system is definitely worth it, even for just the one plan. But in that case you should choose one of the comprehensive packages (CadRail or 3rdPlanIt!), as from what I’ve seen, the free packages aren’t really adequate (I know, there will be a lot of pushback on that comment. But, speaking as a professional CAD user of such CAD packages as Computervision, Unigraphics and CATIA, I think it’s realistic).
FWIW.
I’ll second Paul’s opinion that a full fledged CAD program is generally more trouble than it’s worth if all you’re planning to do is design one layout for your own use. Anyrail is more than adequate to draw out your design (notice I didn’t say “design your layout”), unless you’re simply in an ideation phase where you will spend a significant length of time creating attractive drawings before actually embarking upon construction. Anyrail actually does handle elevation changes quite well, but unlike the rest of the product it is not intuitive and requires some delving into the manual and trial and error to get it right.
In less then 10 second with some junior high math I am quite able to calculate the grade and elevations given a certain radius. To me it’s all I need to know before starting construction of a grade or helix.
Of course when you are after wonderful 3D renderings this is not enough. Also for large complex layouts I never felt the urge to go to CAD, other then showing off my ideas on here or in mails to people who are asking for my plans.
Paul
Thanks for all the great ideas so far. What I have envisioned for my railway layout to be is along the lines of Cliff Powers’ layout from the Great Model Railroads 2013 Holiday 2012 issue. With that layout type in mind, that is where my current program is giving me the headaches on the helix construction.
I don’t have the space available to do the exact same size of layout. The space I have is roughly 13’ by 14’. I am considering keeping with the 3 level approach to things. The levels would be roughly the same, bottom for staging, middle for one location, and top for another. The level heights would be roughly 30" for staging, 40" for middle and 54’ to 56’ top level.
I figure I could accommodate 1 or 2 towns in the 2 main levels,2 or 3 industries related to coal, and 2 or 3 industries related to grains. I do have some military cars that I would love to factor in some how with a small depot base, or they could just be rolling stock being moved from one area to another.
I also wish to add a round house in there some where. and the time frame would be in the diesel era.
I suspect that I may be trying to cram a lot into a small space, and I am open to feedback on my projected layout.
Terry
I really like anyrail. www.anyrail.com. It’s about as simple as Atlas’s free RTS (Yes you can still download it if you hunt for it.) And it supports a whole multitude of track libraries.
The other thing I like about it is youi can create common objects and then upload them to the community. You can selectively download the object packs.
So if someone takes the time to draw a particular kit building, you can upload it and share it with everyone.
