I’m ready to build my “Dream Layout”. This layout has been in planning for years and supplies have been stockpiled in anticipation of construction. Given my age, this will probably be the last layout I build for myself, so I want to include as many of the things I have dreamed about for years. By definition, a dream layout includes everything you’ve ever wanted to have in a layout.
Unfortunately, in spite of all my efforts, I have been unable to come up with a trackplan that satisfies me. I know, I know, model railroading is a series of compromises. I understand that. This being my final layout, though, I want as few compromises as possible.
Now, I’m NOT asking anyone here to design a layout FOR me. Each layout is individual to the modeler. What someone else designs may not be what I’m looking for, even if ALL of my givens & druthers are included.
I have lots of comments but let’s start with this…
You are using 24" radius curves in N-scale and only 5 yard tracks fit in over one foot of space? It looks to me like you are using an HO-scale library instead of N-scale.
I’ve wondered about that myself. It seems to me that I should be able to fit more track on a layout this size. Other layouts in N scale that I have seen posted have more scenic areas with more complicated trackwork than what I have. Don’t understand that! I checked the RTS libraries. Both Atlas Code 80 and Code 65 libraries are listed. I used the Code 80.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Is it possible that RTS SAYS it’s N scale, but it’s really HO?
I’m fairly new to using RTS. So far, it’s the only track planning software that I’ve been able to use with any success. Could be me! It’s confusing, though.
Texas Zepher, thanks for the comment. Hopefully, someone will be able to offer more information or suggestions.
My layout designs in HO definitly suggest that this has been drawn in HO.
Suggestions:
Take off the door and store it somewhere even if it is under the bed. Let your decendents put it back on after they put you on the caboose to train heaven.
Check out Ian Rice’s new layout design book for bench work ideas. And put into play his cassette train storage idea instead of a staging yard.
Set up to pieces of flex track side by side and place cars on them. When you can get your hands safely around the cars on one track you have your spacing bettween the tracks. The width of both is your mainline. And all the rest of the benchwork width is good for industries and scenery.
Use ALL of your wall space for the layout with a swing gate or lift out at the door. Do that and you have increased your layout by 25% on one level. Design one section at a time to your ideal and then place on on a room grid and Then make comprimizes to get it to fit.
I have never used RTS, but when looking at the length of the turnouts (5-6") and the size of the turntable, I would say this is N-scale. Is it possible that you are used to working in H0-scale, and are using the H0 radii and H0 parallell distance while working on this N-scale plan…?
Offhand, Svein, I’d say no. I’ve only done N scale planning in RTS, never HO.
That doesn’t mean that I’m using the program correctly! LOL I only learned enough to describe benchwork and lay some track. Many of the details of RTS are lost on me 'cause I haven’t taken the time to learn them!
I can really relate to this thread. My daughter married last year and I immediately claimed her bedroom in the honor of “Model Railroading”. The room size is 10 x 12.5 and the closet and door are just about in the same location. I wanted a 2 track mainline, town, small switching yard,bridges and a tunnel or two. I drew up all kinds of plans on graph paper with compass in hand and could not design something I was satisfied with. My previous layouts were in the den in which my wife finally got tired of so the bedroom was all mine.So one night I was bored with tv and decided to read some model railroad stuff and picked out the “MRR 102 Realistic Track Plans no.5” book. Low and behold I found a plan (#34). This plan requires some modifications to work like going from 9 x 11 to 8 x 10 to allow access to the closet,door and shelf loaded with mrr stuff but it’s a perfect start and with some minor modifications, I can make it work.
Is that the newest layout book? I don’t think I’ve picked that one up yet. I’ll go have a look at my LHS later this week. I have NO reservations about stealing, er, I mean, “Borrowing” ideas from anywhere! LOL
Stay tuned, willy6! Progress is being made! You never know when a great idea will slap you upside the head. Maybe the suggestions offered to me will be of use to you, too!
When you’re ready, start a thread on your layout so we can watch your progress.
Code40 on the N scale.net forum suggested an improved track plan. Using code40’s track plan, I went to RTS and tried to re-create it as code40 drew it. It didn’t come out as well or as smooth as his, but it’s a better plan overall than what I started with.
Here’s the upper level: Here’s the lower level:
If I start a downgrade near the roundhouse corner, by the time I get completely around the room, I can get nearly 6 inches of clearance below the roundhouse with a 1.5% grade.
There is a turnout on the left wall that connects to one end of the yard and far enough away from the yard to allow for grade adjustments to bring the track to the same height as the yard and roundhouse. There is a long lead to the roundhouse that split
On another forum where I have posted a similar thread, Will Annand was kind enough to offer some suggestions and post the trackplan of his CVR layout. I liked the looks of Will’s layout and the fact that it is on one level. So I duplicated it as best I could in RTS and started playing with it. I will post my doodling after Photobucket finishes with their maintenance. As I said at the beginning of this thread, I’m open to reviews and revisions. I’m trying for a trackplan that fulfills as many of my druthers as possible. I’m not abandoning anything that has already been posted, just considering options. I appreciate all the comments and suggestions that have been offered.
As promised, here is the latest track plan that I have been working on:
It is heavily modified from Will Annand’s CVR layout (my apologies to Will!). The original CVR uses sharper curves than what I wanted so part of the re-design was to enlarge the radii. Most are now 11”R+, many with 19”R easements. I had to shorten the length from 10’ to 8’ to fit my space and shorten the left leg to 74” to clear the doorway into the room. Most of the turnouts are #6.
Now might be a good time to review my druthers and compare them to this layout plan. I originally posted these:
Double-tracked mainline operation (continuous running for passenger & through
As promised, here is the latest track plan that I have been working on:
It is heavily modified from Will Annand’s CVR layout (my apologies to Will!). The original CVR uses sharper curves than what I wanted so part of the re-design was to enlarge the radii. Most are now 11”R+, many with 19”R easements. I had to shorten the length from 10’ to 8’ to fit my space and shorten the left leg to 74” to clear the doorway into the room. Most of the turnouts are #6.
Now might be a good time to review my druthers and compare them to this layout plan. I originally posted these:
Double-tracked mainline operation (continuous running for passenger & through
Hi Darrell. I like the latest one level design plan much better than the initial that required a duck-under. With that much space in n scale, I would definitely double track the mainline and reduce some of the other extra track to leave more room for scenery. I did a turntable and roundhouse on a previous layout and would not do it again as it looks great but is a bear to get to reliably work in n scale. I know it’s hard to do with track planning software, but at implementation time try to vary the track so its not always so parallel to the edge of the benchwork or symmetrical in nature. What are the chances that you are going to move in the future and would you plan on taking the layout with you? It would influence some construction decisions. Jim
No, I don’t plan on moving. But you know what’s been said about plans! LOL With that in mind, I intend on making as much of this layout salvageable if not outright moveable. I haven’t gotten into the benchwork design phase yet but it’s been on my mind almost as much as the layout design itself!
I am looking over my last track plan to see if it can be double-tracked. That was an important design criteria in the beginning and I haven’t abandoned the idea yet. A lot will depend on what I can squeeze in and what I can eliminate. The roundhouse will stay. It’s kinda been a dream for nearly 40 years and I’ve got a roster to fill it with, too! I plan on using Walthers programmable turntable.
There are some problems using track planning software. For instance, RTS does NOT have a 1/2 section of 19"R in it’s track database. 9 3/4" and 11", but not 19"! Also, it’s hard to tell how far the tracks are apart from each other unless you zoom in. I suspect that during construction I’ll be able to free up some additonal space by being more accurate in the spacing of the tracks. As in the past, any trackplan is more of a suggestion than a mandate. I always make some changes on the fly!
One time, years ago, I entirely flipped a plan during construction. I didn’t go back an re-draw the orignal plan, just worked with it as it was. Without modern computers and track planning software, it was really difficult to keep everything straight since it was all backwards from the drawing! It was only good fortune that the number of right and left turnouts was about equal! LOL
I’ll go back and play with some double-tracking and see what happens.
It is heavily modified from Will Annand’s CVR layout (my apologies to Will!). The original CVR uses sharper curves than what I wanted so part of the re-design was to enlarge the radii. Most are now 11”R+, many with 19”R easements. I had to shorten the length from 10’ to 8’ to fit my space and shorten the left leg to 74” to clear the doorway into the room. Most of the turnouts are #6.
Now might be a good time to review my druthers and compare them to this layout plan. I originally posted these:
Double-tracked mainline operation (continuous running for passenger & through
The above is a link to that layout. It is gone now due to a move, and I am now building another layout in HO scale.
Now for my comments. Build your benchwork so it goes around the walls. Two foot wide seems to be right for reaching across to the back. The corners will be deeper but you can still reach them if you stand on a small work platform about 9 inches high. (Build it yourself) It will also double to sit on while working underneath. Get rid of all the furniture. If you have to have your computer in the room, find or build a LOW desk. Get a SHORT chair for it. Build lift bridges to cross the door and closet. If the room door opens inward, remove it. I am fond of track arrangements where the main line goes around the room twice, so it has a grade or two and has to cross under / over itself. You would probably need four lift bridges, but they are not hard to do. My current HO layout has four lift bridges and I have written up how I did them. Here is a link to a PDF file that includes photos.
You should be able to get the roundhouse and turntable in a corner and the yard next to it. The lower lift bridge that spans the closet entrance can be your stagging yard or interchange with a through track. So I would put the yard on the wall accross the room from the closet. On the upper level behind the yard could be some city type industries. The other two walls could be used for intermediate towns.
I just KNEW somebody was going to look at this with a totally unbiased view! LOL
Okay, Byron, let’s look at the record (as they used to say):
First, to make sure we’re talking about the same thing, I’m referring to the last track plan I posted, a heavily modified version of the CVR layout by Will Annand.
The druthers, as originally posted:
Double-tracked mainline operation (continuous running for passenger & freights)
Hi, Elmer, thanks for your comments.The first track plan I posted was designed to utilize the walls and a swing/lift gate for access. I haven’t abandoned that plan. I got a suggestion on a different style layout and wanted to play with that for a bit. This is a process. Draw something and see if you like it. If not, draw something else. Having these forums to post to and getting feedback is a real bonus!I can’t really get rid of the furniture in the room. The bookcases are all fine since they are only about 30” tall. The desk is a little shorter than the bookcases, but with the computer monitor on it, it raises my minimum bottom layout height to about 45”. With a single level layout, that’s about where I’d want it to be anyway. Multiple levels get trickier, but are still within reason height-wise.I’ve commented elsewhere about the door into the room. It can be removed, but since the doorway is at an angle, there isn’t much space gained by removing it. That holds true for replacing the regular door with a bi-fold door. I won’t gain much space because I still need e
I made a measurement mistake when working on the last trackplan, making the upper wall 10’ instead of 12’. Guess my brain had left without leaving a forwarding address!
It was correctly pointed out to me that one mainline and multiple sidings do not a double-track mainline make. (Sorry, poetic license.) While fooling around with squeezing in a double track mainline, I found my measurement error. The layout plan below is the result of correcting that error and adding the second mainline.
With the increased width of the layout, I was able to add the second mainline and modify some potential trouble spots. Except for a couple of locations, the mainlines follow the straight routes through the turnouts. I also added several single crossovers, although if built, they would be double crossovers.
I have been following up on this thread for quite some time now, observing how your layout ideas develop with the input through this forum. Although I am not in a position to comment on your recent ideas, allow me to make some remarks.
Designing a layout requires multi-level thinking, i.e. track and scenery or LDE´s. I find it difficult to picture your layout ideas in terms of scenery, which IMHO, is the spice to each layout.
Your layouts have a lot of track and a lot of turnouts, but the focus is on letting 1 or more trains run. I assume that this is one of your druthers. If you like to watch your trains run through some nice scenery, may I suggest that you kind of concentrate the passenger station, yard and loco facilities in one area - your "city, maybe? - and thus open up space for scenery? If you then lead your trackage into a (hidden) staging yard and add some lineside industries along the way, you can come really close to what you expect to get, I assume.
Darrel, I have never designed a “big” layout like you do, so these are just my thoughts.