richhotrain,
I’ve seen plenty of hand-drawn layout designs. They rarely match the layout 100%. Have you ever had to make changes building the layout because the penciled in plan didn’t work? I’ve seen that often.
Six sheets of 11"x17" for a 42’x25’ layout? What scale?
Accurate dimensions of all switches are readily available? Where would that be?
A compass can be accurate…up to the limit of the thickness of the lead. But even the most accurate compass can’t draw a transition curve.
Maybe it’s just me, but when I mean accurate, I mean dead to nuts accurate, not “close enough”. If anyone has to tweak a switch here, or gently curve a track there just to get something to fit, then the plan was not accurate.
I also took drafting classes in high school (Chicago’s Lane Tech - 1962) and found that the teachings served me well in drawing up scale track plans on quadrille paper. And with an HO track template for turnouts and crossings, they turned out quite accurate when transferred to the plywood.
As I said earlier, if you are planning a sizeable layout, especially for a club, using a track planning software would be highly desireable. BUT, that is not a starting point, for hand drawn sketches would be a necessary preamble.
But once again, a post asking simple questions has turned into a “versus” debate - which does not serve the OP.
Changes in paper drafting are why you use tracing paper until you are ready for a ‘final’ design. You can trace over the otherwise properly drawn yard with the new layer of tracing paper offset so the yard is shofted over the required distance instead of erasing the whole thing and drawing it all out again.
Also why older electronics have so many ‘bodge’ wires fixing mistakes - the PCBs were all laid out by hand and with stick-on pads and so forth, and redoing the board to fix a mistake was a lot more expensive than just having somone solder on a jumper wire. Still happens even with electronic drafting, if only because the circuits are now many times more complex and the sheer amount of work required to reroute perhaps dozens of traces to add in the one you forgot may end up costing far more than adding a manufacturing step to solder on a wire. And even worse, if thousands of boards with the mistake have already been produced, even if not yet populated. Sure, you can get 10 PCBs for $1 from these Chinese places these days, but those are small boards and are not production qulaity, nor are they multiple layers like almost all modern components need. There isn’t, for example, room on just two sides of a board to run all the wires from a modern CPU with more than 1100 pins on the bottom.
I just checked the course catalog at a major engineering school and they don’t even offer instruction in drafting without a computer. Why do you think that is? I only checked the engineering curriculum, maybe they teach it in the history department.
Have y’all considered that it’s easier for you to use pencil and paper because you were trained to do so when that was the only option? I doubt seriously if anybody has been tought manual drafting this century. They’ve been tought to use computers. People born after 1970 or so don’t think like you do. They approach problems differently because they have had different tools available to them.
Some of us have had tried to embrace new ideas and keep up (with varying degrees of success). The “old dogs” that don’t want to learn any new tricks can plod on with their stone knives and bear skins if they choose, but they need to let the rest of the world move on.
Even though I have some CADD experience, my latest track plan is being drawn on a couple 24 x 36 sheets of mylar.
By the time I would get up to speed with any of these programs (because I have not used any of them in years), I will be done drawing the layout the “old way”.
Of course I still use hand drafting in my work every day. Just completed plans for a 1000 sq ft addition to a house with a 1000 sq ft basement foundation, 5 sheets, about 35-40 hours of drafting total. CADD would not have been any faster.
Any experienced hand draftsman knows all sorts of short cuts for changes.
How accurate does a track plan need to be? If you follow good engineering practice, and not try to cram stuff in, reasonably accurate hand drafting is all you need.
My biggest problem with computer drafting is not being able to see the whole sheet at once unless you have the room for large expensive monitor set ups, no thanks.
I’m one of those “Old Dogs” and once introduced to a CAD program on my first IBM PC in 1985 I never looked back. To me my CAD runs a close second to my model railroading, can’t do without either. When my arthritis gets so bad I can’t work on my layout I go to my CAD.
I also took two years of Mechanical Drawing in high school and Drafting in college but my CAD program is so much easier than the old paper and pencil way I rarely use them. There are so many things that one can do on the Computer Assisted Drawing program it’s mind boggling.
I even draw model railroad pictures on my CAD when I can’t do any physical work do to arthritic pain.
My double crossover, Atlas components out of the box have 3” center to center spacing.
Therein lies the issue. Its a recurring theme for me. Simple vs complex. Simple is probably more realistic, and can also accomodate some changes on the fly during construction.
I have nothing against, or will I stand in the way of, anybody that wants to use a computer program to design their track work.
The proof is in the actual building of the layout, if it actually does get built. Did you make changes? Did you make the changes because once you seen the actual plan laid out in front of you, with track and turnouts in hand, you thought it might work better if I did this? or that?
The way I see it, if you need a computer program to figure out how to cram complex track work into a small area, your cluttering the layout with way too much track.
With templates, turnout templates can be made from tracing the turnouts you have in a box, waiting to become part of a layout. It worked fine for me. It all fit just the way my crude, “drawing in the dirt with a stick” plan shows.
By the way, just what is “complex” track work? Modeling nothing but a yard? or a model of Alton Junction?
Design on my friends, how ever you wish to do so.
If I build another layout, I’ll “design” it the way I did my current layout, except, maybe I’ll start with a flat bed of sand, and I’ll sharpen the stick, to get finer details. [(-D]
I’m one of those “Old Dogs” and once introduced to a CAD program on my first IBM PC in 1985 I never looked back. To me my CAD runs a close second to my model railroading, can’t do without either. When my arthritis gets so bad I can’t work on my layout I go to my CAD.
I also took two years of Mechanical Drawing in high school and Drafting in college but my CAD program is so much easier than the old paper and pencil way I rarely use them. There are so many things that one can do on the Computer Assisted Drawing program it’s mind boggling.
I even draw model railroad pictures on my CAD when I can’t do any physical work do to arthritic pain.
My double crossover, Atlas components out of the box have 3” center to center spacing.
Exactly! For 25 years now I have been on the “less track and less complexity in a bigger space” path, as has been being discussed in the thread about my new layout.
My best example, an 8 track yard 25’ long is no more complex than an 8 track yard only 12’ long. Which one is more realistic? I have the room for the 25’ yard, especially being willing to only have one such yard…
I am so bad at track planning… paper or CAD, that I am a certifiable incompetent.
.
I had to build a 1:1 scale model of my actual layout, then make a sketch from that. At least I KNOW eveything will fit. Nothing will ever be more accurate than a full sized model using the actual track components.
Oh, for goodness sake, Carl, shame on you. Speaking for myself, I may be old, but I am not an old dog. I spent the early part of my working career as a programmer and systems analyst. When I moved over from IT to financial planning for high net worth clients, I designed a series of sophisticated software programs and started a business and a website selling software licenses to other financial planners. So, your crack about stone knives and bear skins is offensive.
Let me return to a more civil discussion of paper and pencil. It is simple, it is basic, and it is accurate. The learning curve is zero, and the price is right. The OP has been “doodling random ideas for track plans”. That is fine, nothing wrong with that. He is looking for something more accurate. So, I repeat, how about pencil and paper? There is nothing wrong with track planning software, but you do not need it to draw an accurate and workable track plan.
I have designed for a number friends, those basement filling model railroad empires I am often told are so rare, and many of them started out on a napkin…
And like Rich, I have lots of “tech” experiance. I was writing code for PLC’S in the early 80’s to replace relay controls in factories.
But I still manage my daily work with a legal pad…
Every one of those offices/cafeterias probably had chairs too - which is equally relevant to a thread titled “Track Planning Software Recommendations”.
i think part of the relavence is understanding what cad deals with best.
if you were to consider several different approaches to part of the problem, you would probably flesh them out on paper (or white board) before drawing one or all ideas in cad.
so even after starting to draw a layout in cad, paper/pencil is still a very useful tool for fleshing out ideas.
For YOU, but not necessarily for others. What you and the rest of the pencil pushers have failed to recognize is that different people have different skills, abilities and preferences. When someone is asking for software recommendations, it is pretty clear what his preference is. I find “use a pencil” as a response to be offensive (so we’re even [:)]).
Maybe for you, but I prefer to flesh out my ideas in XtrackCAD. There hasn’t even been a pencil in my house for probably 20 years.
…but I will use that white board to explore ideas with a customer for the layout of a Storage Area Network. I think the difference is that the white board facilitates collaboration. I have never participated in a collaborative track plan.
You are correct about there being a learning curve!!! I stopped the automatic upgrades to my CAD two years ago. I don’t like the learning curve to the upgrades, my version does everything I need or want.
And you are also correct about almost needing a refresher course if you don’t use it often.
