Content removed due to a completely fucked up and incompetent Kalmbach customer service.
First one. The second one has more stuff resulting in less usable trackage.
Complex trackwork can be a real bear on a layout, but that being said, the first one allows a longer runaround to park your train on while you switch it with the local industries. The second plan cuts down the parking area quite a bit (to almost nonexistant) as you need wiggle room to use the slip switch to finish your work in the area.
Just my thoughts…
TZ, you posted while I was typing! You beat me to it! [;)]
Content removed due to a completely fucked up and incompetent Kalmbach customer service.
I like the first one better because it represents/could represent an interchange track. You have two mainline tracks converging and a runaround track that could be used for setting out for the other train. That train picks-up and sets out for the first train.
Adding the switchback adds one more industry if you want it, but kinda pales in relation to the interchange moves. Your call.
I just got to this thread tonight and did a quick clicking back and forth to see a blinking change effect and feel, as do the others, that the first is the better plan. It does everything the other plan does with less complexity.
The new plan is a little smoother. I think it is na improvement.
I like the revised plan as well. I belive there is a certian balance in a layout. While sometimes too much switching or over use of trackage may not look prototypical, it is a lot more fun and you wont get bored with it. Real railroads werent made to be fun. But that’s me. [swg]
Content removed due to a completely fucked up and incompetent Kalmbach customer service.