Give me the pros and cons please. I want continuos running, some switching and only have a 9X7 area with doors and shared aisles for space. This would actually set in the middle of a room that also has to double as a guest room ocassionally.
[img]http://s292.photobucket.com/user/PanelDeland/media/Trackplans/d1387045-bb32-477b-b4a6-d16bcc3ae6a1.png.html?state=copy&sp=false[img]
Here an image of your plan using copy of Photobucket
SHARE THIS PHOTO
Direct
link between image tags
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm14/PanelDeland/Trackplans/d1387045-bb32-477b-b4a6-d16bcc3ae6a1.png)
Quote from: Deland on March 06, 2016, 10:24:14 PM
Give me the pros and cons please. I want continuos running, some switching and only have a 9X7 area with doors and shared aisles for space. This would actually set in the middle of a room that also has to double as a guest room ocassionally.
[img]http://s292.photobucket.com/user/PanelDeland/media/Trackplans/d1387045-bb32-477b-b4a6-d16bcc3ae6a1.png.html?state=copy&sp=false[img]
I would say use the wall's of the room to build your layout this way the center of room would still be available but you mentioned a doorway & aisles.
So your plans or limited is there a chance you can pick another underused room or possible build your layout in your basement
That is the basement, and realistically, that's what there is for now. I have a "zoning Committee" and getting this much past was a tough sell. Removing the guest bed would make things much better but for now that isn't an option. I'm hoping I get the go ahead to expand after my painter(also the "Zoning Committee") runs out of decorating projects. I have to build while allowing room for a bed and dresser, the sump pump box and the aisle. The way I have laid it out allows me to use a shared aisle to access the long side on both sides the base of the L on one side will be against a wall. I looked at literally thousands of plans and some were really good but limited my radii to 18 in with the space. I don't have any "long" rolling stock yet but do want to keep that option. I also choose HO because of the amount of choices and my eyes aren't getting younger. Point to point didn't allow as many options for continuous runs and really cut back on scenery choices. That basement is actually about 1200 sq ft but has a family room, a wet bar, a bathroom and library in it also so the guest room was the only space I could use, unless I wanted restrict my layout size even more and have more windows and the same number of doors to contend with. I did compare an around the room type setup in it but had less options, due to the rom.
The idea here was to freelance a small town forgotten by modern life but revitalized by a shipping container point coming in to keep the town alive. I'll be mixing the down on its luck local with a more modern long haul system to give me options on scenery and motive power.
I know the PtoP would be better for ops but the zoning committee get mesmerized by the train going thru, which is the time for negotiations.
Neat little track plan; I like it.
K487
What are the dimensions of the 'notch' at the bottom of the pic, and how far is it from the right edge? Is the overall front to back dimension 7' and left to right 9'?
Len
The table is a 5X9 with a 2.4 ft long x3 ft wide extension on the left and a 4X2.4 on the right. I fudged a bit over the 9X7 , so the notch comes out 2 ft wide and about 2-2.5 deep. Just enough room to be able to get in and reach every area of the layout except where it will be against the wall. I may need to flip this a and let the narrower extension be against the wall. That would make the longest reach a bit over my goal of 30 in but the painting and artistic talent is just a hair over 5 ft so it will be 38 in tall in the begining but I built the bench with an option to lengthen the legs so I can raise the height if I want.
The actual overall comes out to 9 ft 4 in X 7 ft 4 in. If I fill in the notch, I have way too long a reach to do scenery and retrieve derails(not that I plan on having any because my trackwork will be absolutely perfect lol). This plan isn't set stone but the space is. If anyone has a better plan, I'm all eyes. I'm still looking at other track plans also.
BTW don't mind my amateur attempt at SCARM I'm trying to learn a lot of new skills at once.
are you going to be able to access the side of the plan where your yard is? because if that area is set against the wall, you'd better redesign the plan so that your yard tracks are out front.
also, I would strongly advise redoing the plan with #5 switches instead of the 18r ones you are using. those will cause you a lot of s curve problems that can be eliminated with the use of #5s. plus, a 12 degree curve (33.25r I believe) will work with the #5s to give you parallel tracks.
I agree with jward... I would use #5 turnouts instead of #18 turnout's Also moving your yard area up front with be a big plus... I still feel the space & room your are using to double as a guest bedroom is not the greatest... I would still try to build your layout in a less used room if you can but understand not everyone has that option...
Great suggestions on the higher numbered switches. The yard would actually be accessible from 3 sides. I know the guest room isn't the best choice but it only gets used 1-2 times a years for a night or two and no kids. Any other spot would have a "LOT" more (Non train) traffic. Like I said, this is just one of many I've considered and the input really helps me determine what pitfalls I would have. I'm looking at a couple of other plans but neither have the yard areas this one does. I may do this one temp to see if it really works for me.
Seems like I've spent more time on trackplans and made less progress than any other area. Momma told me there would be days like this.....
Question: Are you locked into doing your layout with EZ-Track?
I ask because all of the built-in roadbed track switches, not just EZ-Track, take way more space to build a yard, or bring tracks parallel, than track that does not have the roadbed built in. It's also way easier to adjust the length of non-roadbed switches and crossings.
Len
Why are you building the railroad in the middle of the room? That takes up way more space than around the walls. Around the walls also leaves the centre of the room free(er) for other uses, like a guest bedroom. As other's have asked, do you have to use E-Z track? Flex track is a much better option as, by it's very name, it is way more flexible in its geometry and looks way better than the rigid geometry of any brand of set track.
Cheers
Roger T.
do not be discouraged by the planning process. keep churning out the plans, save them all. take the best ideas from each one and use those as a basis for future plans. if you have the pieces, try some of them out in real life to see how they look and work.
also remember, even when you come up with a plan you like, do not be afraid to make changes when you build it. none of the layouts I've built in real life ended up exactly as planned.
I really like your layout idea, but I have a few suggestions.
Based upon my entrance into this hobby a year ago, I concur wholeheartedly with Len: abandon EZ track; go with flex track instead. The options (and the costs) are greatly in your favor.
I agree with jward about 18'R turnouts. I've replaced EZ Track 18"R turnouts with Peco SL95's and 96's, and wish I had gone with them initially.
In regard to layout, rogertra's suggestion to build around the walls is a fundamentally solid one. It gives you much more control and "reachability." I have a 4x8 and a 3.5x7, bridged with a 2x2.5 section. There is an 18" set off from the side walls and a 2 ft center aisle, but it is really tough to reach parts of my layout. An around-the-wall layout would be much better for reaching everything, but I agree such a layout limits the creation of a miniature reality. With your expansive layout, you can view it from different angles and be swept away by the realness of it all, depending upon the success of your scenery. Around-the-wall layouts have limited angles from which the layout looks good.
Work through the possibilities before you commit to the layout. You'll be happy you did.
I'm not stuck n the EZ. I just have enough (Minus turnouts) to layout most of these. I hope to lay track other than EZ when I actually firm up what I plan. I just haven't been playing long enough to have developed any skills in that yet.
The reason I will be using the center of the room is because I have doorways to avoid, like the one to the closet where the emergency water shutoff is (I can share the aisle to one side of the bed with that closet) and another to a closet with stuff I need to get to every 3-4 weeks (Which I can't block the door but may be able to restrict the access to and make the entry into the layout a little tighter). I did not finish this basement and honestly cannot think of a worse way to have set it up. There are at least 4 doors in every room. There's not a plumb or square wall anywhere. The box over the sump pump is not even service removable, it would have to be torn out and rebuilt to service the pump. There are only two short walls that don't have multiple opening in the whole basement. The plus is that there is a bath and a wet bar. The guy who did the work was the previous owner and he was a Dr. of something besides M.D. or carpentry. The plumbing wasn't wrapped and sweats to the point I have to change ceiling tiles about every 18 months or so. I'm actually moving the guest bed to get this much space, otherwise I would be stuck with 8X5 and that would restrict one of the aisles.
My initial idea was to lay it out in EZ and see how I liked the ops, then try another and see which actually interested me most. I got the initial bench built and should have it sanded and painted tomorrow with any luck but I picked up a small paying job today so I'm going to try to finish that between sanding/painting to replenish the hobby fund. I got it cut and just need to do some assembly and install on a Dutch door for a shop here in the neighborhood. I need to get both of those done so I can take a couple of days while I have the weather so I can replace some metal on a truck I'm doing. That will leave me some time in the evening to play with track plans and see if I can come up with a way to squeeze some more space or use what I have better.
Quote from: Len on March 08, 2016, 01:02:48 PM
Question: Are you locked into doing your layout with EZ-Track?
I ask because all of the built-in roadbed track switches, not just EZ-Track, take way more space to build a yard, or bring tracks parallel, than track that does not have the roadbed built in. It's also way easier to adjust the length of non-roadbed switches and crossings.
Len
Agreed.... My layout is all Flex Track code 100... a lot easer to work with by far...
Quote from: rogertra on March 08, 2016, 02:55:20 PM
Why are you building the railroad in the middle of the room? That takes up way more space than around the walls. Around the walls also leaves the centre of the room free(er) for other uses, like a guest bedroom. As other's have asked, do you have to use E-Z track? Flex track is a much better option as, by it's very name, is way more flexible in it's geometry and looks way better than the rigid geometry of any brand of set track.
Cheers
Roger T.
+2 on that thought Flex Track is the way to go...
First step, imo, is to look at lots of different kinds of railroads to see which appeals in terms of era, equipment and operation. There's a huge choice out there.
Once you've the kind of railroad you like, or even found a specific prototype, figure out the key parts of it you would like to include and can plausibly model, given the space and your skills, then see about arranging them into a satisfying whole. If the layout is based in reality, or is a plausible version of reality, it will ultimately be more satisfying because your structures and operation will have a purpose to them.
I'd also suggest that if you must have a continuous run then don't make it such a major part of the plan. Point to point is much more interesting operationally but you can always fit in a continuous run by joining two spurs from opposite sides of the board together. That way you get the best of both.
What's great about your track plan is that you have a Point A and a Point B. That is what real railroads do, go from Point A to Point B. Many , many track plans don't do that, and you have done it in minimum space.
Just for the practice I modified the original plan using flex track and a combination of Peco and Shinohara code 83 turnouts. Overall size is 9'4" x 7'4". The green triangle is a suggested change to the cutout to leave a bit more space between the corner and the track.
The turnouts in red are #6, the blue are Shinohara #6-1/2 curved turnouts, and everything else is a #5. I added a run around to the upper yard.
The inner loop uses 18" radius curves. The outter loop, except the curved turnouts which are slightly larger, uses 22" radius curves. I would actually use flex, rather than sectional curves, it's just faster on the computer using sectional.
(http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l529/Pickanotherid/Bachmann/Deland_zpsy4fpbvjl.jpg)
Len
len,
altogether a much more workable plan. you've eliminated all the problem areas except the s curve on the inner track. thanks for taking the time and effort to redraw this plan.
Yeah, I wasn't happy with the S-curve either, but with the geometry involved it was either that or parallel tracks, and the seperation gives more flexibility for scenary. I figured with 18" curves on the inside Deland will be running short cars anyway. So as long as the speeds are kept down, it shouldn't be a major problem.
Len
if the plan is built with a short piece of flex track where the s curve is, you should be able to eliminate it or at least lessen its impact. from my experience, 18r s curves are bad, while one of say 30r would work. that would one of those examples where I would deviate from the actual plan.
That inner loop S-curve has been bugging me, so on this take I've replaced it with 36" radius curves (violet) and no S-curve.
I would raise the inner loop and use a grade seperation it and the outer loop, maybe 2 or 3 inches, for scenic interest.
(http://i1122.photobucket.com/albums/l529/Pickanotherid/Bachmann/Deland2_zpsbxje5ixv.jpg)
Len
Len, Very nice. Very clean. I should have you and Jeff fix my problems with my track design.
Great input guys. I knew the s would probably be a derailing nightmare but never thought of replacing it with something like a 36. My original plan is still in motion. Put together a table(almost done, needs more paint), lay it out as close as possible in EZ and play with it a bit, then change it up and see if I like something else better. Also to determine how much of each type operations suits me best. I have a couple of other track plans that look like they might work but they didn't have as much yard area. I had one with a double loop and some yards but switches between the continuous and the local wouldn't work with the elevation changes. I'm still playing with the trackplans so I may find something I like better. I tried the inset along the 7 ft side but found It left little room because of the walk-in area. I'm trying to keep that 30 in reach so I can keep scenery and such taken care of and hopefully when I finalize for a perm layout, I can learn to lay flex well enough to have very few derails.