Large Scale Central

Track plan

Track and Trestles
#1

So with all the talk of switches and what not and trying to explain what was in my head has forced me to get a digital image of the tack plan. Well I finally spit one out on AnyRail. I have limited the grade to no more than 2%, min rail to rail crossover is 10", min diameter curve is 8.5. I have set parallel rail separation at 9" center to center and more like 12" on the curves. Edit: I eliminated a complicated piece of track and am down to 6 switches likely #6 all the way around.

The one siding that starts on the left top and heads to the very right and off the plan is a future spur that may someday run into my front yard. It wont be there initially. Also the two loops are would be designed to be made one at a time. I would build the double crossing and then just add a small sections of track to make sidings until phase two.

My plan is to build this in Llagas creek code 215 aluminum rail and hand lay the switches and crossing. The building is an existing play area that will be revamped into a two story building. The bottom will be the train shed. The top will have a double bunk bed and windows that will allow sleepovers and overhead viewing of the RR. The second story not shown will cantilever over the track by two feet. Stairs are not exact just representative of where they might go. I will make them fit. You will enter the train shed from the opposite side. Min height will be 18" except where it heads of the page for the future spur.

I am thinking since talking to the locals frost heaving is not much of a problem so I am thinking of making raised beds with rock and good draining fill and then trench the road bed in and fill with gravel and then just have a free floating track on that. Walk ways would be shredded bark or decorative gravel.

Ideas, suggestions? This will likely be started next year. Maybe some clearing and grubbing and a rebuild of the play area this year if I get other stuff done first.

#2

Humm… Looks like a good start, but I bet if you listed what you wanted (roundy round or operations) and space size you might get some more ideas if you wanted.

Any specific era? Or location?

I’m more of an operations type of guy, so when I see the layout I ask, where’s the operations? My first layout was a simply oval, with a branch line that lead off towards an industrial/town area. It gave me room to sit back and watch, but also switch.

#3

Neat… Will be something to follow…

#4

What are your “Givens and 'Druthers?”

#5

Devon, nice. Being as that track plans are a rather personal thing, I do not tend to advise much, unless I see a glaring error. I do see 2 ovals of roundy roundy with the trains always going the same direction, that is, the direction that they were set onto the track. The right side outer loop, where it crosses over and heads inside, could be extended with a switch at the turn, and then joined to the “spur” with another switch, so you could turn trains when you fancy it. Keep in mind this is just a suggestion. Of course if you are running track power, that opens up a can of worms (wiring wise) but its very doable.

#6

OK So clarification on what I am doing is in deed a good idea. So this based on an 1880’s narrow gauge mining RR. I will be running 1:20.3 moguls and smaller. I did try to make it big enough that others can come over and play if they bring their modest sized loco. Might want to leave the dash 9s and auto racks at home. I will be pulling 30 foot box and flat cars and a couple 40’ coaches. This will be a battery power/RC layout. I am a roundy rounder. I like to build trains and scenery more than I like to run trains. I prefer to let them go around and when the urge strikes me I will do some operations. One thing I will consider is adding some spurs as I develop scenery and get a feel for where mines and concentrators and town will go. The one spur on the lower left will be where the steamboat will go. The prototype ran down to a landing where it off loaded ore onto a steamer. So a 1:20.3 stern wheeler is in order.

David the one aspect of this design I don’t like is the lack of a Wye. The prototype has two Wyes one at each end for turning trains, and I do want one. The complicated piece of track that was removed was making the future spur a Wye on a curve that met back up by the train shed. That may happen. It was removed because I was having trouble meeting grade and also am trying to avoid a spaghetti fest where your climbing over track. The compromise is elevation with crossovers or the wye and crossings and less elevation changes. I like grade crossovers and bridges and tunnels; more visual interest. The Wye is in the back of my mind though. I want the landscaping to be rugged and rocky and mountainous.

Oh and space is 50’ on the bottom, 46’ across the top and 12’ wide. The layout will be contained in fence on the sides and bottom and the house on top. This is to keep four and two legged critters at bay. You will enter at the upper right; where you cross the tracks here and to get into the train shed will be wooden bridges that will double as deck bridges for the tracks. the lower left will have stepping stones to access the area behind the steps.

#7

David,

I was looking at the option you offered of hooking that one outer track as it comes inboard to the spur across the way but evaluational that is asking a lot. There is 9 inches of vertical separation at the greatest distance which by eyeballing is about 25 feet. But that inner loop could switch off and continue the arc back under the other track for another crossover then sweep back to the spur. Only two inches of separation there. and it gives me another crossover which is always a good thing. Might have to play with that and see where it goes.

#8

OK so thanks to David I came up with an alternate track plan which gives me a Wye and options for reversing direction:

#9

Devon, I didn’t realize there was an elevation difference there. I now see the grade markings, I didn’t notice them before. My bad.

Wyes are cool, but unless you are an operations kinda guy, they can get rather…they can be a…a balloon track is easier. On the NMRA set up, they have a balloon track at one end and a Wye at the other. The Wye is always the limiting factor. Some cars don’t like to back up through a Wye, no matter how they are placed in a train. And the tail tracks have to be long enough to accommodate the longest train you want to run.

Edit

Devon, you were typing as I was typing. If the curvature and switches will work for the Wye, I think that is a great place for it. It gives you a reverse loop (balloon track) and a Wye all rolled into one.

#10

Here is another small revision making the new portion connect with less parallel track:

#11

David Maynard said:

Devon, I didn’t realize there was an elevation difference there. I now see the grade markings, I didn’t notice them before. My bad.

Devon, you were typing as I was typing. If the curvature and switches will work for the Wye, I think that is a great place for it. It gives you a reverse loop (balloon track) and a Wye all rolled into one.

It didn’t red flag anything so that means the curves are all above 8.5 dia. I could also smooth things when actually laying it.

#12

Givens and Druthers.

#13

Steve Featherkile said:

Givens and Druthers.

OK I could be cool and act like I had a clue what you were talking about Steve, but honestly I had to look it up. Givens and Druthers are my must haves and wants. So the must haves are lots of visual appeal. By that I mean things like bridges, tunnels, buildings, etc. It also has to be build-able in stages, one loop at a time. It will be less about a garden and more about a railroad. So I am not concerned to much about having room to plant stuff. I will stick it where I can. Thats really about it. It about building lots of cool stuff to cram in every nook and cranny as I can.

#14

Steve Featherkile said:

Givens and Druthers.

Steve,

Maybe Devin doesn’t know what those terms mean! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)

#15

Steve, My druthers were I wanted it to run, and run without needing operator intervention. I am a rail-fan, not an operator. Given the fact I had a sloping yard and a pond to cross, as well as a tight spot next to the porch.

Devon may have a whole different list. Devon?

#16

Craig Townsend said:

Steve Featherkile said:

Givens and Druthers.

Steve,

Maybe Devin doesn’t know what those terms mean! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)

You must have been typing at the same time I made my confession

#17

David Maynard said:

Steve, My druthers were I wanted it to run, and run without needing operator intervention. I am a rail-fan, not an operator. Given the fact I had a sloping yard and a pond to cross, as well as a tight spot next to the porch.

Devon may have a whole different list. Devon?

Running first, operations second. I want to be able to have the trains run without me needing to tend to them also. But there needs to be an opportunity to conduct operations so sidings and places to go and place to be are a concern

#18

Thanks to David I went from 6 to 10 switches. Better start laying switches now so I can build my railroad in 10 years (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-tongue-out.gif)thanks David.

#19

Givens are what you have to have. You are not willing to give them up no matter the cost.

Druthers are things that you would like to have, but you would give them up in order to have a given.

Example for me

Given-Scale 1/29, modeling BN in 1970-1971 on the 7th & 8th Sub. Modeling towns per prototype plan of Redmond & Woodinville.

Druthers- Proto:29 Track, modeling towns of; Renton, Issaquah, size of land,

#20

Devon Sinsley said:

Craig Townsend said:

Steve Featherkile said:

Givens and Druthers.

Steve,

Maybe Devin doesn’t know what those terms mean! (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-wink.gif)

You must have been typing at the same time I made my confession

I find the easiest way to sort them out is just to list them.

Let me attempt yours…

Givens- Prototype of a specific RR, 1:20.3, size of land/space available (list the area), continuous running (notice I didn’t say a circle)

Druthers- operational aspect, buildings, scenery, crossovers/tunnels/wye (1 or 2)

Do you want the track to be ground level, knee high, waist high, or chest high? All of these factors play into each other.

See how this works. By listing everything you can free yourself up from a specific approach, and new track plans become possible.