Large Scale Central

Track plan

Track and Trestles
#21

OK then my givens are that I am sticking to a theme of Coeur d’Alene Railway and Navigation company in 1:20.3. I will run prototypical equipment. It must be looped operation and build-able in phases. I would say a min of two loops I m pretty firm on. The signal tower is also a must no getting rid of it. The space is the most important given. I can’t go beyond this and it dictates what can be built.

Druthers, I want lots of crossovers that are either bridges or tunnels. I want them over even buildings. The prototype had lots of river and creek crossings (no tunnels but I think I have to have at least one). various buildings would be nice with associated sidings. The prototype ran from mine to mine picking up ore and taking it to the steam boat. This should be represented. They had no yard or complex tracking.

Hope that helps.

#22

Now you’re talking. Developing a model railroad that won’t bore you after the first twenty minutes requires more than just putting track on the ground, though if someone is stuck, I will advise doing just that, to get the juices flowing.

As long as you are putting this much though into this, why not decide where you are going to put the various industries, and the turnouts and track to serve those industries.

#23

Is it really loops that you want or continuous running? If its loops, than fine, but if it’s merely continuous running then reverse loops or something else might work.

#24

Craig Townsend said:

Is it really loops that you want or continuous running? If its loops, than fine, but if it’s merely continuous running then reverse loops or something else might work.

And when I finally convert you to operations, the reverse loops can sub for point to point. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif)

#25

Steve Featherkile said:

As long as you are putting this much though into this, why not decide where you are going to put the various industries, and the turnouts and track to serve those industries.

One problem I always have is I have bigger ideas than space. I always think I can get more in a space than is realistic. I am certainly looking at it with eyes on what might go where. The area tat is developing into the Wye will likely be the main town. Along the straight in front of the tower will be a accurate (as possible) model of the Wallace CR&N depot. and then the steam boat siding. When it comes under the stairs I am thinking this would be a good place for a big mine and concentrator with a siding there. I guess these would be druthers. So I am thinking about it. What will help is visiting others RR so I can get a feel for just how big large scale is. I am already finding once I scale things out that they are bigger than I imagine.

#26

Craig Townsend said:

Is it really loops that you want or continuous running? If its loops, than fine, but if it’s merely continuous running then reverse loops or something else might work.

Craig and Steve,

I am a roundy rounder in the first order. I like loops. What can I say. I do like the improved version so I can get at least some operation use; but at the end of the day I bet 45% of the time will be spent with trains running continuous loops while I futz around building maintaining or rearranging. Another 45% will be letting others run the trains around the loops and minor operation. 10% will be me actually working the road.

Sadly the real deal was a true point to point. It had a Wye close to each end. They would pull in turn the loco and back the train the rest of the way then do it again at the other end. I can not see myself building it this way. In N and HO my layouts were both walk arounds with the layout on the inside. I want tis to be big loops accessed from the interior.

#27

Devon Sinsley said:

Steve Featherkile said:

As long as you are putting this much though into this, why not decide where you are going to put the various industries, and the turnouts and track to serve those industries.

One problem I always have is I have bigger ideas than space. I always think I can get more in a space than is realistic. I am certainly looking at it with eyes on what might go where. The area tat is developing into the Wye will likely be the main town. Along the straight in front of the tower will be a accurate (as possible) model of the Wallace CR&N depot. and then the steam boat siding. When it comes under the stairs I am thinking this would be a good place for a big mine and concentrator with a siding there. I guess these would be druthers. So I am thinking about it. What will help is visiting others RR so I can get a feel for just how big large scale is. I am already finding once I scale things out that they are bigger than I imagine.

This is where you givens & druthers come into play.

Druthers add- Steam boat siding, wye, station model, main town?

Why is a loop a given? Is it just to watch trains go around and around?

#28

Craig Townsend said:

Why is a loop a given? Is it just to watch trains go around and around?

Yes

#29

Devon Sinsley said:

Craig Townsend said:

Is it really loops that you want or continuous running? If its loops, than fine, but if it’s merely continuous running then reverse loops or something else might work.

Craig and Steve,

I am a roundy rounder in the first order. I like loops. What can I say. I do like the improved version so I can get at least some operation use; but at the end of the day I bet 45% of the time will be spent with trains running continuous loops while I futz around building maintaining or rearranging. Another 45% will be letting others run the trains around the loops and minor operation. 10% will be me actually working the road.

Continuous running can be accomplished with two reverse loops… I speak from experience that watching a train go round and round can get boring after a couple of years. I ran almost every day when I got the layout first started, and the loop completed for about 2 years, then would hardly touch anything because I lost interest.

Personally, what I think you would get the most enjoyment out of is this; two reverse loops with your town site in the middle. Place one on either side of the building?

Something like this?

#30

This givens and druthers conversation is proving to be most useful. Thanks Steve and Craig for it. Ii is making me look at it from the stand point of what I must have and where it will go. I am seeing the layout differently than just track. It does help make a difference. I guess I had already done it in my mind but talking it out helps.

#31

Craig,

I will give that some thought. I am not opposed to it and I do understand the the ability to continuously run and also have operations interest. In my minds eye what it lacks is grade crossings. But the only reason I like crossovers is I like having a bridge with something going on under it. Bt the key is lots of bridges and a tunnel or two and I kno that an still happen. If I work at it I am sure I can come up with a grade crossing as well. One option I am thinking about is a hybrid with a dog bone like you have and then coming across the top for a loop. would be a good use of the space and give the double reverse loop and allow point to point operations, continious running on the dog bone or around the oval. I might play with that.

One thing I have is time. I can play and play in AnyRail and see what I come up with. So I will work in a dog bone layout.

#32

Devon Sinsley said:

This givens and druthers conversation is proving to be most useful. Thanks Steve and Craig for it. Ii is making me look at it from the stand point of what I must have and where it will go. I am seeing the layout differently than just track. It does help make a difference. I guess I had already done it in my mind but talking it out helps.

So once you’ve got all of your givens and druthers figured out just list them and let us see. Then the guru’s with track planning can help you figure out what might work. Then YOU can pick a track plan that works for YOU. Your area to work with is 48’x12’?

I think Shawn’s layout is a really good example of the collaborative nature of LSC. Shawn had his ‘initial’ idea, but Steve & others got him to list his givens & druthers, and voila he got a redesigned, new idea that he’s now building.

Here’s something else that should be added; turnout size & curve diameter. Are they givens or druthers? For me in my example #9 & #11 turnouts are a given, but I’m willing to give up something else for that large (well, small prototype wise) turnout.

#33

A dogbone doesn’t have to be as Craig drew it. It can be folded, cross over itself, wander around, its really much more versatile than a loop.

#34

So here is a double double reversing loop layout that will meet my criteria. Sidings can easily be added to both tracks to the right of the switch tower.

#35

8.5 min diameter curves is a given. This new design will allow continuous running around a double reverse with 8.5 diameter or if someone bring over something bigger there is continuous running on either the loop or the double reversing loop on 11 foot diameter curves. As for turn outs since this is my RR I am saying #6 as a min but will put in the largest I can get away with. Unfortunately AnyRail does not list #'ed switches. I was guessing.

#36

I spent all last winter making track plans for what I wanted to do. So far they haven’t survived the first nail driven. What looks good on paper doesn’t necessarily translate well in reality (or your minds-eye once you see what an area can actually hold). What it does do is give you a good idea of what will fit in a certain space and a basic concept of what your trying to accomplish. Don’t be surprised when you start laying track that you find better and more interesting ways of doing it. What I have on paper doesn’t look anything like what I’ve put down, but it accomplishes what I set out to do. Interesting and challenging. But, then again, I’m an hands-on, operations oriented type of guy. I can spend an afternoon just playing on what I have built so far.

Good luck. My only advice is don’t spend a lot of time “thinking or talking” about it, giter done!

#37

Ken Brunt said:

What looks good on paper doesn’t necessarily translate well in reality (or your minds-eye once you see what an area can actually hold).

Bingo!

That has been my experience going all the way back to indoor HO layouts many, many years ago.

I just put the track down without screwing it together and make adjustments as needed.

I know others who have “marked” the track plan using water hose or extension cords.

Ralph

#38

Devon take a look at my track plans in my build thread. There is a plan with a crossover. Although your width is smaller then whats on the plan but maybe you can do a compressed version. Message Jose and see if he can give you some ideas. He has some great ideas. Here was one idea for mine with a crossover

http://www.largescalecentral.com/forums/topic/22492/building-the-kittatinny-mt-rr?page=6

If it doesn’t bring you to the page its page 6 on my build log.

I have to say Im very happy with my reverse loops and the way the track plan came out. Its nice being able to run as a loop, a loop to loop or point to point. It gives so many options.

#39

Geez Devon, You waste no time. This thread is already 2 pages long by the time I found it! I like where you are going. There is definitely a balance between planning and just getting something done. You have to know your self to know what the acceptable ratio of planning to get 'er done is. At minimum, I would suggest printing your track plan. Try to draw in some structures thinking about how big they would actually be. Try to draw to scale. Example: Is the structure you’re drawing only wide enough to fit a door on the front just to fit it to a spot? If it doesn’t look somewhat believable it might as well not be there. You dont want to put that track plan down and find a few must haves don’t fit. Like a steam boat dock! (and Drool!, I love steam boats (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)) This exercise might help you figure how many must haves you can have.

#40

I agree with Ken… Paper is great for general ideas, as it all seems to change when you actually get down to laying track…

On the trackplan shown above, I’d put in a connection on the inside loop, so, if you want continuous running, you can run continuously on both tracks, independently… That way, you could have trains running in both directions on the loops…