Need Comments on Layout Plan

[Johnr0836]

Hi! Here is a layout I'm working on. The benchwork is mostly done. The theme is a defunct logging operation/tourist railroad. There is an upgrade starting from the curve with the "0.3" next to it. The rest of the numbers on the plan are not correct. I'm still learning how to use RTS. Most of the switches are 18" Snap Switches should I consider #4's? I plan on using flex track. Operation will be DCC. Scale is ON30. I hope the file gets posted. Each box on the plan is one foot. Thanks for you help.

John

 

[hubba90bubba]

I think the general layout looks fine.

Are you planning to ad any more spurs? They could be interesting scenic features and you’d have the possibility to do some switching.

A couple of small suggestions about the track plan, I’d change the right hand turnout leading in to the siding on the right side to a left hand turnout. You could then let the curve of the mainline from the upper level continue through the turnouts diverting rout. By that you’d avoid a S-curve in to the siding. You might also want to consider putting in a short stretch of straight track at the point were the 0.3 is marked and bit up and to the left of the point were the 2.9 is marked to avoid more S-curves.

/Mattias

 

[Nomad]

John, I noticed on your plan that the crossover is not aligned. That could be due to using snap switches. To me, they have a funny radius that does not line up right. If you have not bought your turnouts yet, try redrawing using #4 customlines. I have found that parrallell tracks and crossovers align a better. In fact, on my new layout, I took out 21 snaps and replaced them all with customlines.

Loren

 

[Johnr0836]

Thanks for the comments. I was leaning toward the custom line turnouts. I didn't want to fuss too much with RTS in trying to get the cross over to align so I left it as is, realizing when I got down to do the track work I would have to adjust to make it work. Does any of the layout planning software construct a reverse loop automatically? Hubba I was aware of the s-curve issue and planned to leave a small straight section between the curves.

 

[Nomad]

Quote:
I didn't want to fuss too much with RTS in trying to get the cross over to align so I left it as is, realizing when I got down to do the track work I would have to adjust to make it work.
John, I suggest you draw your track plan exactly using the software. I did what your doing and ripped up the whole layout because nothing fit. It's a lot easier to change it on the puter then it is after it's glued or nailed down.

Loren

 

[Russ Bellinis]

Do you have access to both ends of the layout? If the layout buts against a wall on either end, you will have difficulty reaching across to the back. If the ends are open, you will be able to reach easily from the ends.

 

[Johnr0836]

Russ
Both ends are open. The corner is the furthest point. The curve should be about a 38 inch reach.

John

 

[Russ Bellinis]

How high are you planning to have your benchwork? In my opinion shoulder or armpit height is a nice viewing angle, but at those levels your reach is more restricted. Lower benchwork allows more reach, but the "helicopter" viewing angle is not as satisfying to me.

 

[Johnr0836]

Russ

The top of the table is 39" off the floor. The height was determined by recycled wood from prior layout.

John

 

[Russ Bellinis]

A 38 inch reach is a little bit of a stretch with a layout height of 39-45 inches depending in scenery, structures, etc. When I was in the Coast Guard the 210 foot patrol boats were first deployed and were known for rolling a lot because of being a "top heavy" design. They had grab rails built into the overhead on the bridge for personel to hold onto in rough seas. A strategically placed handle bolted into roof beams to give you a hand hold for support would probably be helpful for that 38 inch reach in if you need to rerail a train. Otherwise the layout looks like a lot of fun to operate.