New layout

[renniks]

   Yampa Bob

   I see that you are using the usual  "toy train " layout on the RH side of your layout as given in most basic layout books.
   Placing the Turnout to the passing track with the curve leg as last part of curve will virtually double the length of the passing track and(more importantly)eliminate the S curves.



   Eric UK 

[renniks]

   All,

   A good software for layout planning is AnyRail. It is as easy to use as that from Atlas but has track libraries of virtually every system made, from Zg. to G scale. You can also mix items from different systems e.g. Atlas turnouts with any make of curve and  Flexitrack.
   You can also design a Mini layout with Ng. curves and HO turnouts. Copy and paste:-
   
         www.anyrail.com/index_en.html

   The free version has a limit of 50 pieces of track per layout but if you use Flexitrack between turnouts and for sidings you can still draw a faily large layout.
   If you have the TrainPlayer/Layer soft, you can directly import an AnyRail file and run trains on your layout to see if it is suitable for your intended style of operation. Beware that you could end up running Virtual trains instead of building you actual "Empire".LOL

   Eric UK

[Yampa Bob]

Hi Eric
Thanks, but I already considered the method you suggest and didn't like it. I make it a practice to never have the curved leg as part of the main.  On this side of the pond, it is not prototypical and presents problems for high speed operation.

I didn't get the design from a layout book, the "toy train"    arrangement is a  modified John Allen "Timesaver", and serves as the required run-around, not actually a siding for long trains.

Contrary to rumor, the "S" curves present no problem for low speed switching operations, even for the AC4400 pictured. Most western railroads have S curves at sidings due to narrow right of ways. Anyway, it's nailed down and works for my operation.

My theory for layout design is, one must first develop a "Plan of Operations".  Too often a newcomer will build a complicated layout, only to discover it doesn't work as intended or anticipated.  We spent a year in planning and walking local yards, but only two days to build the layout. 

I'm only teasing, but I couldn't resist quoting one of your posts:

"It is YOUR layout and if someone desn't like it you help them thru the Exit." 

Happy Holidays.  In 18 hours and 30 minutes I get to run my new GE 44 Ton. 

[Santa Fe buff]

I was considering a layout plan given by a booklet for a 4x8 layout. It seems very nice.

Yampa Bob,
I'm sure Santa believes you deserve it...
< >

Josh

[Jim Banner]

Eric, I have often used the curved portion of a turnout as the mainline in places where it led to smoother operation.  In some cases, I even curved the short, normally straight section next to the points to form a smooth, uninterrupted curve throughout the turnout.

Usual prototype practice where there is lots of space is to use the straight route as the main and the curved route as the secondary line.  But keep in mind that the prototype uses much longer turnouts so that their S curves virtually do not exist.  As modellers, we have to make compromises in our cramped spaces, just as real railroads do when they are in cramped spaces.  As modellers, we go even farther in our compromises, using impossibly tight curvature and S curves in our tracks and then using truck-mounted couplers to compensate.  Unfortunately, this compensation goes only so far.  If you try to back a train of say 50 cars, all equipped with truck mounted couplers, through an S curve or just about any other curve, the forces involved serve to twist and derail the trucks.

On my layout, operation is Job One.  Realistic track work is farther down the list.  It has to be - I just don't have room for 10' radius curves and number 10 and larger turnouts.  So I find it easy to justify using turnouts "wrong way round" if it means I can use body mounted couplers and back long trains through complex point work.  Your priorities and results may differ.   

[Yampa Bob]

Obviously my tiny layout wouldn't win any prizes. I only present it to show that a modeler can have a lot of switching fun on a very small footprint.

Our original intent was to start out with the minimum required, then add on later. However, once the layout was set up in the living room, we decided that any increase in size would not be practical.   

Since the picture was taken, we added a Bachmann Companion station on the left side (far corner) so my wife and I can both enjoy the layout. She works the Phippsburg yard while I concentrate on Craig.  With a lot of practice, we have developed a fairly realistic operation.  Running a small layout presents many challenges, which just adds to the enjoyment.

I interpret "Selective Compression" to mean that WE select the compression to suit our needs. When opinion differs, I simply invoke "Rule Number One".

[pdlethbridge]

I have one main line turnout using the curved side as the mainline. I Have no problems with it as normal operation allows for backing into the siding.

[SteamGene]

Mr. Train, you have had some very good pieces of advice given to you.  One thing to consider is the shape of the bedroom.  A round the wall in HO could be very good - if room allows it.  I was going to do that until I figured that between the doors, window, and wall shape, it just would not work!
Another thing to consider is what you want to do.  I'm afraid I'm still not sure N scale steam is as good as it could be.   
Gene

[ebtbob]

Good Morning All,

       Merry Christmas!!!   Let me chime in on this topic.    In a bedroom,   if choosing between HO and N scales,   there can be any number of things to consider.   One thing that has not been discussed is maintenence.    The ONLY reason to consider N scale is the fact that much more can be done in any given space.   Just remember,  the more railroad you have,  the more track.  The more track,  the more cleaning and what is the one topic that constantly is discussed here?    You got it,  how do I clean my tracks easily?  More is not necessarily better.

Bob

[Conrail Quality]

Bob, have you ever actually done anything with N scale? If you have (which you obviously haven't), you would find that N scale is actually much more mechanically reliable than HO. Modern N scale locomotive mechanisms are actually designed to eliminate as much maintenance as possible, such as the split frame eliminating wiring and solder, and so on. Couplers in particular are much easier. I have never had an N scale coupler fail or need to be readjusted. With HO, it happened quite frequently, even with Kadees! All this by far makes up for the minor amount of time one spends cleaning track (I only need to do it every few months). I'm a former HO'er who switched to N, and I have no intention of ever going back.

Timothy

[Mr.Train]

 Thanks. This has been very valuable. I have pretty much made my decision on N even though I already have a small HO thing. Now I just need to figure out some of the details and get started on cnstruction and shopping.