First layout power and insulation advice needed

I am cautiously approaching beginning my first real lay out. (Finally!) It is going to be a small table top portable layout using mostly Kato Unitrack on foam. The theme is a small Midwest farm town. It will at least for the foreseeable future be a DC setup, with an MRC 280 dual power pack, and Atlas Selectors. The likely hood of more than two trains operating at one time is probably less than none. The kind of operations I envision is a local switcher that goes off to a neighboring town (Fiddle track) for drop off and pickup, and handling the majority of local car shuffling, with an occasional thru-train passing through town <shrug>.

I'm attaching an image of the KISS layout I have in mind. The problem at hand is that I have no idea where to put in the insulated joiners to form blocks, or where I should be applying power. In the image, I've used small red squares to indicate insulated joiner points, and small green squares to indicate power points. These are totally uneducated guesses at this point, and I'm hoping to tap into the collective wisdom here to refine things.

Thanks for any input you good folks can supply.

 

Since you do not intend to run more than one loco at a time, you can dispense with the blocks - as noted above - and also with the Dual controller power pack, since you won't need it.

In addition to the "parking spots" in the engine facility, you might want to consider the others on the list - especially the passing sidings - if you want to simulate a meet or one train passing another.

Andrew

 

This takes me back to one of my earliest layouts. I and my friends had more fun with that layout. It had the distinction of being the teaching layout, the one where I learned at the school of hard knocks and stubborn persistence. But watch out for those spurs that dead end at the side of the board. Many a would be model rail ran one of my hard earned locomotives off the track...splashing it all over the floor...earning their coveted "Member of the Flying Diesel Corp.", merit badge. >

I don't need to add to the advice already given. I might suggest another spin...however. Keep the blocks in as a learning experience and use atlas sliders as your turn on and off control point. This way you could make up a train and hold it on the fiddle track until you move your local off the main line, parking it on the track next to it. This will give you potential for non-stop action. Great entertainment.

It wasn't until I put in a double track main line that I needed the blocks and a dual transformer...another learning experience. And, what fun we all had. Kept us off the street and out of the local block fights...ahh...another type of block...grin!

Move ahead and enjoy the fun.

Edited add on: I typically "Rule of Thumb", put my blocks in on the diverging or emerging side of the switches. Seldom do I need them outside on the main unless I feel I need to be able to hold a train and split the block. I've done that on my present layout and it allows me to hold a train while one clears the block ahead...but that's another story.

 

It seems that I've fostered a bit of a misconception...I do plan on the possibility of two trains moving in some fashion at a time...but more than two is not likely. For example, one through train circulating, while the local switcher spots and picks up.

On the dual powerpack and controllers, I've got them, and if I don't use them, they'll just continue gathering dust.

The double track curve on the right end was what I had intended to be a kind of passing track. Any trains will likely be short, and the passing likely to be a mater of a thru-train passing the local switcher, not whole longer trains passing each other.

I did not include any blocking or power feeds on the sidings (except for the fiddle track), because I was thinking that the Kato turnout power routing feature would handle that. Right? Wrong?

I think I've got the flying boxcars covered...a short backdrop will guard the left and rear (upper in the image) sides...those two sides will have limited PITA access. For the other two sides, I've been thinking in terms of a short Plexiglas or Lexan plummet guard.

That was kind of my general line of thought. Where I strayed away from that was the insulation points at roughly 3 and 9 oclock...the idea there was to separate the upper and lower halves so that a thru train could be moving along the upper section, while lower section could be turned over to the local switcher <shrug>

 

I like your plan and the idea of moves being made by a local, while a train is eating up mileage on the main brings life to the layout. It's obvious you've given a lot of thought to this plan.

The only other advice I'd toss your direction, has more to do with isolators then anything else. You will need to isolate both sides of the track where you will be operating independent or separate trains...Cab A or Cab B. I'm sure you already figured on that. I would avoid the "Common Wire or Common Rail" thing. I've had nothing but trouble with the concept and I'm not alone. You could set up the yard on Cab B and the Main Line on Cab A. That came out backwards. Or...use DPDT toggles to control each isolated section which allows you the best in flexibility and operation. You probably have that covered to.

Thanks for allowing us in on your plan.

Looks like you are headed for loads of fun.

 

Thanks! Yes, there has been a lot of planning...too much actually...a lot of second guessing, back and forth, and coming full circle. I've been arm-chairing it for umm...wellll...27 years or so. In those years, I planned several layouts, all much larger, and all falling victim to circumstances ( moving, job loss, disability/mobility issues, etc.). I'm still suffering from near paralyzing fear of SOB (Small Oval Boredom) syndrom, but I try to keep focused on the idea that a small oval is better than nothing.

Actually, what you see there is minimized version of what started out as a 4'x8'...shrunk to 36"x80" door size...then reorganized again to it's current size. A combination of a rapidly shrinking to near non-existent budget, and the reality check of trying to maneuver a full size door through the house, made necessity the mother of this invention. The operating scheme I can not take credit for...it's the scheme of the 1:1 scale railroads through small Midwest farm towns that I spent a good part of my younger days around.

Yes, I had planed on insulating both rails at every block...Kato's wiring system kind of made that a natural choice. Having the Atlas Selectors already laying around helped along the idea of more blocks than I probably would have done otherwise.

 

You'l never know how many times I wish I had my oval layout back again. The memories, the fun and the simplicity of the layout are a stark contrast to what is sitting in my train shed today. The best thing about your plan is the room for expansion...should you so desire. John Allen started out with an oval and look what he ended up with...all said and done.

I envy you and your plan. Loads of fun to be had.

You take care of yourself and stay in touch with all of us here at Trainboard.com. Let us know how things progress. Need help... put out a holler. There might be one of us that can come and physically help you.

 

The basic rule for insulated joints is any place a rail connects two frogs, it needs an insulated joint.

I would put my roads at an angle, maybe with a curve in them.

consider putting a divider down the center to create two scenes, one on each side. then put a siding on one side and the rest on the other. Use the siding as "staging". Put an eastbound on the main, then a westbound in the siding. Bring them around to the town in whatever order you want.

Dave H.

 

I wish I had room for future expansion <sigh>, but the physical space I have to work with, pretty much dictates that this will be all there is, at least barring moving to a different house, which is SERIOUSLY unlikely.

Thanks again for the encouraging words.

 

The problem with moving the roads is that the bridge positions pretty much dictate the roads...their current squareness is accidental. When the plan was larger, there were a couple curves worked in. The rear thru girder leading to thru truss bridge scene is a must for me...it's a scene that has been stuck in my head ever since I got interested in model railroading...and there is no place else to put it, and no room to shift it in it's current general location. The front of the layout underpass could only be swapped with the position of the station...and that is still a possibility...but so far, that configuration has not clicked. On the other hand, being a first layout, straight roads and square corners are likely to be easier <shrug>.

I tried repeatedly to come up with a divided layout that would work, but with access limited to only occasional derailment patrol on the left and rear sides, nothing seemed to work...one side always had little visibility to go with the limited access. The dearth of sidings and other features on the rear and left sides is intentional...less complexity hopefully equals less derailment potential in the areas with PITA access.

 

Sorry about that - seems my speed reading is not what it should be...!

I missed the "more than" before the two trains operating at the same time. Oops. So yes the dual pack is needed and some sort of control.

On a loop this small, it may not be advisable to have two trains chasing each other around the loop, as this will require 4 blocks within the loop (one for each train to occupy, and one ahead of each). It will be a whole lot of switch flippin' to keep them going. Therefore the blocks are more likely to be one complete loop (including the inner track at right) and "all the rest". That will allow one train to orbit, and a switch job to occupy the rest.

And yes - properly set up, power routing turnouts should handle the "on/off" function for your sidings.

Hope that is more helpful than my last reply...

Andrew

 

No worries...you were not the only one to read it that way...I should have been clearer.

Excellent!

Both were helpful..the first pointed out where I needed to make further clarification

Thanks!

 

Not to hi-jack this thread... but can we discuss this a bit more? What are the problems or troubles with common rail in block control? I have had very good luck with this approach, although my layouts and ability are very simplistic. I thought the only time we needed to insulate both rails was a wye or loop configuration.

I prefer two blocks on my loops (using the common rail approach), with the insulators coordinated with the cross over switches. This way, I can stop the outer loop train on 1st block, and bring the inner loop train on to the outer loop on the 2nd of the two outer loop blocks, thus creating a 3rd loop, or visa versa.

Again, not my intention to get off topic, but I am very interested in learning any pitfalls of common rail approach to block controls.

 

this site explains what can happen with common rail wiring Model Railroading with Digital Command Control the biggest problem is a possible short circuit between power supplies even if not using dcc.

 

Thank you! Those are simple to understand descriptions.

now, back on topic...