Hi all, I've been trying out different free track design programs but, it seems like each company for track falls short in one way or another. I'm looking at Atlas 55 for the realistic look of it but, it doesn't seem to have the cross overs that I would like to add to the layout. Or maybe the free software just doesn't add all the track that is available. It does have the curved switches that are going to be a must but, kato and peco have different appealing track with other options that atlas doesn't have. Do people use both and make them work or just make their own sections? I wouldn't use code 55 with say code 80. I'm just thinking of different suppliers. I already have some kato unitrack and atlas 55 flextrack and curves. I like the kato unitrack because it has the ballist but, it's grey and doesn't look real at all. I would rather use cork and have it quieter. What are your thoughts?Growler
This is my first time using Unitrack. I have a test loop hot glued to a piece of 3/4 plywood. I dont hear any noise...other then an occasional growling locomotive when using Unitrack. I think the notion that the plastic roadbed makes lots of noise...is highly overstated. Putting real ballast over Unitrack seems to be a simple task. JMO...thnxs
That's good to hear. I was worried that the plastic would give off a rough plastic sound with the cars running over it.
Mine's always been a true mixed bag and it's gotten worse. Three layouts; one large and two small, and all are a mix of everybody's C80 and now Peco C55. When it comes to 'final design' on a layout don't be afraid to actually buy some components and make a full-size plan on taped-up sections of oversized paper (drafting, kraft paper, whatever). That also makes an excellent template for cutting scenery and roadbed if you go that way. I literally drew my entire layout 1:1 full size in the room it was going into on kraft paper (on the floor) to see if the plan was actually going to work - taped on switches, had building footprints, everything. The tighter the design is the more important this gets. Another thing I've done for track planning (particularly Peco) is to use .JPG's of the track sections, correct them to actual size, paste them in Word to the right dimensions, print them out, and tape together components to see if they will fit. Nothing against either scale drawings or planning software, but there's something to be said about 1:1 design to see if you really like what you're doing. The classic one is the out-of-production yet HIGHLY useful old Trix curved switches. A true lifesaver, difficult to find, and not in anybody's design library. Same thing with Peco SL1's, and a whole lot of oddball Shinohara stuff made in the 70's that is still floating around, like some epic double crossovers. The biggest 'mistake' I see is assuming parallel double track spacing based on the UNMODIFIED turnouts. You can certainly modify anybody's turouts with a saw and solder to fit 15' track centers, or even tighter, but the track planning guides (computer and paper based) would have you believe otherwise. Only a real switch in your hand will teach you that. I've been accused of 'impossible' track plans because they couldn't be replicated on a computer.
I am pretty surprised, Atlas has a lot of crossings 2040 11.25° CROSSING 11.50 2041 22.5° CROSSING 11.50 2042 30° CROSSING 11.50 2043 45° CROSSING 11.50 2044 60° CROSSING 11.50 2045 90° CROSSING 11.50 I found this at the Atlas site under Catalogue. These are for Code 55 track size. I did not look at the Kato site. Are there more available there?
Sorry I meant cross overs. At least not listed in my free trial of AnyRail. They have the turn outs that are curved which are really nice but, then Kato doesn't list any in the trial. I'm trying to use the program to see what I can come up with. I just did one from Kato that I'm pretty happy with. It only took about 13 different tries too. lol Though I'm getting confused with angle and radius again. I'm using a 45 degree angle and mostly 12.4 inch radius. Is this correct for the larger engines or do I have it backwards? Do I need bigger radius?
I've found a couple articles that might help me with the curvature of my layout for larger steam. Is arc the same as angle?
This is not true for Tomix and Kato tracks. The tracks are designed around a completely modular sensibility. The average Japanese home does not have the space for a permanent layout. Japanese Clubs also do not have layouts either. The clubs will rent a gymnasium and set up on the floor. They will set up in the morning runs some trains and then disassemble it in the evening. There is no time to customize track pieces for these temporary layouts. So all the tracks will form very predictable units. Tomix spacing is 33 mm. Kato is 37mm. There is the allowance for station platforms of one and a half tracks, but that is as out of wack as they get. There is no reason not to mix tracks from different companies. They all have a gauge of 9mm. Kato even sells an adapter track to mate with the Number One track in Japan, Tomix. The code differences can be overcome but they can be a pain. Many people will use smaller code tracks on branches and sidings.
