Help, I’m not happy with my design !!!!

I would like to ask for some help, or some kind of advise. You always get good answers and suggestions on this board, so hopefully I can get some now.

For the last year or so, I have been working on my very first layout. At the time of the design, I really liked it, but now I’m not so sure.

The initial idea was to have a 1½ level layout, where I would use the center peninsula plus 2 walls as the helix, and then have point to point operation.

You can see the current state of the layout at http://photos.yahoo.com/jkristia here in the layout folder. I had almost completed the mainline when I decided to replace the code 80 track with the new code 55 track from Atlas. All the tracks at the lower level is replaced, and I am now at the point where to design the main yard and the end yard. But all the time I felt something was wrong and now I think I know what it is.

1, I don’t like the upper level, it’s blocking too much of the view to the lower level. Also I don’t like the layout design, but that is not a problem to fix.

2, I don’t like to waste a lot of space on the peninsula on a mountain. I like mountains, and still want them on the layout, but I don’t want to waste a 4X10 area.

3, I’m not sure I like the point – point operation, but I can’t tell for sure yet, since I haven’t tried to actually run trains. Only a few test runs.

Basically, the only thing I like about my current layout, is the benchwork .

Here is what I think I want.
1, only one level. Maybe raise the level about 8-10 inches, but leave the benchwork as is.
2, a twice around the wall mainline, single track with some passing and industries along the line.
3, have a main yard against the bottom wall (bottom when looking at the picture that is ).
4, have another smaller yard on the peninsula, and a lot of industry. I would prefer that the 2 yards are on different levels, so the train would have to travel around the room once before it comes to the next yard.
5, keep the left side reserved for mountain area.

Oh, and it’s N scale, and I want to model modern.

Yep, that is what I think I want. Or maybe I should just leave it alone for a couple of weeks, and then hope I will like it better when I come back.

What would you do?

Thanks.
Jesper

[ 19 April 2002, 03:43: Message edited by: jkristia ]

 

Jesper,

As one grows in the hobby, one's tastes in track plans change. So you have outgrown your original plan that you thought was just terrific. This happens to many people so you aren't alone. My suggestion is to give up your original track plan and move on, your tastes have changed, and probably for the better.

Point to point - some in the hobby feel that point to point is the most "sincere" way to run your trains. I prefer both a point to point style with an option for continuous running. There is nothing wonderful and sacred about a point to point plan. If you want to run trains when you are alone, and want to have some continuous running trains, thats your choice, nothing wrong with it.

I couldn't access your site to look at your plan. It sounds like you have a fair size room for an N scale layout. Remember you can use underneath your main level as your staging. You will only need about 6 inches of clearance to access it.

I would plan on doing a couple of more plans before you finally proceed. Put the whole layout up for grabs. I bought wood and started building a layout. I decided I didn't like it (out grew it) and the wood is still beside the present layout I am building. I am much happier with what I am doing now. I use the other wood to help build this one, but I even changed the method I was using.

I am not an L girder fan, especially in N scale. N scale layouts don't have to be a bullet proof as HO layouts so other methods of construction can be used. I don't like L girder because it eats up a lot of vertical space, making staging under your layout more of a challenge. I used L shaped brackets attached to the wall, with wood on top (you could use foam). This gave me much more room underneath for my staging.

What I would do is work on your benchwork shape first, to maximize the amount of room you have, then think about the mainline only. Proceed with construction, while planning where the rest of the layout is going to go (yard, passing sidings, interchange, industries, etc).

Also take into consideration how wide your aisles are going to be, and if you are going to have a walk in plan (which I recommend - no duck unders or access hatches).

Although it is a bit of a bummer to stop what you have been doing, I think you will gain more in the long run.

 

Just fixed the link, so now it should point to the pictures I have in photos.yahoo.com.

Sorry about that.
Jesper

 

I just went to your site. I didn't realize you had the layout as completed as you have, tougher to tear out...lol.

What are the dimensions of the area. Are the grids one foot (I suspect not) or what are the grid dimensions?

 

yes it's 1 foot grid, and the size of the room is 15x12.5.
The "current-benchwork" picture shows the L-Girder benchwork as it is right now, and I would rather not have to change that. Maybe I could change it so it goes all the way to the bottom left corner. The reason I did it like this was because I had planned that area for the main yard.

Jesper

 

Jesper,

First off - there is nothing wrong with making major changes before a layout is finished if you are not happy with what is turning out. If you 'push on' you run the risk of building a layout you won't like and won't operate.

IIRC - the upper deck bits you built were on a domino style - 2x4 foot sections. You could probably be able to incorporate these into a new plan - remember this is one of the biggest advantages of that style of construction.

If you are going back to the drawing board - using the existing benchwork is a good idea, but don't get to attached to that idea - if a change to the benchwork will give you a great plan - by all means, make the change.

The big 4x10 area: put a backdrop down the middle so you have two 2x10 sections - the main line from the coal on the lower right should curve around the saw mill area and run on the 'south' side of the backdrop, then curve clockwise to the north side of the backdrop - the 4x10 area is then divided into two scenes.

 

Jesper, I'd be happy to help you with a new trackplan, but I do have one question for you. When you say you want to utilize existing benchwork, which trackplan on your webpage does this represent? I guessed it would be the very first one, but it always pays to double check! I look forward to working with you! :-D

 

OK, I have made a new track plan, and I think it's something close to this that I want. Don't be too critical on the layout of the sidings etc. it's just a quick drawn draft, just to give an idea.

I have decided to get rid of the upper level. The upper level are two 2x8 modules, with scenery almost done on only one of them, and no scenery at all on the other one, not even any switch machines installed.

Currently the height of the lower level is only 38”, but by removing the upper level, I can raise it by 10”, but not more than that, it’s limited by the sloped ceiling where the stairs comes up from below. Actually, I just realized that if I raise the elevated part (paper mill) 8”, I can keep the backdrop as it is, that would give me 10” of backdrop above the track, which I think is enough.

The only place I can see there might be a “reaching” problem is at the right side, next to the grain elevator, but maybe I can tweak it a little bit when first I’m putting down the track.

But what do you think of the overall plan?

You can see the trackplan at http://photos.yahoo.com/jkristia, one_level_plan.jpg

Any comments are appreciated.

Thanks
Jesper

 

Jesper,
The new plan looks good. You don't have much passing track (I know this is a first draft you are presenting). You can staging beneath you layout with an oval helix down using the peninsula area. You don't have to have a lot of clearance for the staging. I would have the staging track towards the front of the layout and only about 8 or 9 inches wide. This way it isn't too deep for access.

 

Jasper

since you're modeling in N scale I'd really re-think the idea of going to code 55. Maybe just set up some track and switches on a piece of foam and give it a try.
My complete trackwork is made using Peco code 55 flextrack and Peco code 55 switches. It looks outstanding but it's a hell of work to ballast. If you don't take care your trains will run on the ballast instead of the rails. Also the switches are almost to tiny. Takes some time to get them properly aligned so not causing any derailments. I have to admit that I don't know the Atlas tracks. But out of my experience I'd never use anything else than flextrack.
Also code 55 could cause difficulties with out-of-gauge wheels. (It's not possible to run European equippment on code 55 because of higher flanges).

Also make sure that there are sufficient power feeders. I user power feeders at almost every (!!!) rail joint.

 

Hi all, and thanks for all the comments.

I'm still playing with the new trackplan, but I don't think the "final" plan will be much different from the new one I proposed, of course that is until you actually start laying the track

I am not planning on having any staging area, I know I could have one in the 4x10 area as you mentioned Rick, but I think it will be too complicated to build an oval helix under there, and keep enough clearance for tortoise switch machines etc. But maybe instead I could have a couple of tracks under the main yard, hmm.

Also, I am planning on using Atlas c55 flextrack exclusively and have a mix of handbuild and atlas #5 turnouts. So far I have build 4 turnouts, and the last one took about 2-3 hours to build. I know it would be much faster just to buy all the turnouts, but I actually enjoy building them (but lets see when I have to build 50 of them, then maybe I change my mind )

What I have done until now is to add power feeder on every other section of flextrack and to all sidings etc. It seems like it's sufficient, but of course I have only done some test runs. I do plan on adding a lot of powerfeedes, the more the better I think.

Now I have another question regarding building turnouts in place, but maybe I should start another thread for that question. The question is, if you build a turnout in place (N scale with pc ties), do you glue the ties to cork roadbed, or do you build it directly on top of the plywood. I am thinking when building a yard ladder ? Can you draw the track centerline on cork ? I tried with a pencil and it wasn't really easy.

Another problem I have is, I find it really difficult to align the tortuise switch machines properly (had same problem with the rix I tried, seems like I just don't know how to install those machines ). Even if I try to be really carefull when I install it, it always seems to pull the throwbar either forward or backward, instead of straight from side to side, what am I doing wrong. OK, that was another question and maybe that should have it's own thread too.

Jesper

 

I have read somewhere that you can glue down a paper template of the turnout on the cork in the proper place and then glue your ties to the paper template. I have not tried it, * yet *, so I don't know how well this works. I do plan to build all of my own turnouts for my new layout. So I will be asking a few questions in the future.

 

Jasper

I would recommend using Woodlands track bed (foam typ) as a base for your track. If mounted direct to plywood is really noisy. Also cork gets hard and occasionally cracks if getting older. I glued to foam track bed to the plywood and glued the track on the foam. This provides almost silent operation. Since this is a flexible construnction it allows track to compensat for stretching and shrinking of the plywood construnction.

To mount the switch machines in the correct angles is not that difficult. There's this small tie-like piece in your switch to which the switch machine is connected. (sorry, don't know the right word for that. english is not my mothers tongue). Now take something straight and place it exactly on top of this moving bar on your rails (parallel not angled). Now drill two small holes 1-2" left and right from your switch exactly in line with the moving tie. If you look from underside the plywood you'll find this two holes. Draw a line between them using a pen. Now you can easily adjust your switching machine.

Sorry if you don't understand my post. I really try hard to find the correct words. As stated english is not my mothers tongue.

 

That actually sound like a really good idea to mark the throwbar with 2 small holes. I didn't think of that at all, I will try that next time I get to install those !@#$ machines .

About the roadbed, I was thinking to try and use these sheets of (some kind of soft material) that are used for suspended ceilings, and put that on top of 1/2" plywood. And then use cork for the mainline, but maybe the woodland roadbed is less noisy, but also more expensive!.

And Mike, I do build the turnout on top of a paper template glued to a piece of scrap plywood. It's really not that difficult, just need a lot of patients (still, I have only build 4 until now, but I'm getting better and faster all the time).

Jesper

 

I have seen turnouts build directly on plywood, directly on cork or homasote. The method doesn't matter. In a yard, your engines aren't going to be going that fast that noise is an issue, so you can build it directly on the plywood - I have known a couple to do that.