# Proper use of Easements



## Nutz-n-Bolts (Aug 12, 2010)

I am hard at work planning the first portion of the out door layout. I've heard many of you endorse the use of easements on the rail road. I can certainly see the benefit of using them but have some questions before I get too carried away.


Let me preface with saying that the minimum diameter on my line will be 12 Foot. I am modeling in 1:20.3 scale, and may run some larger locos at some point. My questions as to easements are these:


1. Does every bend in the track get them. Or if the turn is say less than 30 degrees are they not needed?

2. If the radius of the bend is very large, dose this negate the use of easements? 

3. Did real railroads use them every where or just on the mains? ( was this different between narrow and standard gages? )

Easements certainly create a lot more work plotting points and laying out, but I'm willing to take the time to do it right. I just don't want to go nuts putting them in places were there may be little benefit. 


Thanks Guys !


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

1. Yes, ideally. 
2. no 
3. usually on the main line, not sidings or yards (but I defer to people that know more about prototype trackwork than me). 

If you are running longer locos, and have the room to add easements, it will help operation and will look nicer too. 

Normally, the space used up in easements is traded for a larger curve when things get tight in our outdoor model railroads. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

I had an interesting thought on easements awhile ago.. 

lets say your curve is going to be a moderately sharp 8-foot diameter.. 
so you use an easement of 20 foot diameter to "ease into" the sharper 8-foot diameter. 
(in reality the easement isnt usually one set radius..it should start "wide" then gradually "sharpen" into the main curve) 
but for the sake of argument, lets say you use a 20 foot diameter curve to ease into the sharper curve.. 
now you have a nice and gradual easement (20 foot diameter) easing into the 8-foot diameter curve.. 

Well then..what if your *entire curve* is 20 foot diameter then?? 
must you then use something like 30 or 40 foot diameter as an easement?? 
I would say no..why bother? 
if your entire curve is going to be "that wide"..the easement itself might as well be as wide as the total curve.. 
(which equals no easement to speak of) you are using a nice and wide 20 foot diameter easement for a 20 foot diameter curve!  

2. If the radius of the bend is very large, dose this negate the use of easements? 

I would say yes.. 

if you are using 12 foot radius (24 foot diameter) 
I see no need for creating an easement on such a wide curve.. 
your "main curve" is already much "wider" than what most people would use as an easement!  

Im doing 14 foot diameter curves on my railroad..im not bothering with any easements.. 
(mainly because it messes up my track planning!  
For 8 foot diameter or sharper, I would use an easement.. 
but when you are getting up into the 20 foot diameter range, and larger, I dont see much point to it.. 

Scot


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

From the original post:

Let me preface with saying that the minimum *diameter *on my line will be *12 Foot*. I am modeling in 1:20.3 scale, and may run some* larger locos *at some point. 


12 foot diameter. That's 6 foot radius.


Larger locos in 1:20.3 like the K series could be tight...

Greg


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

ah! I misread that..I thought he said radius.. 
(this is why I think we should start a movement to discuss curves ONLY in diameter!  
(which he did of course) but I have always been a fan of only speaking in diameter) 

well ok..I agree 12 foot diameter is pretty sharp for 1/20.3 scale. 
easements would definately be helpful! if you can fit them in..they do create a need for more real estate though.. 
often people (like me) devise a track plan using the widest possible curve that will fit into the space, *not* factoring in easements.. 

which is better then? 
12 foot diameter with no easements? 
or 10 foot diameter with easements? 
sometimes you can only have one or the other.. 

Randy, 
what is the limiting factor on your 12 foot diameter choice? 
do you have a track plan you can post? 

Scot


----------



## Bruce Chandler (Jan 2, 2008)

I just used "natural" easements, rather than plotting everything out. I used TufBoard and let it form a curve - which gave me the decreasing radius of an easement. 









I then just fastened the flex track on top. I think no matter what your minimum radius is, an easement just makes it look better.


----------



## Nutz-n-Bolts (Aug 12, 2010)

Thanks Guys, Gregg, you say a K might be tight, and Scot, you say 12' D is tight for 1:20.3. I looked on Accucraft's site and it said 8' diameter min. I thought 12' D would be fine. I have a 1/2 acre but most of it is 45% grade, So long and narrow is what I'm tied to. Herr is another thread showing what I'm up too:

http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/118964/afv/topic/Default.aspx

Scot, as I was redrawing the bottom (big) loop with easements at every bend I went through those same processes in my head. So, I hear you. That's why I decided to post the questions. I think I may end up doing a mix.I still have lots of drawing to do.


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

with large radius', the flex track that could be used will naturally put the smallest point of the curve in the middle, making easements in the process. with smaller radius', bending out MOST of the curve and then leaving a few feet on both ends of the track will allow for easements. Let's take a 90 degree curve, the radius doesn't matter. bend the middle portion of the track out leaving about 5 feet on either end. the bend should be 60 degrees leaving 5 ft to make a 15 degree turn. that sounds sharp but it would be larger than the radius you would bend the track to. 
--JJwtrainman


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Randy, for marketing/sales reasons, manufacturers will quote the smallest curve the loco will negotiate. But often they run poorly on those curves. Also, you want to plan for the future. 

Also realize that coupler swing from body mount couplers can be a problem. In a standard gauge example, you might get a SD70 around an 8 foot curve, but couple a boxcar to it and see what happens, it literally "throws" the box car off the tracks because of the overhang of the loco... 

Likewise in 1:20.3, even if you don't have derailments, the load on the loco and wear on it will increase... another thing to remember is that curves basically act like grades with more drag, add a curve on top of a steep grade... more running problems. (You did mean 4 to 5 % grades, right? not 45% !!). 

Another point is that just the body overhang can wreak havoc with abutments, bridges, portals, switch stands, and as TOC found out with the Bachmann K, his turntable structure was too narrow to allow the loco to enter. 

going from a 4' radius to a 6' will make a difference, but those are definitely not "wide" curves. 

Hopefully that is a good set of examples to explain my comments. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## chuck n (Jan 2, 2008)

I am running Bachmann (Connie and K-27) and Accucraft (K27,28) on a layout with Aristocraft 10' diameter curves with out any problem. My 1:20.3 rolling stock looks OK entering and leaving these curves, but my 1:29 USAT streamliners and Aristo heavyweights look a little funny. If I had the room, I would add a larger diameter curve to the beginning and end as easements. Once they are in the curve, they are OK.

Chuck


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

The primary purpose of easements is to "ease" the wheels into a curve. If you go directly from a tangent to a curve, the truck has to swing HARD into the curve, and it puts excessive pressure on the flanges and rails to the outside of the curve. With an easment, gentle pressure is placed on the truck, or drives, and the flanges are gently pushed in the direction you want them to go, as opposed to the direction they want to go. (Newton's Laws of Motion) 

There is a formula for computing easements, but nobody I know of in Model Railroading uses it, most people use exactly the method Bruce uses and I would highly recommend it as well. I would also add that having that easement going into that bridge will prevent a lot of equipment from taking chunks out of the bridge superstructure. 

One of the things I've noticed with model railroaders is that we tend to be minimalists. There may be a very legitimate reason to use a 12 foot diameter curve at one end of the layout, and I have no issues with that, What bothers me is when MR's make EVERY curve on the railroad 12 foot diameter. If you have room for a 20 foot diameter curve, use it! Or even a 40 foot diameter curve! That's why I use flex track exclusively, simply measure the width of the space you have to use, and go from there. 

That said, to me, a 10 foot curve with easements is far better than a 12 foot curve without them. I will tell you that a Bachmann K-27 coupled to the back of an AMS shorty caboose will NOT have problems entering or leaving a 10 foot diameter curve without easements. I don't know about an Accucraft, but I would suspect it would need a bit more curvature. 

But who knows, at some point, someone may make a plastic/cast metal K-37, so, why not leave our options open? 

Sidings designed for medium or high speed will have easements going into and out of the curves that match the easments of the turnouts going into them. For instance, if you have a #14 turnout, the reverse curve into the siding will mimic the radius and easement of the #14 turnout, almost exactly like a crossover without the extra points. On the protrotype, this would require a 30 mph speed restriction. 

As Greg implies, an industrial spur or siding with a 10mph speed restriction would not require easements. 

I actually asked a retired engineer why the speeds on sidings were so low on the prototype, and as he pointed out, if you go into a siding, you're going to stop at the other end, otherwise, there's no point (pun intended!) on sending you into the siding. And since Approach speed is 30mph, that's the normal restriction. He also pointed out that going into one end of a siding, and out the other end without stopping, with the associated braking, curves, points, and the possiblity of a derailment because of all of those factors, will usually get a dispatcher some time in the boss's office. 

Another UP engineer told me that most dispatchers completely forget that sidings exist (complained about it, actually) and they usually just go down the track and follow the train in front of them. (He also wasn't real happy about the Restricted Proceed rule, but that's another story...) 

Thanks, Robert


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

hmmm..I didnt think of this until now, but I might have created easements without even trying!  

I laid out my ROW by marking the center of the circle with a tent stake, then used string and another spike to scratch the arc into the ground. 
the track plan was made *without* easements specifically..14 foot diameter curves going into a straight section, no easements purposly planned. 

But then I used PVC pipe to lay out the ROW on the ground..staking it down as I went along. 
Uprights for ladder roadbed will then be placed right on the center line of the pipe..pipe will be gradually taken up 
as ladder roadbed progresses.. 

I think the natural curvature of the pipe has given me very slight natural easements! 
cool..I didnt even plan that! 

The curve merges into a straight section in the lower left of the photo..the straight section is along the 4x4 piece of lumber:










Scot


----------



## Nutz-n-Bolts (Aug 12, 2010)

Wow, Lots of great advice. One thing I had not considered is body mounted couplers not working on a manufacturers minimum. I also find Robert's comments on sidings quite interesting too. Definitely seems to me that easements of some form are needed most places. Greg, I did mean 45% grade referring to the slope of my property. (there is a good over all pic of the yard in the other thread) The rail road will be laid out perpendicular to the hill. I for see 1.5 to 2 % grades on the line. Every green topo line in the drawing from the other post represents 2 foot in elevation change. This is why at both ends I'm still leaning towards a 12 foot diameter, but I'm definitely going to use easements on them. They really don't seem to add that much extra diameter. As for the K's they would be the exception, but I do want them to be able to negotiate the whole railroad trouble free. I don't see my self with one soon but you never know what someone will stop by with. In fact my only loco right now is a Ruby!


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

What are Easements? Is that the space on either side of the track? 

JJ


----------



## Scottychaos (Jan 2, 2008)

JJ,
an easement is a section of track that very gradually transitions from a straight section of track to a curved section.
rather than having straight, then suddenly jumping into the sharp curve..the easement "eases" the train into the curve..

here is a good diagram I just found that explains it, and shows what it looks like:

Easements for model railroad track.

You can make an easement with sectional track, like in the diagram, or use flex track to make it very smooth and gradual.

Scot


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

JJ, 
Sitting in your truck.... as easement is the distance you travel from straight, as you turn the wheel until you stop turning and travel around the curve. It's a spiral that goes from straight to the desired radius. 
How fast you turn the wheel determines the tightness of the spiral. 

Without an easement you would travel straight and the suddenly crank the wheel over to the desired radius. Might throw you out of your truck! 
With flex track it's easy to add, with sectional track the larger radius mimics an easement, without being one. 

Clear as mud yet?


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Actually John, an interesting fact is that most roads, and definitely freeways, are built without easement/spirals. 

The thing that was determined was if there was an easement/spiral, it took constant change in the steering wheel, to follow the changing curvature. Most freeways are constructed like throwing a piece of sectional track between 2 straight pieces, you hit the curve, adjust the steering wheel, and hold it constant through the curve. 

Interesting, but it makes sense for drivers. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Interresting, but irrelevant as you are still traveling as you adjust the steering wheel... there will still be a spiral distance traveled between two set raduii from 0 to whatever. The lanes are wide enough to contain the easement. 
Only at rest can you change from tangent to curve without describing an easement. Any forward/reverse motion while adjusting the steering will describe a spiral. 

I s'pose it's to fool the motorist's eye and simplify the skills needed, but at the same time savy drivers are using the whole lane or two to ease into curves and lessen the final radius.... cutting corners.... 

Don't look at the chuckhole if you want to avoid it, look beside it. 

John


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Dunno why you said irrelevant... try it next time you are on the freeway, as soon as you hit a curve, turn the wheel into the curve. once you are in the curve, you can leave it where it is. 

It does not require continuous motion while you are in the curve. That is the difference, and apparently it does make it easier for most people. 

I just thought it was interesting. 

Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Because you are moving foreward and turning the steering wheel vs. snapping it to the right curvature. During the time you turn the wheel you are describing a spiral, thus an easment from one constant curve to the next. Constant radius is after an easement, not instead of.... that's all. I agree that it's easier to hold a steady curve, but that's not about an easement. 

I looked at the 33 miles I covered each way today and saw many easements... the only right angle turns were in a city grid. 
I've driven across the country and don't recall seeing a 'sectional track' freeway. I see easements leading into and out of constant curves. I think Deadman's curve was a tightening spiral.... that's irrevelent too! 

Have a green scotch for me, hold the green. 

John


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

http://www.tpub.com/inteng/11.htm 

TYPES OF HORIZONTAL CURVES 

There are four types of horizontal curves. They are described as follows: 

1. SIMPLE. The simple curve is an arc of a circle (view A, fig. 11-2). The radius of the circle determines the sharpness or flatness of the curve. 

2. COMPOUND. Frequently, the terrain will require the use of the compound curve. This curve normally consists of two simple curves joined together and curving in the same direction (view B, fig. 11-2). 

3. REVERSE. A reverse curve consists of two simple curves joined together, but curving in opposite direction. For safety reasons, the use of this curve should be avoided when possible (view C, fig. 11-2). 

_4. SPIRAL. The spiral is a curve that has a varying radius. It is used on railroads and most modem highways. Its purpose is to provide a transition from the tangent to a simple curve or between simple curves in a compound curve (view D, fig. 11-2)._ 

Thanks, Robert


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Yes, I have been researching the highway application. Spirals are most often used on onramps / exits... onramps normally have a decreasing radius to allow the car to accelerate. Offramps are (naturally) done the other way, broadest at the highest speed, tightest at the end. 

But I was talking about the main part of the highway... take a look next time you drive a freeway and make your own decision. There's no doubt that while in the curve, it's constant. The approaches and exits are the point we are talking about. 

John may be right that there are "easements" ... I need to find more specifics.. more curious now... 

Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

OMG!!! 

"John may be right that there are "easements"" 

I dare you to sit in your car at any speed and snap the steering 15 degrees or more... you can't, it takes time to move the wheel. During that time you describe an arc of varying degrees. 
I wouldn't want to be your passenger! Oh vey the Whiplash! 

The only way to do what you said above would be to stop at each curve reset your steering and then move forward, stop, straighten your wheels and continue.... 

Some things I do understand..... 

John


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I have a sports car, and that's how I drive though John! At least my passengers will say I snap the steering wheel! 

ha ha ha! 

I am still interested in the "specs" the designers use, I guess I have to hunt down a design book. 

Greg


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

I did a little reading, and the earliest high speed roads used easments, and roads with very sharp curves use them. I would say most of the Interstates don't, and the one Engineering manual I found on the DOT's website said they're not used in new construction. I would say that most people drive like they're are easments, you can kind of tell by looking at the wear on the road surface and the worn painted on foglines at the beginning of most curves. 

I've driven semis for over 30 years, and I've often wondered if the nice folks that design highways have ever actually driven on one. Going into a curve with a semi can be quite a chore, given that you need to stay to the outside to keep the trailer from dragging off the curve to the inside, and most four-wheelers like to cut the corners to the inside. And most of them are pretty unclear as to why they almost got ran over when they crossed the center line to "draft" the curve. 

The first accident I ever had in a semi was a guy who tried to pass me on the inside of a right turn. I smashed his BMW up against a telephone pole and broke it in half. Both of them. Witnesses said the guy actually went up on the sidewalk trying to get around me before I smooshed him. 

So, basically, some roads use easements, depending on age, some don't. It's pretty clear this one doesn't: 










And it's just as obvious that this one does: 










So, it just depends. 

Robert


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

What I thought you were talking about was parts o f your property that you can't build on that is reserved for future streets and untilities.

I have a 50 FT eastment on the North and East side of my property.

Thanks for explaining what you were talking about. 

JJ


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

Narrow gauge railroads may or may not have used easements. I've got ICC valuation maps for the East Broad Top's entire right-of-way, and they do not indicate easements of any kind. They went from tangent (straight) track directly into the curves. Other narrow gauge lines I've ridden seem to be built very similarly, or if there is an "easement" into the curve, it's over a very short distance--less than one rail length. Of course, narrow gauge trains aren't exactly "high speed" rail. If the rails are bent into the curve simply by flexing the rail, it will inherently make its own easement. If the crews bend the rail using a bender, then it's likely they start with small bends then gradually increase into the curve to get the "proper" bend for the curve. Such an easement wouldn't necessarily show up "on paper," but would physically manifest itself during the construction. 

In the garden, our curves are significantly tighter than those on the prototype (Uintah Ry notwithstanding). Easements are advantageous for aesthetic reasons above anything else. Because our curves are so tight, we can really see when a train enters a curve as the cars start to swing into the curve. (The tighter the curve, the more acute the angle between each car.) An easement allows the train to enter the curve much more gently, so the transition from straight to curve is less jarring on the eye as each car enters the curve. Generally speaking, our trains can handle very abrupt transitions thanks to uber-deep flanges compared to the prototype. From an operational standpoint, I'm sure there's an advantage to easements, but as others have posted, to what extent? If you're running 10' or larger radius (20' dia.), I'm not sure an easement gains you near as much as it would if you're using 5' radius (10' dia.). 

You don't mention whether you're planning on using flex track or sectional track. Personally, I'd never use sectional track. It's far too limiting. Flex track allows you to build in easements no matter what your curves, so they're there almost automatically. Go out into the garden with a garden hose and just lay it down where you think you might want to have track. Any way you lay out the garden hose, you can lay your flex track to match. 

Oh, and 6' radius (12' diameter) is no problem for a 1:20.3 K-##. Both Bachmann and Accucraft will handle them with great aplomb. (At least they do on my line.) From an aesthetic standpoint, I think 6' is probably the minimum radius you'll want to use with 1:20 equipment. I've got one loop that's 6' radius, the other 5'. Trains look just a bit too "tight" on the 5' radius, but look fine on the 6'. I also occasionally get a bit of bogging down when the trains go around the 5' radius that I don't get on the 6', especially when my trains start getting to 6 or 7 cars long. 

Later, 

K


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm thinking that the D&RGW's narrow gauge most likely used easements, simply because they were a standard gauge railroad. Originally, the plan was for the narrow gauge to be standard gauged, and indeed, except for the San Juan's, for the most part, it was. By the time the narrow gauge was "modernized" in the 1920's and later, the engineers (civil), track crews, and even train service employees were interchangable amongst the gauges. 

Thanks, Robert


----------



## steam5 (Jun 22, 2008)

Posted By John J on 18 Mar 2011 12:33 AM 
What I thought you were talking about was parts o f your property that you can't build on that is reserved for future streets and untilities.

I have a 50 FT eastment on the North and East side of my property.

Thanks for explaining what you were talking about. 

JJ 

Me to!

I thought they were called transition curves?

Thanks
Alan


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Transition curves, spiral curves, easements, French curves, I've heard all of those terms. Funny thing is, when I googled "easement" to find the above pics, I got both "right-of-way" easements, and spiral curves. I've driven the first road many, many times, and I knew it didn't use "spiral curves" and it's a pain-in-the-patootie to drive in a semi because of it. It's tough to turn the wheel fast enough to keep up with the curves. There's a lot of rollovers on those curves as a result. 

Robert


----------



## JackM (Jul 29, 2008)

I have to disagree with the idea that highway curves take a certain arc and stick with it, certainly in the NorthEast. We have many, many on ramps and off ramps that are "diminishing radius curves". I presume the idea is to get the driver to slow down because he's in a curve, then tighten up the curve because of space considerations. Hopefully, the driver will know enough to slow down gradually as the curve gets tighter (merely taking foot off gas pedal will be sufficient). Few interchanges on the NY state Thruway are consistent arcs; most make like Archie Bell & the Drells and do the "Tighten Up". 

Try the ramps on I-81 in Pennsylvania. Some of them will challenge your Bugatti Veyron. 

JackM


----------



## DKRickman (Mar 25, 2008)

Getting back to the original point of easements on a railroad, I would always recommend their use if possible. Prototype practices have been covered, and operation has been touched upon. Two additional points, though: 

1. Operation - Body mounted couplers do not operate poorly on tight curves because of the curves (unless they're so tight that the cars hit each other). They operate poorly because the cars are in wildly different radii - one straight, one in a sharp curve. An easement will reduce or eliminate that problem. 

2. Appearance - Layouts with no easements - and especially those with tight curves - tend to make the trains look like a tinplate three rail layout, they way they lurch suddenly into a curve. Typical trains do not lurch, they transition gracefully into a curve. The difference is stunning, and well worth the extra effort in my opinion. It simply makes the trains look a lot less toy-like.


----------



## Nutz-n-Bolts (Aug 12, 2010)

Funny how some subjects seen to go down a different "Road"[/b]







ha ha ha . Well instead of referring every on to the old post, here is the latest track plan:







You can see the three areas that will have the 12' diameter curves. Kevin, that was great insight as usual and I will be using flex track everywhere. I'm definitely going to use easements every where, except the tiny jogs from the Y up to the loop at the far end. The lower (large) loop will be completely level for "wind it up and let it go" style running so I think easements will be very beneficial there. I've decided to quit agonizing over drawing every easement exactly in my drawing and create them on the fly as so many of you have suggested. 

I'm going home to a bobcat that I am going to use to finis leveling a few areas and fine tune the yard this weekend.







I can't wait to finish so I can start laying things out. Thanks again for all the great advise!


----------



## CliffyJ (Apr 29, 2009)

Great thread, Randy. 

Your site plan looks vary similar to mine, but my house is turned 90 degrees CW. How are you creating your drawings? 

You're speaking to a fascinating technicality of geometry that has bitten me in my day job. In my industry, we call these easements "clothoid" curves or spirals. Here's an article that gives good overview, in case you've not seen it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Track_transition_curve 

As to my non-day job, meaning my layout planning, my curves will be tighter than yours, and I'll be counting on the rail bending (with flex track) to help me work my transitions out. 

===Cliiffy


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Jack, I specifically mentioned that on ramps and off ramps are normally done with easements (spiral curves to a highway engineer)... 

It's the main freeways that seem to have no easement into or out of the curve, and they certainly (newer ones) have a constant curvature through the curve. 

It's interesting the difference between railroads (where easements make everything better) and freeways (where constant turning of the steering wheel is bad). 

Greg


----------



## rdamurphy (Jan 3, 2008)

Yeah, but Greg, anything that makes driving a car harder is automatically bad. Most people can barely manage as it is... 

I did some screenshots for MSTS, showing the difference between crossovers using constant radius turnouts, and crossovers using correctly transitioned turnouts, if anyone is interested... 

Thanks, Robert


----------



## Nutz-n-Bolts (Aug 12, 2010)

Hi Cliffy, 
That was a great Wiki article. I hadn't thought of researching there. I really appreciated that properly drawn color coded image. I have been following your thread with great interest too. Your 3D drawings are fantastic. I don't think I have the ambition to to tray that with my drawings. I have been playing with several methods of drawing easements at work and home. I can't take credit for the main topo drawing. I had to have that done for a permit and the engineer was kind enough to let me have a DXF file of it. I've separated the contours, structures and track in to separate layers, and added the garage addition that I'm just finishing the drywall in. I've been using a program called Turbo Cad. (Mac Version). It was very inexpensive, only $150 dollars and it is fully functional 3D software. I haven't done lots of work in it yet, but I'm very pleased with it. Much cheaper than auto cad and I don't have to run windows on my Mac to use it. Be sure to check out my other thread http://www.mylargescale.com/Community/Forums/tabid/56/aff/11/aft/118964/afv/topic/Default.aspx It has a bit more back story. 


I think it's easy to get carried away trying to plan and plot every point precisely. Unfortunately it may be near impossible to get it to come out the same in life as on paper. I guess I'll see how it goes soon enough.


----------



## Dan Pantages (Jan 2, 2008)

Use easements! My ruling diameter is 24’6” my next tight curve is a 25’ 6” diameter. The rest of my curves are between 33’ diameter and 52’ diameter and I have easements on all of them. It looks better and makes for smoother running. 

I dislike using diameter; radius makes more sense to me. To each his own, use what you want but make sure when you write it or say it, you don’t get the two mixed up.


----------

