# track design



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css); Before bringing up the discussion, I want to say that I have tried to be better with my words on this fourm. We have all heard me in the past, and i want to apologize for anything that I have said that would have hurt you in any way. my main problem is that I can't type my emotions very well. Therefore, when I have typed something that some can interpret as offensive, it is often misinterpreted and results in needless arguments. Anyways, here is the discussion:

Track planning is something that I guess many modelers enjoy, correct me if I am wrong please. But I have noticed that many people have many different types of track plans. the big three that I have noticed is continuous loop, out and back, and of course the point to point. 
So first question:

What kind of track plan do you have and why is it like that? I have a feelingthat many of us choose certain plans over another because of how we operate our railroads. So a person running live steam or battery operated might choose a walk around style for accessibly. While a person who operates from a master console might choose a plan that allows the operator to see where all the trains are in most locations.
Then the second question:
Based on what you have done with your railroads, no matter whether you plan to re build or not, what style of plan would you go with on your next railroad? It could be any style of track plan, the three mentioned above, or a combination of two or three, or a completely new style that i have missed. 

I think discussions like this can help new modelers better understand the pros and cons of different types of plans. Feel free to add to anything I forgot, and download plans if it can better explain your railroad. @import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## Polaris1 (Jan 22, 2010)

I used Atlas O O Gauge Software to design my G Gauge layout 3 years ago... G Size scale factor was 1.5 times larger than O. Goal was to use the Largest min Dia 

Curves as possible in a restricted 40 ft by 35 ft area (back yard). I have been operating in the "TEST Mode" since July 4, 2011. All wires are fed however all 

blocks are no isolated yet.. Same for 8 R7 Train Line 45 switches (4 powered, 4 manual) near the Central control area. I'd like to run DC & MTH DCS initially. 

Final Min Dia was 12 ft allows MTH Big Boys & Triplexes.. etc.... 2nd other need was Rail elevation averaging 18" on the 340 ft system for my 69 year old body!! 

Elevated curved ladder setting on 188 PVC posts filled that vital need. Two Main lines was a 3rd need... & the super loop folded dogbone was need #4... 

What I want to change is NOT in the Question now since I am perfecting what I got.. I still need the 75 DEG 12 ft Dia curved Cross-over from Kansas. 

And I have to get a few (2) MTH engine power slides to not hang up on the Split Jaw 12" long expansion tracks!! And I do not know what "point to 

point" RR operations are.... A major long term Goal is to operate all types of "Power systems" & swap them out quickly for Newbies in G Gauge. 

In Green Bay, WI.... Our G Gauge Club has a lot of Members with trains but NO Track!! NO Layout..... And I see that need to help get more 

G Gauge runners Active into our Hobby.... Once the weather warms by mid April.... I have lots of outdoor Fun Work planned !!! 

PS: I just received my PIKO G Mogul & I note that I must add about 10 decorative parts.... Going to use CA Super glue on that & the tender hatch.. 


And click on my Photo at upper Left to see 4 of my year old layout photos "by using additional clicking"..


----------



## HaBi Farm (Aug 28, 2011)

In the beginning, my main objective was to have something simple and easy that I could run my trains on (battery power). 

I started with a flat piece of ground above a cement retaining wall (to help cut down on mowing problems) and put together a 80' loop on board and retaining wall roadbed. Last summer, to make it more interesting and versital, I added some sidings and a reversing loop through the middle, on gravel. This was also my first use of turnouts. 

I have lots of room to expand but it is up to 8 degrees of slope in some directions. Next I'll take off on the level with a double mainline and eventually the original loop may become a glorified siding/yard. The expansion may start as a folded dogbone type, to be able to let the trains go round and round if I feel like laying in the shade and just watching. Like a lot of my projects, the railroad will grow by whatever looks best to do next.


----------



## Brandon (Jul 6, 2011)

First advice would be to join a club if you're not already before you build another railroad. Seeing others, running your locos and cars on others railways is always useful. You might not have the room to do what you want but if a fellow club member already has what you want maybe you'll want to model something completely different. Worst case is you find out you like something they did any copy that. 

For me the biggest thing I'd consider is space. I'm putting in 900' of code 250 (likely SS but still might be aluminum rail) and that sounds massive but I have a 9' diameter curve that I can't avoid and that really will limit what I can run, but I do know others with larger minimum diameters so I can always run my bigger locomotives (if/when I get them) there. I also won't have a big yard, which I'd really like. Just seeing trains and cars lined up side by side looks great and I'll miss not having that as part of my railway. 

Some advice I can pass on from others is: 
1) try to create a layout (and storage) so you have to touch your trains the least 
2) it's better to over plan than under plan because even if you over plan you'll still run into problems you'll be working out anyway. 
3) See what others run and pay attention to clearances, or reside to the fact that you may not be able to run long passenger cars or double stacks (or narrow gauge locos) because you opted for 9" of clearance or only 6" between tracks. (My own thought is I may sacrifice being able to run a K-27 or double stacks in order to keep grade changes lower than 1.5% which only requires about 7" of clearance whereas double stacks need 9.5" and a K-27 is about 9" tall and 6.5" wide. 
4) consider the fact that track is expensive but switches are more expensive and so is maintenance and the chance of derailing. 
5) Trees are good and bad and so are neighbors vegetation. 
6) Overestimate curve radius rather than under ("letting out" curves doesn't have downsides but "pulling in" often does. 
7) Decide if you're a operator, collector, designer, or tinkerer far before you lay any track. 

Well, I think that should do it for now. Maybe more later.


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

I think the best track plans combine switching with a continuous loop, me personal favoriite is referred to as an X plan, its basicly a point to point that in plan loops over itself, the "X" where it crosses over becomes to continuous loop option. 





This is my current layout, I found the base plan online as an N scale microlayout which I scaled up and extended to include the staging yard and the transfer cassette on the left, the "ends" are the transfer cassette on the left and the small yard on the bottom, but along the way the track "loops" over itself so I can run either point to point or just let it chase its tail. There is also a wye so I can turn engines around. It was a particularly cleaver track plan (which is why I pinched it) by a German bloke. Surprisingly I havent been able to find it online since.


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

Very interesting indeed for all of you. I think that this forum has already achived one of the purposes of its existance, to show different scales, and different things people like in a railraod. 
Polaris1: Wow, good detail indeed. I am a little confused though on what scale you modeled? I saw O and G in the same paragraph and you kind of lost me there, but great post none the less. 
HaBi farm: I see in your post a great example of a railraod that is growing. I personally like the bit about starting simple. 
Brandon: You offer great advice for anyone starting out and I agree 100% with you. 
vsmithy: Judging by the paln it would take a long time to explain what the plan is. And you are right, following the tracks that plan is genious. I see a point to point, out and back, and continuos loop all in one! My only question is if this is an indoor railroad? No real reason for asking, just curious. 

After operating indoor railraods for some years, and finally gettign back to outdoors, I personally like the following railroad types and the plans associated with them: 

If I were to have a small, short line or backwoods theme, I think that I would like a loop, but with a branchline coming off the main. My reasoning here is that you can have a train go in a circle, but you can also send a logging train up the hill to various landings, or send the local along the route o the branch line. The loop I think could be operated from a console, but the branchline might need a walk around control system, so perhapes DCC? 

If I were to have a mainline railraod, I think I would like to have just a single or double main line with a few yards and a few indusrtrial spurs. I think that a walk around plan might work best becausse you would be following a long route where you have to watch for oncoming trains. R/C power or DCC I guess would be a must becuase you are following the train everywhere. 

And for some interesting operations, like a single track regional line, I think I would go with a plan like vsmith's. I like that type because you can go from point A to point B and still have a place to jsut run trains when the mood strikes. I am no expert by any means with live steam, but I guess that it could work if you are careful. I would probably try battery power though because a reverse loop would be in the plan. 

Anyone else have some input?


----------



## s-4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Hello, 
After 15 years of garden railroading I have done just about everything! My primary goal is always to make sure the railroad looks neat. It must either enhance or blend into the landscaping to some degree. After that it's all about operating style. I have a circuit of double track that I use for continuous operation of battery/electric trains. I also have point to point logging route which pairs off of the circuit track, with steep grades and a dead end. The logging line is perfectly suited for geared live steam with manual control, but can also accommodate battery trains.


----------



## Polaris1 (Jan 22, 2010)

JJW etc................... 

Since I am a Former O Gauge guy(still am)...... I used familiar O Gauge Software to model my 1/32 G Gauge layout.. It took about 20 Iterations..... 

I used the O-99 (99 in Diameter) Atlas O curves to model/simulate 12.5 ft Dia (150 in Diameter SS332) curved rail..... Factor is 1.50...... 

And yes I have three big problems now....... How to cut the grass & place to store the rolling stock.... & how to mount "elevated" buildings.. 

Lawn cutting is 18" electric mower plus Big B&D weed wacker plus a Fiskars long handle nipper... Takes 2 hours every 10 days... Have Soaker hoses 

for Flowers......Rolling stock goes in Garage on an empty 10 ft Snomo Trailer........ I have parking rail to garage wall set for two 35 ft storage tracks. 

Building placement is pushed "out of site & mind" as I have just 2 buildings to date.. 

Dennis M from GBay, WI


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I think your decision process should start with what you hope to achieve with your railroad. 

Sit back, close your eyes, and think about what you would do on your ideal days of running trains. 

Then develop a track plan that can facilitate this. 

Some examples are: 

Have a bunch of trains all running in loops, but little interaction once they are on their way. 
Run trains with your buddies, and several at the same time 
Run more than one train on the same track at a time 
run trains in opposite directions on the same track 
don't care about having them run unattended 
have to have them run unattended 
have lots of space 
have lots of money 
have a very small space 
have a limited budget 
want modern cars and locos 
want shorter trains, narrow gauge 

Don't try to come up with the solution before you have really bounded the problem. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

I liked my tri-oval so much that I pulled it up this year. Then layed the track on on the ground to see what I had and where it can go. 
2 reverse loops (rl) with a single mainline connecting. Major city at middle of lower loop w/ a passing siding, cowtown just before other rl with engine facilities and a passing stub siding. The mine spur breaks off the upper rl as does the car barn lead. 

Adding an exterior revese loop to the oval was only fun the first time, the second time turning required a back up move, so I added a wye as the rl lead. Semi perfect! Still didn't go anywhere.... 

Battery power RC and spring switches. I can either folow and set switches with a walking stick or just let 'em run. Only got 2 trains, 2 hands and 2 personalities to run em anyway.... 

Happy Rails 

John


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

I initially planned for three loops for continuous running through the garden that interconnect so any train could go anywhere. When I later got into some operations, I started adding spurs. Eventually, I automated everything and we now run 7 trains unattended (four on loops and three point to point) over about 600 feet of track. The various routes are shown in different colors.


----------



## cape cod Todd (Jan 3, 2008)

I think what makes large scale trains outdoors so exciting is the need to stick closely with the prototypes and overcome the same issues like mountains, hills, valleys and the grades associated with each. In our smaller worlds the problems to overcome or avoid might be a walkway, driveway, a tree or flower bed etc.... All these things will dictate where and how your track will be run. This also makes everyones layout different which is neat. 
I have always favored the loop for continous running because I can get a train going then let it run while I'm off in another part of the yard or I can follow it around. My yard was a challenge due to a grade drop off so I had to incorporate curving switchbacks to keep the train moving and I had to put down alot of track to overcome the severe grade. Along the route I have several sidings and a run around so I can switch some cars around. Each of these sidings are also "blocked" so I can throw a switch and kill the power to that siding and then head to another and start another train going. I also have enough power to keep 3 trains or more running at once. I like it when a train disappears from view which adds to the fun as it brings mystery. 
Here is a video I shot over the summer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spS4aTS5nwo 
I think when you design your RR you will be happy to have continous running and do set up several sidings with industries to go to. A train needs a destination. Plus some type of walk around control is good too so you can follow the train to throw the switches and work couplers unless your RR is in a tight area that is. 
Happy RRing 
Todd


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By jjwtrainman on 21 Feb 2012 11:30 AM 

vsmithy: Judging by the paln it would take a long time to explain what the plan is. And you are right, following the tracks that plan is genious. I see a point to point, out and back, and continuos loop all in one! My only question is if this is an indoor railroad? No real reason for asking, just curious. 





Yes, it is indoors, my "garden" is severly limited spacewise so I moved to the Great Indoors several years ago, I have been building, demolishing and rebuilding now for a long time, doing so each time has honing the layout and the roster down to a fine point. My roster is size-wise as small and tight as the layout, small mostly 2 axle engines with short 10' to 20' cars, narrow gauge industrial line servicing small businesses on my freelanced layout loosely based on Mexican and southwestern mining RRs. All R1 (4 ft diameter) curved track, I am a big fan of the R1 based small layout, I think something very creative and vital to large scale has been lost in translation in the rush toward the more prototypical practices now dominating the hobby today, c’est la vie.


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

Wow and I thought there was variety before! Looking now, I think that this forum post has plenty of advice for novices or beginners about what they might want in a railroad and how to design one based on that criteria. I think we have a good thing going. If I new this would be as helpful as it is, I would have put it in the beginners section. Keep on adding on guys, more plans, advice, information is always helpful. I have a couple other things I'd like to add on too: 

On top of Greg's post I'd also like to say that an important consideration is not only what you want in a railroad, but how you want to operate it. I am sure most of us agree that we all have our favorite method of control, console, live steam manual, live steam remote control, battery remote control, R/C track power, exc... 

I personally like track power and DCC, so I don't have much to say about live steam. however here are some examples of what I am trying to say: 

Some of us prefer to walk with our trains, while others prefer to sit back in a lawn chair and have all the trains at your control on a console. So, if you want to walk with your trains, obviously (at least from my point of view) designing a track plan that allows a person to submerge in the railroad and travel with the train is better for that person than following it for a few feet, then back tracking to where the train appears again. On the other end of the spectrum, a person watching trains from one point may want the railroad to show action by means of a lot of tunnels, bridges, disappearing, reappearing, railroad "magic" tricks to keep him or her occupied for hours by just watching. i suppose most of us fall between these two extremes, and hence we get the variety of railroads that we have in this hobby.


----------



## RimfireJim (Mar 25, 2009)

I think something Greg left off his list is "Operate it like a railroad" (as opposed to "running trains"). I have been interested in simulating the function of a real railroad from my earliest days in HO scale, and it still holds true for large scale that happens to be outdoors. I get bored very quickly with just running trains. My plan, admittedly as yet unbuilt, is for point-to-point logging and mining narrow gauge line line that strives for realism in purpose. The only concession to roundy-roundy running are semi-hidden turnback loops at each end which will be used only when sharing it with visitors or if I want to have a train running unattended while I work in the yard nearby. I'm just not the type to sit on the patio watching the trains run, at least not for long - I'd rather be interacting with them to move freight and passengers. 

This thread illustrates why there is no such thing as a "best" track plan - it is too individualistic to be universal.


----------



## HaBi Farm (Aug 28, 2011)

No one yet seems to have mentioned how much TIME you intend on spending on your layout. Time can be as critical an investment as money or taking up lawn space. During parts of the year, G scale is my number 1 hobby. At other times it ranks about 3rd or 4th. 

Part of designing my layout was putting it where it could be viewed from inside the house, as a form of "yard art" I suppose. It also incorporates a pre existing fish pond. That way I can enjoy the layout when it's 10 degrees below or 110 degrees above without having to go outside.


----------



## Bob in Kalamazoo (Apr 2, 2009)

Posted By HaBi Farm on 23 Feb 2012 07:28 AM 
No one yet seems to have mentioned how much TIME you intend on spending on your layout. Time can be as critical an investment as money or taking up lawn space. During parts of the year, G scale is my number 1 hobby. At other times it ranks about 3rd or 4th. 

Part of designing my layout was putting it where it could be viewed from inside the house, as a form of "yard art" I suppose. It also incorporates a pre existing fish pond. That way I can enjoy the layout when it's 10 degrees below or 110 degrees above without having to go outside. Right now it's 28 degrees, so it isn't too cold to be out, but yesterday the ground was clear and this morning we have less than an inch of icy snow all over everything. That's the way it's been this year. Not much snow and the snow we've gotten has come with ice on the rails before the snow shows up. I've only been able to plow the rails about 3 or 4 times this winter. Last winter was good, lots of snow and I would run the plow every few hours to keep the rails cleared. It was fun to watch the snow build up over the tops of the trains and yet they would keep running as long as I didn't wait too long to send the plow out again. Once I left the plow run for a few hours without any trouble and then decided to shut it down because I was going to leave for an hour or more. When I got back I tried to run it again and it was too late. We got another several inches of snow and with the high snow banks along the tracks the plow couldn't get through. So, all of this is to say, I really just like watching trains run around the tracks. I don't care that much for operations. In the summer I like to run a train while I work on the railroad and then at the end of the day just sit in the shade with an adult beverage and enjoy watching trains run. 
Bob

ps, the fish pond has ice on it so I can't see the fish, but I do keep a small pump running the keep an opening in the ice.


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

You know rimfire, I find it quite comical that we strive to make our railroads more realistic by operating them opposed to running them, yet when we have double main lines and operating them like the large unit trains, we essentially do the same thing, run a train in a circle from yard to the same yard. A lot of what I do is run the train in a loop and occasional stop to switch some cars. basically though, I run the train around the circuit, then pick up another train and do the same. A far cry from industrial switching i suppose, but I see a good compromise between running and operating.

however your railroad sounds quite fun and fits your view exactly. And i feel the same way about interaction with trains, the more manual labor ,the more fun it is to run.
@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

HaBi farm: 

Ah yes, time! As an addition to your statement I'll say this: 

Because many of us have jobs, are hard working, and do not have as much time as we would like to run our railroads, designing a track plan and building a railroad that requires as little maintenance as possible is a key factor in design. For instance, more and more people are opting fro rail clamps over traditional joiners because of a couple reasons: 

1). The clamps hold the track together WAY better than any rail joiner. 
2). The clamps( or at least most of them) make electrical connections between track pieces much better 
3). Because of the rigidity of the joints with rail clamps, the track moves as a unit rather than as a bunch of little pieces. 

Restricted time is also one of the larger factors on why we care so much about our road bed, the trains, the switches, the method of operating trains, it all comes down to the fact that we want to get the most running time from our trains, so we try to cut down on the required time for maintenance. At least I see it as that.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

JJW, 
Be careful with your assumptions. I for one hate those unsightly clamps and I find on my Aristo SS, the screw joiners act more like fish plates and bring the railheads into line better. I ballast to the tops of the ties so the clamps are exposed. 
The old layout was up for 6 years and never suffered a sun kink, nor expansion / contraction seperation. My thermal range is from 5 degrees F to 119 F. One 90 degree arc of 10'D track was in a tunnel and another floated on a curved trestle (built to allow for expansion), it moved as a unit, just fine. The track floated in ballast. 

I work, hard when necessary, but... I also have other interests and a best friend not into trains. Yet my layout was ready when I was... 

Happy Rails 
John


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I agree that low maintenance is something I aspire to. 

But, what is low maintenance in coastal San Diego may not be the same as in Arizona. 

Items 1 and 2 are always true in my opinion. 

Item 3 may be a good thing or a bad thing depending. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

"But, what is low maintenance in coastal San Diego may not be the same as in Arizona." 

Naw big boy just fewer hoops to jump through with battery power vs track power / DCC. You can't run enough current through the screw/ joiner combo. Structurally they're fine and do a good job and my railheads are smooth. 12 -18v was ok when I was track powered. 
Had this been posted in track power / DCC I wouldn't have offered a different view. 

Happy Rails 
John


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

Yeah I was taking a quote from one of the manufacturer's site, can't remember which one because it was a while ago







. But hey, you don't like them, who am I to say different. I guess in the competition of selling those things, a manufacturer might make assumptions too. And good for you if you didn't have any problems, obviously you have a system down that works well for your area.









I too have other interests, but you have to admit, we all strive ( or at least I think so) to lower maintenance issues so that we can run more trains. If I am wrong, please correct me.
@import url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Provide...ad.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## jjwtrainman (Mar 11, 2011)

part 3). I can see how it might be bad. I suppose instead of having the WHOLE railroad move as a unit, a better idea might be to connect pieces in sections and have gaps in the rails every X number of feet so that parts of the railroad can move as a unit. I should probably just shut up, I am making too many assumptions that are [email protected] url(http://www.mylargescale.com/Providers/HtmlEditorProviders/CEHtmlEditorProvider/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);@import url(/providers/htmleditorproviders/cehtmleditorprovider/dnngeneral.css);


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

It's all a learning experience, and very much affected by climate and type of ballast. 

I've seen some methods succeed in one place, only to fail miserably in others. 

When I started, the "common wisdom" was to screw the track down to 2x6 boards... as people learned more and experimented more, it seems that now that is one of the least successful methods. 

One thing that came to me is to try free-floating track in ballast. If it worked, great, if not, I have not lost anything except some time and gravel. 

If I started with concrete roadbed and it failed, I'd have a ton of work to undo it. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Brandon (Jul 6, 2011)

See what local guys do (hence why a club is helpful). It seems locally the best results are floating with clamps but for me I still have to consider that I haven't visited a members home yet with more mainline track than what I'm doing and I bet the longer the straights and wider the radius the more or less certain characteristics will poke their ugly faces up. Also for tips, get real sick including a fever that makes you think like you're on drugs and go over your track plan. I had some crazy ideas over the weekend and a few have got me completely throwing one design out and really trying to swap where I'm doing what to allow track to flow better between switches. I'm also having to consider a shed that may not be long enough to store some longer 'pre made' consists that I can just let go without having to couple any cars because the shed isn't long enough and this is making me completely re-think what "operating" my railroad really means to me if I can't setup all my trains to just run between usage.


----------

