News:

Due to heavy spamming attempts on this forum, automatic registration has been disabled. We will approve registration requests as quickly as possible (unless you're a spammer of course :) )

Main Menu

Large N-scale layout

Started by RhB_HJ, January 31, 2012, 11:10:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jeff

Mike, interesting stuff. Take a close look at Jody's Givens and Druthers on page one of this thread, then follow HJ's link to the thread on the Trainboard. It should give you all you ever need to know. Notice I didn't say that it would answer all your questions. That's because there has to be room for the actual designer to add their elements to it. But, with all that room, there's plenty left for that.
Later,                                                AnyRail Fanatic
Jeff                      and Unofficial Guy Who Knows Almost Everything About It

Mike from CT

#136
Thanks, I already had.

The only one I'm deliberately not following is the track brand.  The most important reason is that I find the Peco turnouts far less troublesome than the Atlas ones and that's going to be critical when it comes to operating and maintaining this behemouth.  The other reason is the better selection of track  and closer track centers (1 3/64" instead of 1 1/4") for complex areas like Union Terminal and even just running through the city areas, where real estate in 1:1 scale is expensive).  The final (and admittedly selfish) reason is there are elements I've designed previously for my layout and just adapted for this one (like Union Station) and I'm more comfortable using it.

I don't expect anyone (including Jody) to follow these plans precisely at any rate.  I know what Byron Henderson charged me for a single, 20' long design element and this one would cost Jody his first five years' budget (whatever that is), and then some, for just the plan if I did (and I'm an amateur).  If there are pieces he likes, great.  He's welcome to use them (as is anyone else) for free.  The only price is that I got to pick the brand of track so I can use (parts of) the plan, as well.... :)

Jeff

#137
Ok. There IS a good reason to use the Atlas track, as you know- their system has #10 turnouts. That certainly doesn't mean you can't mix and match on track. I use a fair amount of Peco track in my design, as well. Peco has #8 turnouts, curved turnouts of a reasonable radius, and things like a double-crossover and three-way. I'm sure there are appearance differences, but once ballasted and weathered, those would be small. As for track centers, my experience says that less than 1.25" will keep you and your 1:1 fingers from being able to pick up a derailed car from the middle of a yard or anywhere else there are more than one track next to another.

As for reusing elements, everybody does it. Or should! That's one of the nicest parts of AR. Creating your own .any file to hold track arrangements in a sort of library really saves time.
Later,                                                AnyRail Fanatic
Jeff                      and Unofficial Guy Who Knows Almost Everything About It

Mike from CT

#138
Technically, the only turnouts Peco has are #6 (10 degree frogs).  For the varying lengths ("short", "medium" and "long") what varies is the radius of the closure rail on the diverging route.  Short turnouts use a 12" radius, medium turnouts use an 18" radius and long turnouts use a 36" radius.  (The crossover is actually the equivalent of four medium turnouts - 18" radius in each turnout.)

As for rerailing a derailed car, I agree completely.  No 1:1 fingers are going to rerail a car when there are strings of cars on adjacent tracks - so, in those cases when that happens to me (when I'm uncoupling with a pick),  after I get done cursing I push the cars on an adjacent track a bit to the left or right.  Let's face it, giant 7 foot (160:1 scale) wide fingers don't reach down from the sky to rerail cars in the prototype, either.  And, while I don't know for certain (I can't find a set of safety regs on rerailing),  when a 1:1 scale car goes off the tracks in a yard with tight spacing, I'd think they clear the adjacent tracks so the workmen have a safe place and enough space to work.  If that's so, I'm just following the prototype.  And, if it isn't so I don't want to know....:)

Besides, 16.7' center line spacing between tracks (which is what 1 1/4" inch is, in N scale) just looks "wrong" to me.  I guess we each have our own set of ideas about what constitutes a correctable eyesore.

One last (side) note: The actual yard on my operating layout tends to have ample open track.  While that's good design (planning on maximum actual usage of 50% of capacity), I can't claim I did it because of design guidelines.  I did it because I've never found 5 3/8" inches of straight track where I couldn't find an excuse to place "just one more" turnout. Just look at what little there is of trackage on the preliminary plan.  The commissary/ready tracks (to the right of the turntable at the top left) originally had 9 tracks and a thoroughfare track - because they fit.  Then I looked at what would be a reasonable list of trains originating here and came up with a total of 5 trains.  (There are passing-thru trains and trains with sections joining and splitting, but they wouldn't, logically, have any storage requirements at this location).  It hurt my pride, but I cut it down to the current 6 commissary/ready tracks.  No promises I won't succumb to temptation  as the plan develops, though. (While Amtrak tends to run its trains as unit trains, I'll use the extra space to store spare cars for peak loads and replacements when a car is pulled for repairs - not that Amtrak has an abundance of spares.... :( )

glakedylan

what is the suggested distance between parallel track, especially in yards/staging?
thanks much!
respectfully
Gary L Lake Dillensnyder

Mike from CT

Gary:

NMRA suggested minimum spacing for handling cars (uncoupling yards, etc.) is 1 3/16" (15'10" in 1:1 scale) for parallel tracks in N Scale.  The minimum for running is 1 1/32" (13'9").

They have a host of standards and recommended practices covering all sorts of distances and clearances in all scales at http://nmra.org/standards/sandrp/consist.html.

Jeff

Sometimes you need to grit your teeth and design for reliable and sustainable operations and let that be your guide. I'll stick to 1.25" and perhaps a little wiggle room on curves.
Later,                                                AnyRail Fanatic
Jeff                      and Unofficial Guy Who Knows Almost Everything About It

glakedylan

thanks
i know about the NRMA standards
and i know that Atlas provides for 1.25
and Kato provides for 1.325

it was mentioned that it is not easy on the eyes or the fingers.

thus my question was (not according to standards, but) what are you using instead of these?

if not 1.25 because it does not look prototypical, what does look prototypical and provide sufficient finger room for rerailing?

thanks!

respectfully,
Gary

Mike from CT

Quote from: glakedylan on May 21, 2012, 11:15:08 PM
thanks
i know about the NRMA standards
and i know that Atlas provides for 1.25
and Kato provides for 1.325

it was mentioned that it is not easy on the eyes or the fingers.

thus my question was (not according to standards, but) what are you using instead of these?

if not 1.25 because it does not look prototypical, what does look prototypical and provide sufficient finger room for rerailing?

Clearly, I can't answer that question as I've already noted that, for me, the two goals are mutually exclusive.  I've already mentioned what I use*.  I prefer (and suggest) the one that easier on *my* eyes (where appearance counts), exceeds the the NMRA minimum and happens to be the default separation used by manufacturer missing from your list:

     Peco  1.046875"  (1 3/64"), or 13' 11.5" in 1:1 scale



* The one exception (besides curves) is on parallel ladder tracks where two trains may be operating side by side (e.g. the station platform ladder) I use 1.25" to avoid the possibility that they will sideswipe each other transitioning from the platform tracks to the ladder.

Jeff

This discussion is something of a moot point, since your track system dictates the track spacing to a large extent. Certainly in the case of ladder tracks in a yard and any connections made at crossovers, etc. I've built a bunch of yards using Atlas c80 "#4" (actually #4.5) and the look when populated is acceptable to me.
Later,                                                AnyRail Fanatic
Jeff                      and Unofficial Guy Who Knows Almost Everything About It

RhB_HJ

Quote from: Mike from CT on May 19, 2012, 11:04:22 PM
I just found this thread and thought I'd try my hand and it....

...................................

PS: You really don't want to see my two-tiered version, if I ever get around to that one - mushroomed or not, even..... :) )

;) :) :D ;D

Very good Mike!

But you left too much aisle space for the operators. 

BTW even though I do commercial/professional layout planning, I get a great kick out of adding my four cents on this forum. AND yes I wan't to see your multi-tier version.
Hans-Joerg Mueller
Coldstream, BC   Canada

http://www.rhb-grischun.ca

My train videos

Win7Pro 64bit; 8 GB RAM; i5 2.67GHz; 1920x1080 22" display

Mike from CT

Quote from: RhB_HJ on May 29, 2012, 05:38:39 PM
But you left too much aisle space for the operators. 

It's (yet another) of my character flaws.  I get jealous of the trains when they have plenty of room to pass and I don't... ;)

Jeff

Ah, but what an incentive to get yourself trim and fit!
Later,                                                AnyRail Fanatic
Jeff                      and Unofficial Guy Who Knows Almost Everything About It

Mike from CT

Quote from: Jeff on May 30, 2012, 03:13:18 PM
Ah, but what an incentive to get yourself trim and fit!

I prefer thinking of it as it's less effort to widen the aisles than it is to narrow my girth.... :)

RhB_HJ

Quote from: Mike from CT on May 30, 2012, 05:36:18 PM
Quote from: Jeff on May 30, 2012, 03:13:18 PM
Ah, but what an incentive to get yourself trim and fit!

I prefer thinking of it as it's less effort to widen the aisles than it is to narrow my girth.... :)

Not only that, it's really hard to get a good operating crew of only slim guys.
At least that's my experience, but then I should have stopped baking cakes and other goodies for the session after operating.  :o  ;)  :)
Hans-Joerg Mueller
Coldstream, BC   Canada

http://www.rhb-grischun.ca

My train videos

Win7Pro 64bit; 8 GB RAM; i5 2.67GHz; 1920x1080 22" display