I need some feed back on this concept.

Discussion in 'Track Planning' started by Mrplow123, Mar 14, 2007.


What do you think of this layout design?

  1. It needs a few things tweaked, but I think you should build it.

    0 vote(s)
  2. It needs alot of work, but it is not a total loss.

    0 vote(s)
  3. What the heck is it?

    0 vote(s)
  4. BURN IT!!!!

    0 vote(s)
  1. Mrplow123

    Mrplow123 Member

    I have discovered 2 things in the past few weeks. I like XtrkCad better then Atlas RTS 7, and I know what I want, but can't seem to design a layout to save my life. I designed this with Xtrkcad, and I am fairly happy with it. I know it is not very prototypical, and there are some operational problems with it, but hey that is why I am here. Let me know what you guys think of it. And what you think I could do to improve it. I welcome all ideas, and please tell me if it is worthless. Starting in the lower left corner and working up and to the right, the tracks are going up a grade to cross over the other tracks, and they come back down to table level on the far right end of the table. So there will be a little bit of mountain action going on. The 5 things I really want, I want a big yard and inter modal operation, a few industries, I want continuous running, I want a lower level for staging, and I like this bench design. I am open to any suggestions or changes. I have to pretty much stay in the 11x6.5 area, but I could expand slightly to the right to say 12, maybe 13 feet, but only if there is a rally good reason(have to get approval from the building commissioner, at least that is how she acts). The upper part of the pic is up against a wall, and the left is against a wall. I like the walk in peninsula design, it opens up the possibilities to more main line run, and more scenic opportunity's.. I really wanted a continuous run with a pit in the middle, but there just didn't seem to be enough room to stand inside it.

    By the way, the layout will be DCC, and I know there are a few reversing sections.

    Thanks in advance everyone.
  2. MadHatter

    MadHatter Charging at full tilt.

    Love the plan, glad to see that your not using a helix as most people do. That will save you lots of space.

    Maybe you should consider lengthening the lower levels track and then scenicking a section, perhaps bring that loop down or make the radius wider otherwise
    long/ heavy trains will fall inwards.

    I think on the top level the yard design is fine because you can shunt without getting in the way of mainline traffic.

    Thats all from me @ the moment- great plan.
  3. oldtanker

    oldtanker Member

    I think it looks pretty darn good:thumb: . I've tried both programs but really don't have the will power to set down and figure out the programs and get very frustrated:curse: with them.

    Can I send you my dimensions and let you work with em.....sign1 sign1 sign1 .

    Looks great!

  4. Pitchwife

    Pitchwife Dreamer

    One problem I see is with your lower staging. The way it is now, you will either have to back your trains all the way in or all the way out. What you could do would be to add a Y where I've indicated in red. It would still involve a lot of backing through points, which is always a problem, but not as much as you originally have.

    Attached Files:

  5. MadHatter

    MadHatter Charging at full tilt.


    He might just use the yard for storage, so he can save four trains in the bottom, let them go out randomly and at the end of operations store 4 incoming trains, but I like the idea of the wye too.

    I do think that Mrplow123 should use that side as an extra yard or something scenic, to get the most out of that space.
  6. MasonJar

    MasonJar It's not rocket surgery

    For starters, I would simplify the lower level. Run the "yard" along the back wall, with the balloon track to turn the entire train. That way you can avoid extra turnouts in a wye, and still get the train facing the right direction. You also avoid the double decked penninsula, saving some benchwork.

    You could even run the yard down the left side. Either option would avoid the "tight" 180° turn, followed by an "S" curve, followed by a 90° through turnouts to the staging tracks.

  7. Pitchwife

    Pitchwife Dreamer

    Here's something I put together for you to consider. It uses the space directly under your access ramp to the staging area giving you a double ended yard with five storage tracks as well as a complete runaround on the outside which can also be used as storage if you need it. You can build it with less if you don't and save some money. I doubt that you can add more without completely redoing it though.
    It was done on RTS, I got used to it instead of Xtrack. If you are interested PM me & I'll send the RTS file or you can just use the jpeg. The turnouts are all Atlas Customline #6 but you can adapt it to whatever you want to use.
    The advantages are more storage and it eliminates the two tired peninsula as Andrew suggested, however there wasn't much storage room just along the back. Yards eat up a lot of space. Best of all though, your trains are all facing forwards. No backing up is necessary. :thumb: :thumb: If nothing else it may give you some new ideas.

    Attached Files:

  8. engineshop

    engineshop Member

    three things to think about it.
    1. You have a cross over section on the left to change from counterclockwise to clockwise running but not back, except through an in-out-maneuver in the intermodal yard.

    2. Freight Yard: to increase the length of the yard track you might use a different approach. If you increase the radius on both sides and use left - right - left - etc switches on both sides, you will get more length on the same real estate.

    3. Intermodal Yard: the yard seem to be small for intermodal. I know you would like to have access from both sides but it will shorten the length. You might think of running the intermodal yard diagonal from upper right to lower left with one track connecting to the main line. This would give you a crossover in the other direction as well.

  9. Mrplow123

    Mrplow123 Member

    Thank you everyone for your input, and thoughts. As far as Pitchwife, and Engineshop's ideas, they are BRILIANT. Thank you guys for spending time on my layout design. These are the kind of ideas I needed. I sometimes find my self thinking in straight paralel lines. The diagonal intermodal never crossed my mind, and works way better. And the lower staging idea you came up with Pitchwife, works way better. I am going to start working on adding these items to my plan. I will update when I am done. If all goes well I will start taking apart my old layout this comeing week, and begin bench construction the following week.
  10. Mrplow123

    Mrplow123 Member

    OK, it is late, so I will make this quick. I incorporated the new ideas provided by everyone. Let me know what you think. I am really happy with it. The lower staging is alot more usable. I might have to build the staging level last, due to budget constraints. That is alot of extra track and turnouts. Any way, give me your assesment of the new design.

    Thanks in advance.

  11. Pitchwife

    Pitchwife Dreamer

    I just thought to mention, the staging tracks form a reverse loop. If you are using DCC you'll need a reverse loop module. If you're using DC just keep that in mind when you wire it. Also, make a note that on the turnouts on the right side of the staging I added 3" sections between then to give enough clearance between the tracks.
  12. bigsteel

    bigsteel Call me Mr.Tinkertrain

    alright,this is a great looking plan with the improvements you've made,and i think you can fit a roundhouse and engine servicing in there somewhere and make the yard a little bigger,but then again i love running trains more than scenicking.and if your "allowed" expand to as big as you can get it,it will be worth it :D --josh
  13. Mrplow123

    Mrplow123 Member

    This spam stuff is getting out of hand. It is pretty bad that the last 10 responses I have gotten to this post have been SPAM posts. It is so bad I have to unsubscribe to my own thread. You know there is a way to stop this. Only give new members post privilages to the general section untill they are approved. Small price to pay for a SPAM FREE FORUM!!!

    Just my 2 cents

    RANT END.......
  14. jasbourre

    jasbourre Member

    She's nice to look at... but I would not like her on my layout.
  15. TruckLover

    TruckLover Mack CH613 & 53' Trailer

    There was just another one posted, AND IT WAS A bad one, maybe this thread needs to be re-started like we did with that thread a few months back from Kyle Engineer
  16. Ralph

    Ralph Remember...it's for fun!

    Spam? What spam? :) Yeah, I just logged on a few minutes ago and pulled that one out. I'm not sure why this thread is targeted so often. Seems to me that threads with polls have in the past been more vulnerable to spams. In any case, we'll keep a watch and if it keeps up we could restart it.
  17. Squidbait

    Squidbait Recovering ALCO-holic

    MrPlow - you haven't said (or at least I can't find) what scale you're in... I'm assuming N-scale?

    I think you might want to re-think your intermodal yard. For stack cars and TOFC flats, you haven't left a lot of space... I'll doodle a bit and get back to you.

Share This Page