# Need more advise.



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

I have lost count as to how many changes already. But the table is built and the first foam board was placed. As I wait for the track bed to come in, I came up with another track plan. I am planing for two HO DC Trains on a small layout (5X4). The Blue Track is elevated about 4 inches. Now I do not know which one would be better. Here are my track options...


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I prefer the upper drawing. It offers more switching
operations. While it's nice to sit back and watch the
trains run around the track, it does get old pretty
quickly. You can actually work your locos when you
have spurs for switching cars.

Don


----------



## J.C. (Dec 24, 2016)

are you looking to optimize the track to have more running option's ?


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

One of the things I like, is to see one train pass above the other. I am not much in to tunnels. The real issue I have is real estate (land). Since I have a small layout, I am looking in to optimizing optics.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Definitely the top one


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

Rock022 said:


> One of the things I like, is to see one train pass above the other. I am not much in to tunnels. The real issue I have is real estate (land). Since I have a small layout, I am looking in to optimizing optics.


I think the top one allows you to see the trains running by each other front to back as well as left to right. The second layout seems just left to right in terms of that.


----------



## J.C. (Dec 24, 2016)

for the best use of your space for what you like to see use the first one but drop the two level idea and drop the track between a3 and d3 bring the inside loop down to the same level open it up so its closer to the outside loop and install a double cross over between the two loops , if you don't want to use dbl cross than just keep turnouts at a3 d3 and install turnouts on inside loop connecting it to the outside loop .just a thought.


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

I have been advised that on the first one on D3 block, I would have derailments many times. That is what took me out of that idea. You guys do not think I will have derailments there?

J.C. That would be more real estate, but I really like to have the two trains at the same time. I am only doing DC. 

The Trackbed will arrive next week. So this is the time to make any changes.

Plan number 2 seems easier for me. Giving me a larger area 1 and a small area 2 for me to place buildings. 

But plan one does give me more switching action, which I also like.

I am limited to the 5X4 table I built. I am not able to get any more space for some time. 

What am I looking for?

Two DC locos running at the same time, specially one going over the other. 
Water? Not really, but not out of the question.
I still have no idea what buildings to have. 
I do want to have some type of mountain, which led me to have a loco in a higher level.

That is all I know for now. This is also a test run. I have never built anything like this before. 

I have some saw dust, which I intend to color green, to make grass. 

That is all I have planned. Not much, but I am just going with it.

If I do end up doing this for life, then I have a much larger project in mind with DCC locos and all. But for now. I am doing the more basic stuff.


----------



## J.C. (Dec 24, 2016)

Rock022 said:


> J.C. That would be more real estate, but I really like to have the two trains at the same time. I am only doing DC


blocks will allow you to run two different trains .


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

Blocks? I have a tiny understanding of it. I am not familiar on how to do it, or how to run them.


----------



## J.C. (Dec 24, 2016)

don't know if I can explain it to you . but will give it a try blocks are electrically isolated sections of track that through the use of switches let you use two or more different power packs on layout track , giving you the ability to run two different trains on them with separate speed/direction control , also lets you switch blocks by using same power pack. the more blocks the more different options for running you have. 
on last layout with two operators' you could run 4 trains, though it kept you on the ball or under the gun , with 4 or 5 operators' 5 trains could operate at once with one person acting as dispatcher, the most I ever ran alone was two trains


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

That is what I imagine it be. However I want my three year old son to play with it, so I have to keep it more simple. I do like the idea, but it is not practical for me at the moment.


----------



## time warp (Apr 28, 2016)

Rock022 said:


> I have lost count as to how many changes already. But the table is built and the first foam board was placed. As I wait for the track bed to come in, I came up with another track plan. I am planing for two HO DC Trains on a small layout (5X4). The Blue Track is elevated about 4 inches. Now I do not know which one would be better. Here are my track options...


 I would suggest insulating the inner loop passing track and the switching area so you can give yourself more operating flexibility. All you need for them is Atlas connectors or toggle switches and you could run 2 trains that way. Another suggestion would be to isolate the switching area and use a second power pack there. That way you could run on the loop and still switch at the same time.

J.C.'s suggestion of blocks would be good, but you could always incorporate it down the road.


----------



## Cycleops (Dec 6, 2014)

time warp said:


> I would suggest insulating the inner loop passing track and the switching area so you can give yourself more operating flexibility. All you need for them is Atlas connectors or toggle switches and you could run 2 trains that way. Another suggestion would be to isolate the switching area and use a second power pack there. That way you could run on the loop and still switch at the same time.
> 
> J.C.'s suggestion of blocks would be good, but you could always incorporate it down the road.


Or you could just go DCC, simples.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

It sounds to me like you're trying to convince yourself that Layout #2 is better. I don't think it is. Ask yourself honestly: how long is just watching a train (or two) go around in a circle going to be interesting for you? Most of us think it's better if your trains actually have something to do.

If you really do just want to run trains in circles, I think either of these two options will give you a better experience, with two visually separated levels, than trying to make a single level layout, or use grades to connect them.

I think you're assigning too much weight to the possibility of troublesome operations in the S curve area where the double turnouts are located. All else being equal, you would be better served to avoid them or add short straight sections between them, but you can't do that in the space you have, and the alternative deprives you of switching opportunities. Take care to make your trackwork perfectly aligned and level, keep speeds down, and run shorter equipment, and I don't think you will have too many issues. On my last layout, I could run an Alco PA (a 90', 6 axle / truck behemoth) through a similar track configuration without many issues.

Finally, be careful using your son's participation as justification for doing things a given way. One thing is certain, he will grow up, probably faster than you realize. I made a separate layout for my son when he was 4-1/2, using a single loop of track and one siding with two branches. In less than a year, he was bored with it and was asking for something bigger with more to do. He has never had any trouble operating locomotives at appropriate speeds, reversing directions, railing-on locos and cars, and coupling / uncoupling cars. He just needed to be shown what to do.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*DefinitelyTop plan, but modified*

Rock022;

I vote for the top plan, but with modification to eliminate the derailment prone reverse curves. Look at the top plan. At the bottom center there is a cluster of 4 turnouts. For descriptive clarity, let's number them left to right 1-4. Turnout #1 should be moved one track section to the left. It would trade places with a curved section of track. Turnout #2 (the one above all the others, on the inner loop) should stay just as it is. Turnout #3 Can stay as is, but the track between it and turnout will be longer and straighter. a short section of flex track should be substituted for the curved section between turnouts #3 and #4. Turnout #4 should move one track section to the right, It will need to be changed from a left hand turnout to a right hand turnout. This change will allow it to trade places with a curved section of track. These changes will eliminate most of the reverse curves and make switching fun instead of a frustrating exercise in re-railing trains. They will also require some re-arrangement of the sidings used for that switching. Basically moving them in closer to the main loops, It might also mean adding a few inches to the bottom edge of the layout.
I agree with Cycleops suggestion to go with DCC right from the start. There is a Bachman brand HO-scale train set called the "Digital Commander that would make this painless. The set comes with two locomotives, each of which already has DCC installed. It also includes a basic DCC controller, a few cars and a loop of Bachman's "EZ-track," I'm not a big fan of the EZ-track, but you, or particularly your three year old may like it. I gather, from your diagrams, that you are using sectional track. I don't know if you already have track, or what type you may have. Bachman EZ-track is a brand of "roadbed track." Roadbed track is a type of sectional track that comes with a rigid, gray, plastic piece attached to the bottom of each track section. This plastic "roadbed" is supposed to simulate the crushed rock "ballast" found under real railroad track. The EZ-track sections snap lock together. This makes them handy for temporary setups, like on a table. You little one might like playing with it and pushing a car around on it. That is unless you are using EZ-track on your layout.
As for the DC/ DCC issue, DCC is incredibly easy to wire. No blocks, no panel full of toggle switches to flip, just two wires from the controller to the track. That's it! I think, with a little instruction and oversight from dad, your three year old could learn to operate the DCC controller pretty easily. These days kids seem to be comfortable operating all sorts of electronics that might baffle their parents! A DCC controller is about equal to a TV remote control in degree of difficulty. If he/she can change channels and volume; DCC won't be much of a challenge.
I think you would benefit a great deal from a good, basic, book on model railroading. I recommend "Introduction to Model Railroading by Jeff Wilson. You can order it from your local hobby shop or from https://kalmbachhobbystore.com/products/books 
It has a very good explanation of DC and DCC wiring, including text and a diagram of how blocks are set up and wired. It also has good, simple information on planning, benchwork, structures, (model buildings) locomotives, cars, painting, etc. This forum is an excellent source of info, but it's always handy to have a hard copy, with photos and simple text, to go back to.
Sawdust is pretty big to represent grass. While I myself have used sander dust, which is much smaller than sawdust, since you will only need a small amount; I would use commercial ground foam grass instead. It costs more than free sawdust and whatever you pay for the dye, but it looks a lot better. My post "Model Railroading on a budget" here on the "Beginners Q&A section, covers this and many other items that might interest you, or not, :laugh: as you choose.
All these things are just suggestions, based on my experience, you can take or leave them as you wish. "Your railroad, your rules." Have fun with whatever you choose. 

regards;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

What I am finding more difficult is the layout scenery. I am ready to dive in, but I have no idea what to make. Which buildings to use. I do not see much space on the top layout for me to place buildings, that is the only problem I see.

I know which features I like. I like a mountain, a train that goes above the other, and I also like to see trains pulling many cars. 

I am not too concerned about the train types for now. I will end up getting DCC trains, probably a steam and a diesel. I am told that it is easy transition. 

What is not easy, is to keep my son out of it. He has already damage quite a few things, so I am staying with old DC trains for now. He is my fourth child, but the most energetic so far. He wears off everyone in the house, and still keeps going.

This table is more of a tryout. I have never done anything similar to this. 

My biggest hurdle is really what to build with what I have.

The table is ready, the foam board is in place, and the track bed is on its way. I have about a week before I start laying down the track and go from there. But where I am going? I have not a clue yet. I thought I could build a small city on the bottom layer, but the area seems too small for me. Perhaps a factory on the top layer? I don't know.

The only structure I have is Woodland Scenics Chicken Coop. I have no idea how to paint it. 

On a side note. I have PTSD and this makes some simple tasks very difficult for me. This is why I can not seem to develop a good plan. But instead of staying stuck, I decided to just go with it. Something will end up in the table, and I hope it is a train. :laugh: Oh, and if I am repeating myself. I do that a lot. I do not remember much of what I say to people. 

You guys have been extremely helpful in keeping me from getting frustrated, and continue.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Well, let's take this a bit at a time. First of all, model railroading is about compromises. You do what you can with what you have available. You may want a huge city, but if you don't have the space, then you don't have the space.

Secondly, you call this a tryout. You're exactly right. Layouts are not "once and done". They very often require several revisions, and being willing to do something now, knowing that you may throw it out later, is actually a good thing. It will give you experience and confidence for the next one. Just do something. If you don't like how it looks, rip it out and do something else.

Same with painting that chicken coop. My answer to that one is simple: with paint. How you apply the paint and what colors you use don't matter a fig. Again, if you don't like how it turns out, redo it. Try looking on the internet for pictures of buildings and scenery that you find attractive. Then try to reproduce something similar on your layout. Don't restrict your search to layout photos. The real world provides an awful lot of inspiration -- take advantage of it.


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

Thank you CTV.

Traction Fan, I am not sure I quite understood the turnout #4 change that you suggest. I have tried a few things to see if I get it, but I don't get it. I will be gone for a few days, so when I come back I will try again. 

Any suggestions are very welcome as to which buildings or features I need to do, or even change to flex track, I am open to using better track, but I am not open to getting $50 switches or turnouts. If that is the case, then I need to wait for more $$$, and that will take some months. 

Next week I get the track bed and I am ready to start. I also have some extra foam board. All I need now is to do something with it.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## J.C. (Dec 24, 2016)

with the little one I would stick to country side as a structure would be a magnate to him.


----------



## Shadow001 (Dec 15, 2016)

Rock022 said:


> What I am finding more difficult is the layout scenery. I am ready to dive in, but I have no idea what to make. Which buildings to use. I do not see much space on the top layout for me to place buildings, that is the only problem I see.


I could not decide what industries I wanted either, I looked at what jobs I have had and what jobs friends and family have done. I chose some of their jobs that I could figure out how to use different rolling stock to feed or pick up from those places. That way it has meaning to me as well. Not every job works, but I think I have figured out enough for now.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Turnout "choices"?*



Rock022 said:


> Thank you CTV.
> 
> Traction Fan, I am not sure I quite understood the turnout #4 change that you suggest. I have tried a few things to see if I get it, but I don't get it. I will be gone for a few days, so when I come back I will try again.
> 
> ...


Rock022;

I don't know of any commercial turnout that costs $50. Most brands are $30, or a little less, new. Used turnouts are much cheaper still. However, I don't think you will really have a choice of what kind of turnout to use on your layout. That's because building the track plan (at least the top one) in the limited space you have, and in HO-scale, you will probably have to use Atlas "snap switch" turnouts. Nothing else would fit. Atlas snap switches are unusual since they contain a curved diverging track that is 18" radius. This makes it possible to substitute a turnout for an 18" radius curved piece of track. Atlas track plans, published in their booklets, use this particular type of turnout. Other brands of turnouts, and even some of Atlas's "custom line" turnouts; don't have a curve in either of their routes. Both the main, and the diverging, routes are straight track, simply set at an angle from each other. Given the tight spacing in your plan, which I think is an Atlas track plan, you would not be able to fit a different brand, or type, of turnout in the same place. Am I correct that you are using a track plan published by Atlas, or did you get it someplace else? The the bottom track plan in your picture has more room, that might allow the use of Peco turnouts. 
As for buildings, and scenery; It does not look like you have much room for them, so you may have to keep things small and simple. The type of buildings would depend on the "era" (time period) you choose for your layout. For instance, if you want it to be a "Wild West" era railroad then the buildings should all be simple wood structures that you would see in a western movie. If the railroad is set in the present day, then modern, plain looking, concrete, buildings would be appropriate. Its also good to have paired buildings. A farm might transport its crops by rail to a food wholesaler. A sheet metal factory might ship their product to an appliance manufacturer. On your very small layout you may only have room for one pair. You can also have an imaginary destination, or source, that is "off the layout." Cars filled with coal at a distant mine (not modeled) arrive on your railroad and are dropped off at the local coal dealer. 
So the structures should be based on your own preference of era, location, and the type of industry you chose to model.
Scenery is also your choice. A railroad located in Florida would have fairly flat land, an ocean backdrop, and palm trees. If the layout was located in Oregon, then a forested, mountain, backdrop, and conifer trees, would be suitable.

It's your choice on all these things;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

I am back from the trip. 

The roadbed is not here yet, might be two more days. The track plan I have, I made it with a computer program, but it is all atlas. Like you said Traction, I have vey limited space. I even started with a 3X4 and opened to a 4X5. In the future I will have more space, but right now I am limited. 

I am thinking of an in-between era. A time when it was beginning to get modernized, but still had old engines. Would that be like 1940's to 50's? I like diesel engines as well as steam engines. 

I like the idea you gave me about a farm and loading animals. I know you said crops, but I have seen the cow loading dock so much on Amazon, that it came to mind instead. 

Perhaps the top can be a coal station with a steam loco. 

On a different note. I am quite happy with the table I built. I knew I had to make a tough table because it is in the garage, and the family goes there often. Well the table has been moved around a lot and my son has put it to the test. Well, the table did not budge. So I am quite positive that at least the table will remain. As for the layout? Well, I am not making it indestructible, so I might have to re-built a few times. Who knows...


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Steam and Diesel*



Rock022 said:


> I am back from the trip.
> 
> The roadbed is not here yet, might be two more days. The track plan I have, I made it with a computer program, but it is all atlas. Like you said Traction, I have vey limited space. I even started with a 3X4 and opened to a 4X5. In the future I will have more space, but right now I am limited.
> 
> ...


 Rock022;

Welcome back. Yes the Steam to Diesel "Transition era" was in the late 1940s and early 1950s. It is very popular because it had both steam and early Diesel locomotives still running. A cattle loading pen is a good idea. It is small enough to fit on your small railroad, and yet it provides a logical industry. If you want to model the other end of that industry, that would be a slaughterhouse/meatpacking plant. That is quite large so perhaps it can be somewhere "Off the layout."

The new location and type of turnout #4 is not easy to convey by text alone. I drew up a little sketch. Maybe it will help. Notice the attached pdf file is a rough sketch, not an accurate scale drawing. Definitely use your trick of laying out the actual turnouts to see if this new arrangement will actually fit, or not. Also note that turnout #4 is now aright-hand turnout, not the left-hand one in your original plan. My modified plan also includes a crossing, so that's two track pieces to buy. This new plan does eliminate all the reverse curves that were in the original plan. That is what I was trying to accomplish. Which plan you use is up to you.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos: 

View attachment img002.pdf


----------



## Rock022 (Jan 2, 2017)

Thanks Traction...

As much as I tried, it is not possible with the space available I have. Even if I buy the peco curved turnouts. 

Also giving this much thought. I might be better to just do a single working track. If I make a top platform for a second train, I will loose too much Realestate for me to place any buildings. I am at a halt for the moment. Need to figure this out.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Oh well!*



Rock022 said:


> Thanks Traction...
> 
> As much as I tried, it is not possible with the space available I have. Even if I buy the peco curved turnouts.
> 
> Also giving this much thought. I might be better to just do a single working track. If I make a top platform for a second train, I will loose too much Realestate for me to place any buildings. I am at a halt for the moment. Need to figure this out.


Rock022;

Sorry it didn't work out. I agree with your idea of cutting back on the amount of track, in order to have room for buildings and scenery. Maybe it's time to start over with a different track plan. 

good luck;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------

