# Newish Layout



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

This is lengthy, so please bear with me and offer any insight and advice. 

So for the last 2 years I've been struggling with a design for a layout. I initially started with Code 55 on a 36x84" door. My wife then graciously surrendered one of our spare bedrooms for my hobby. It's roughly 10 ft square. I gave up on Code 55 and went to Kato Unitrack. The Salt Lake Route and some extra pieces, with the intent to come up with my own layout. There is a KCS line that I cross daily to and from work that they also lease rights to the UP for. I attempted to model the area of the UP Hollywood yard in Shreveport, past Shreveport Regional Airport and the like, but quickly became bored. 

That was a continuing theme. I would come up with a track plan, get trains running, turnouts remotely controlled, and tear it all down. I finally decided to take the Salt Lake Route layout into consideration, added or modified things to my liking, and got to work. I'm again at the stage of tear it down. I don't know what to do. 

Issues with the Salt Lake Route:
-Too short for length of trains I'd like
-Coal mine (formerly the furniture warehouse) spur is on the wrong mainline track for prototypical direction (counter-clockwise on inner track instead of outer)
-Intermodal yard is attached to the "main yard"-would like it to be a destination. 

Things I'm looking for:
-sizable yard with engine and car maintenance shops
-coal mine with tipple
-intermodal yard
-a wye
-physical track distance between main locations
-extra "random" industries as well

I've mocked up in Anyrail the Carlyle Division with a few changes and I'm relatively happy with it (another $600 in track necessary of course) but not 100% behind it due to cost. 

So I'm looking for suggestions. Double or single track? I want the track plan to by as interesting to run and look it. Could do more with single track then right? Point-to-point with helices at each end? Would be better suited for double track no?

Locos currently:
-Kato UP#1943 The Spirit w/ sound consisted with Kato SD70M UP#4848
-BLI UP#8104 ES44AC w/sound consisted with Kato ES44AC UP#5530
-Atlas SD60 UP#5949
-Bachmann DDA40X UP#6919
-Bachmann S-4 UP#1156 (barely works, would not recommend)


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I understand your preference to model an actual
area or geographical situation. But it takes a lot
of space to do that, even in N Scale.

In layout design I always think that the builder is
going to want to have the ability to run trains continuously
but also have the ability to enjoy the challenges of
switching.

For continuous running I prefer a single track main
with a number of passing sidings. Since you indicate
you are running DCC, that makes possible running
train A clockwise, and train B counterclockwise. Makes
for interesting 'meets' that require use of a siding.

For switching, I've enjoyed installing a number of
small freight users. They will need cars specific
to their business. If you can have both producers
sending cars to customers you'll have even more 
switching fun. A big coal mine is fun to build and
looks great. But you'll need a big power plant or
other major coal user to give it a purpose. Both take
up a lot of layout space also. 

You'll likely need a helix if you're going to have two
or more operating levels. But remember, a helix is
a slope on a curve. It would take a very powerful
consist to pull many cars up it unless your grade is
better than 2%. 

I hope I have given you some points to ponder that
will help you build a layout that works and is your
kind of fun.

Don


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

That was very helpful actually. I had never really thought of what other industries would be served by the coal mine and intermodal yard. The modified Carlyle division I drew up may actually be exactly what I'm looking for. Plenty of space and locations for servicing by another industry


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Replied in other section*



usafajk324 said:


> This is lengthy, so please bear with me and offer any insight and advice.
> 
> So for the last 2 years I've been struggling with a design for a layout. I initially started with Code 55 on a 36x84" door. My wife then graciously surrendered one of our spare bedrooms for my hobby. It's roughly 10 ft square. I gave up on Code 55 and went to Kato Unitrack. The Salt Lake Route and some extra pieces, with the intent to come up with my own layout. There is a KCS line that I cross daily to and from work that they also lease rights to the UP for. I attempted to model the area of the UP Hollywood yard in Shreveport, past Shreveport Regional Airport and the like, but quickly became bored.
> 
> ...


usafajk324;

I replied to your post in the "Introduce yourself here" section, before reading this one. From the information you give here, it sounds like you are further along in your model railroad experience than I had been led to believe, from reading your other post. So, some of the advice I gave you there may sound lame. 
However, some, especially that related to shelf layouts, may still help you. If you can build shelves all the way around that ten by ten room then you will have about as long a mainline as you're going to be able to fit in that space. Snaking a longer mainline around a peninsula of benchwork is likely to create some very narrow aisles and therefore poor access. 
I would recommend single track, with a couple of long passing sidings, as DonR suggested. Unless the particular bit of the prototype you are modeling actually has a double track main. Single track is the general rule on the prototype today. The introduction of CTC has made double track unnecessary in most areas. Railroad companies don't want to spend the money to maintain anything they don't need. On a model railroad single track also gives the illusion of greater length.

A helix, (let alone two) can have benefits, but it/(they) also have serious drawbacks.

On the plus side, the traditional, circular, helix is one way to get trains up to a second level. It also has a whole lot of track in it, if you are going to climb any significant distance, (like the 16" between the two shelf levels of my own layout.)
That long track can be used as a form of "staging yard", with two trains parked inside the helix until they are supposed to appear on the visible part of the layout.

On the negative side though,

1) All that length of track in the helix costs money, particularly since you are using Kato Unitrack, While it is excellent quality, it is also the most expensive type of track on the market. 

2) If you are going to have two helices, then multiply the above cost by two. 

3) A smoothly-operating helix is not an easy thing to design and build. The curve needs to be broad enough to allow super-reliable operation (remember this is all hidden track) of multiple units of big, modern, long-wheelbase, road locomotives, pulling a long train, of long-wheelbase modern, freight cars, upgrade through this curve.
That means a minimum radius in the 18"- 24" range, (yes, in N-scale) which means each helix will be 38"- 50" wide (assuming some sort of covering)
A helix is usually hidden, since it's unprototypical, and, well, ugly. Since the track inside the helix will need cleaning, just like any other track, you will need to have people access to the inside of the helix. This is usually in the form of a (Ugh! "Oh my aching back") duck-under! You're young, and fit, now, but age and arthritis will come.

Two separate helices that size are going to take up a lot of that 10' x 10' room. You might use one larger, double tracked, helix to get trains both up, and back down, inside the same helix. The grade inside such a helix is going to be pretty steep, since each loop needs to rise high enough, in one turn, to clear your highest cars (double stack container cars for example) on the loop immediately below. Using a "roadbed track" like Kato's Unitrack, exacerbates this vertical clearance issue, since extra height, on each layer, needs to be included to allow for the height of the plastic roadbed. Do you still really want two levels?  Now that I've "made your day" (miserable?) let me try to brighten things up a bit.

There is another type of "helix" which might serve you better. It's a "stretched helix", and it's what I use to get my trains between the two levels of my layout. The "stretched helix" idea means that the entire length of the mainline is a continuous grade. My mainline starts at zero elevation in "Seattle" and climbs through "Black River" (the next town) then rounds a 180 degree curve and enters a tunnel. This "tunnel" is really the entrance to a long, straight, hidden track that climbs up to the next level. Another 180 degree curve brings the mainline into the town of Cedar Falls. From there it continues on through some more curves, across a high steel trestle, into another tunnel and enters a reverse loop. (There is another reversing loop back at the "Seattle" end to allow continuous running.) The long length of the snaking mainline allows a reasonable grade and half that length is visible track. The hidden grade, and staging yard, can be accessed by removing snap in/out backdrops.

Hope that helps;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos: 

Note: The file below is one of several that I attached to my response to your "Introduce yourself here post." now that I know what you know, some of the others may not apply. This one though has some sketches of what will fit into a room about the size of the one you have. You may find it helpful. The photos were taken on my layout.

View attachment 3 & 4 How to build a better first layout.pdf


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

i still like those trees traction. i need to make some.


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*All very helpful*

traction fan

I definitely kept it brief on my knowledge about model railroading in the introductory forum. Didn't want to post all this in that page because it didn't seem like the place. 

As far as the area I'm modeling, I hadn't picked any particular area, was going to just go with a protolance layout. I like the UP colors and being a veteran the Spirit of the Union Pacific speaks to me. I had originally planned to do KCS since their line runs about a 3/4 mile from my house, but finding the Southern Bell paint scheme locos was a pain. 

I've spent hours in anyrail trying all sorts of configurations, including peninsulas and nothing seemed to fit. But copying the Carlyle Division as best I could seems to fit. It will be tight getting into the room, but the wife said the door and closet doors can come down to be able to access the room and storage space. So it will be single track with passing sidings. And the biggest thing was that of destinations after coal or containers were loaded. Something I hadn't thought of. Though I enjoy watching trains run continuously, they are also fun to play with moving cars around and building a train. 

All the track in this area on the prototype, mostly KCS and some UP, is all single mainline. 

I had seen a video of a layout that used a bridge of sorts between lower and upper shelves to connect and elevate from one level to another. I thought of that and immediately went away with it. Helices are out for now, though Roy Smith, who is modeling the Evanston Subdivision made great use of them. I may be young but being a DV doesn't make the ducking under things as easy. 

So for now, it'll be one level. I've attached the layout I think I'm going to go with for critiquing and a quirky part of the UP line south of the Hollywood Yard in Shreveport I would love to add to a future layout. 

Are those trees the skewer and coconut fiber pine trees?


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Looks pretty good!*



usafajk324 said:


> traction fan
> 
> I definitely kept it brief on my knowledge about model railroading in the introductory forum. Didn't want to post all this in that page because it didn't seem like the place.
> 
> ...


 usafajk324;

No sweat on the shortness of your introductory post. You're right, it shouldn't be a novel in that section. Your track plan looks OK to me. A little more crowded than I prefer, but it's your railroad, not mine.

Here's a couple of critiques:

First, I counted about thirty turnouts. That's going to be very expensive. Good quality commercial turnouts like Peco or Micro Engineering, retail for about thirty dollars each. The Kato Unitrack turnouts are even more expensive. Overall that's somewhere in the neighborhood of $1000 for turnouts, and in most cases, another big chunk of cash for switch machines to operate them. I make my own turnouts, which is much cheaper, but consumes a lot more time. Could you live with, or at least start out with, fewer industrial spurs?

Second, in the lower left, the 180 degree curve has a passing siding that appears to be on a grade. That would work OK for just passing two complete trains with the locos attached, but you could not spot cars there. They would roll away. I don't know if you intended to spot cars there or not. It would be possible, by using a thin bit of fishing line sticking up between the rails, just high enough to grab an axle, on the downhill side of the grade.

Third, in the lower right you appear to have a nasty double reverse curve. A train coming off the lower 180 degree curve enters the crossover, where it must instantly go from a right turn (the loop itself) into a left turn, ( on the first turnout of the crossover) and then instantly back into another right turn (as it exits the crossover.)
I suggest putting the first turnout back a bit, and incorporating it into the bigger loop's overall curve. The "straight* main" route of that turnout would then "spin off" the loop curve into the "straight" main route of the other turnout. That way the train would go from the right hand curve of the big loop, onto straight track, and then into another bit of right turning track in the second turnout. This would be much smoother than the "right,left,right of the present plan. That may be fine for marching, but its tough for trains to follow, especially if they are being pushed backwards. This kind of "snake trail" turnout configuration is common in a lot of yard ladders. Being a devote of the K.I.S.S. principal, I prefer simple, straight ladders where access to any yard track requires only one turn, and all the track's turns are in the same direction. 

* Except for the awful Atlas "Snap Track" turnout, and of course, curved turnouts, the two routes through a turnout are both straight track. It may just be the way Anyrail shows turnouts, but if you look closely at your track diagram you should see the "snake trail" I'm talking about. 



As for the coal and containers, it's not necessary (and seldom possible, except on giant, club-sized, layouts) to model both the large source (mine/port) and large destination (power plant/container terminal) on the same layout. One, or even both, can be "off the layout." (a.k.a. imaginary)
Either end of the cargo's journey can be operationally simulated with hidden staging tracks.

The "bridge of sorts" you saw in the video may have been a train elevator. Many have been built, and are in use, but they restrict train length, and you said you wanted long trains.
Master track planner, John Armstrong, in his classic book "Track Planning for Realistic Operation," described his train elevator as a "dehydrated canal lock" He also described a "vertical turnout" a track-topped shelf that pivoted down to let a train enter it, then pivoted up to let the train exit onto a higher level. This kept the grade percentage low, yet enabled a greater distance between levels. However, it had the same limited train length drawback as the elevator.

By "DV" do you mean Disabled Veteran? If so, does your disability require any special provisions in the design of your layout? (ie. wheelchair height)
One big mistake I made was mounting my layout too high. It was fine when I was young and fit. The top level was at my (6'-6") eye level. Now that I'm 71 and partially disabled, I plan to mount it lower when we move, in a couple of years. Speaking of moving, I strongly recommend sectional construction for all model railroads. You have quite an ambitious undertaking in your track plan. It will likely take years of labor, and thousands of dollars, to finish. It would be a shame not to be able to preserve, and re-use, as much of that as you can if/when you move. There are other advantages to sectional construction outlined in the files I sent you. 

No, the trees in the last photo are not made from skewers and coconut fibers, but rather from paintbrushes, and Scotch Brite scouring pads.
This file describes how they were made, but the trees shown in the file are somewhat crude early versions. Those in the bottom photo were improved by cutting the Scotch Brite thinner, dispensing with sprinkled on "needles", and using a darker color green paint.
(The trees in the trestle photo are even earlier, even cruder, versions made with skewers and cotton batting.)

View attachment Paintbrush Pine Trees.pdf


Have fun;

Traction Fan


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

I'm at work right now so I can't really see what your referring to on the layout while reading. I'll look when I get home. But as far as the turnouts go, Kato are actually reasonably priced. The turnouts have switching electriconics built in. A dpdt switch, 2200 microfarrad cap, and some resistors and leds and I'm good. I can get the turnouts for about $19 each. I have about half of the required track already though. But I'll look at the layout and what you pointed out and see if I follow

Edit:
So I looked at it while on my lunch break. The concern with turnouts isn't a big deal. I priced any rails part count against what I have and I'm looking at an extra $550 or so on top of what I have 

I hadn't planned to spot cars in any of the passing turnouts. 

And on the lower right I had tried to do what you suggested initially but could not make it fit how I wanted. The crossovers are one unit that's closer between tracks than I can get with the #6 turn outs from Kato. Those crossovers run about $34 each.

And as you mentioned, the Kato track being a snap system, the turn outs have a curve to them. The #6 have a 28 1/2" radius.

Yes disabled vet. Nothing of special consideration. My back isn't as young as I am. I'm looking to make it as high as possible and still be able to reach the back of the deepest parts of the layout

Paint brush handles is a genius idea for tree trunks. I'll have to do that. Though maybe only for edge trees on a slope. Scotch Brite pads make sense as well. Finer than coconut fiber


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Layout Started*

So I started on benchwork yesterday. I have all the materials for it, have 3 sections left to build. I also ordered the remaining track I needed. 

While doing that I was browsing for more locomotives. I don't have a location set for my layout, though it is basically what I could fit of the Carlisle Division done by MRRM, but what other rail companies run with/on UP track?


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

cool can't wait to see it come together. i'm a big kato track fan . love that track.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Sid


Very interesting and potentially scenic layout, extensive
continuous running on a single track with plenty of
passing sidings. Lots of switching opportunities also.

You are aware that there is a 'reverse loop' situation
created in the upper area just after the crossing. A turnout
begins a long loop that joins a crossover farther down. I didn't draw it out using red for 'right' rail, black for 'left' rail but that
would be advisable. There may be more complication
to it.

Don


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Update*

I was looking for a good track system after attempting to use Code 55 and not enjoying the track laying process. And after watching what Roy Smith had done on youtube, I was pretty much set on the unitrack system. 

DonR,

Is the reverse loop you're referring to the left-right-left situation TractionFan had mentioned or are you talking about track polarity? I've uploaded the final track plan, which shouldn't have any polarity change in it. Though I wish I could have gotten a wye in there. Just takes up too much space in my 10x10ft room


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Reverse Curves vs. Reverse Loops*



usafajk324 said:


> I was looking for a good track system after attempting to use Code 55 and not enjoying the track laying process. And after watching what Roy Smith had done on youtube, I was pretty much set on the unitrack system.
> 
> DonR,
> 
> Is the reverse loop you're referring to the left-right-left situation TractionFan had mentioned or are you talking about track polarity? I've uploaded the final track plan, which shouldn't have any polarity change in it. Though I wish I could have gotten a wye in there. Just takes up too much space in my 10x10ft room


usafajk324;


The "left/right/left situation" I spotted in sid's track plan, was a double reverse curve. As you probably know, reverse curves are tough on mechanical tracking, particularly when a train is backing up. However, reverse curves don't cause any electrical problems. On the other hand, a reverse loop, (or a wye, or turntable) do need special wiring, since any one of the three can cause a short circuit between the two rails of the track. All three of them let a locomotive enter "westbound" and emerge "eastbound" on the same track. 
I thought I saw the reverse loop that DonR was referring to. However, after attempting to trace it on your small scale track diagram, I'm not sure if it really is a reverse loop (and therefore a potential short circuit) or not.
I'll see if I can describe where it is. One good way of determining whether a rail-to-rail short circuit exists in a track plan is tracing the individual rails in two different colors. On a larger version of your track plan trace the route I'm going to describe, with red for one rail and black for the other rail. If, at any point a red rail physically intersects with a black rail, you have a short.

Start at the top center of your plan. The very topmost track is a simple spur, which we can skip. Below that are two parallel mainline tracks. Start on the lower of these two tracks and trace that lower track (with your two colors) to the right. It enters a turnout, which splits it into two tracks. Pick either one of the two tracks coming out of that turnout, and try to trace your way along any track, back to the other track emerging from that same turnout. The track connection between the two(if it exists) will be long and complicated, but if you can get back to the same turnout, you have a reverse loop. It's not obvious, but it may be there. It's certainly worth checking.

Wyes don't have to be big. I have two on my layout, and the total area of either of them is well under one square yard.

Good luck, have fun;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*I think this is the area*

I just traced along the area you are referring to. The side in red bypasses the yard area, while the blue line goes toward the yard both ending at the same point. No reverse loop. 

I can fit a wye using 3 wye turnouts and 6 pieces of i think 18 3/4" radius track from kato, but it takes up about a 24x24" area. I love the way it looks but couldn't come up with a practical location for it.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Red & blue individual rails, not entire tracks*



usafajk324 said:


> I just traced along the area you are referring to. The side in red bypasses the yard area, while the blue line goes toward the yard both ending at the same point. No reverse loop.
> 
> I can fit a wye using 3 wye turnouts and 6 pieces of i think 18 3/4" radius track from kato, but it takes up about a 24x24" area. I love the way it looks but couldn't come up with a practical location for it.


usafajk324;

I meant for you to assign different colors to each o0f the two rails that make up each of those tracks. If you do that, and look at the bottom end of your present color codded diagram, it looks like both tracks could go into the same turnout. This might be a short circuit situation, though I now doubt that it's a reverse loop, or maybe not even a short circuit. It may just be physically and electrically equivalent to a long, squiggly, passing siding. Color coding individual rails will show whether the short is there or not. 
Too bad about the wye. It would be a nice feature if you could fit it in. 

have fun;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*I did on paper*

But couldn't get it consistently on the computer. It is just a really long passing siding basically. On the plus side, all of my track parts showed up today. Just need to finish the benchwork, start laying track to trace for elevation cuts and go from there.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Sounds good*



usafajk324 said:


> But couldn't get it consistently on the computer. It is just a really long passing siding basically. On the plus side, all of my track parts showed up today. Just need to finish the benchwork, start laying track to trace for elevation cuts and go from there.


usafajk324;

That sounds great. Have fun building!

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

yeeee build away yeppers cant wait for build pics


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

I'll probably have some pictures of the bench work up tonight. So far 2 of the 4 table sections are built without plywood on them. Section 3 is going to be modifying the salt lake route table I built and then just need a bridge across the room. Should hopefully be able to get elevations figured out by Monday


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

awesome cant wait to see it all come together .


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Took some time*

Got all the track laid out over the last two days after getting plywood down. Took slightly longer than expected with school starting back up. But here are some pictures. First one is into the room from the door and the rest are around the layout, roughly from center of room. 

I went with 36" for base level, to be able to reach the back of the deepest parts of the layout. The main yard is about an inch up from the base. The back loop behind the main yard will go up from 37" to about 42" at a 2.5-3% grade. A little steep, as are most of the grades, but something I'm willing to deal with. 

I'll post an updated track plan with the elevations and locations. I think one ends up close to 4%, which is far less than ideal but I'm ok with it. I want the height difference and I'll be running consists of powerful locomotives. So it should be fine.


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

very nice. got my eyes on this one.


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Progress*

I'm hoping to make good progress pretty regularly. After trying to figure out what to do for 2 years, getting part way done with a layout, then starting over, I feel like I've learned a lot of the mistakes made on a first layout. Or the things that could have been done differently to make it easier/better.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Great start!*



usafajk324 said:


> I'm hoping to make good progress pretty regularly. After trying to figure out what to do for 2 years, getting part way done with a layout, then starting over, I feel like I've learned a lot of the mistakes made on a first layout. Or the things that could have been done differently to make it easier/better.




usafajk324;


Your progress on the layout looks great so far, and remarkably quick.
The 36" height should work well for you, both now, and for the long haul. By sitting in a caster-equipped office chair, you should be able to see everything, and reach most things. As you point out, simply standing up will let you reach the back track. 
Don't sweat the 4% grade. Yes, it's a bit steep, about max for most model railroads, but it's been done successfully many times. The prototype has more conservative standards. They consider 2% a very steep grade. However, we model types don't have to drag 10,000 very real tons of train up the side of a full-size mountain!
A steep grade can actually add operating interest to a model railroad. I have a helper district on my model, which represents one that existed at the same place on my prototype. Passenger trains with sufficient power can proceed up the grade unassisted. Heavy drag freights that just made it up the milder approach grade, need to stop and have a helper locomotive added to the consist.


Keep up the great work! :thumbsup:

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## bewhole (Dec 31, 2016)

Yes it is looking great. I wish I had that much room to work with.
I love that first pic it gives the illusion that the track is hanging out over without anything under it. LOL:thumbsup:


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

Traction fan:

Yeah I'm not too worried. My DDA40X might have a little trouble on the 4% grade, its heavy and powerful, but a long wheel base. 

bewhole:

The amount of space is deceptive. I wish I had twice as much space, ok, maybe 5 more feet in each direction. The room measures about 118 inches square from baseboard to baseboard. Probably why it's taken me 2 years to come up with a plan. The awkward layout of the room made it difficult. Double closet door, non-pocket doors, door position into the room. But it should all work out


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Wheel base and gradient*



usafajk324 said:


> Traction fan:
> 
> Yeah I'm not too worried. My DDA40X might have a little trouble on the 4% grade, its heavy and powerful, but a long wheel base.
> 
> ...


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

Bachmann labels it as a DD40AX but I believe the actual prototype is a DDA40X. If it doesn't work out, gives me more of an excuse to get some more SD70's or maybe some AC6000's or 4400's.

The 4% grade is after the bridge nearest the edge of the table, in picture 4 above before hitting the turnout


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

Been busy, haven't gotten a whole lot done. Elevations on the yard side of the layout are done and I'm moving around the U. Should have some updates and photos this weekend. Been busy with school starting up and deciding to keep my part-time job.


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

So I have some picture updates. I'm starting to think it would have been a good idea to put foam between the plywood and track, but I think I'm going to roll with it and see where I end up. I'll find ways to have dips in elevation, cut some holes, cardboard strips, and a joint compound slurry. But half the layout elevations are done. Once I get the other half up, I'll put power to it and test how things run.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Looking good!*



usafajk324 said:


> So I have some picture updates. I'm starting to think it would have been a good idea to put foam between the plywood and track, but I think I'm going to roll with it and see where I end up. I'll find ways to have dips in elevation, cut some holes, cardboard strips, and a joint compound slurry. But half the layout elevations are done. Once I get the other half up, I'll put power to it and test how things run.




usafajk324;

Your layout looks good as is. You are making good progress.
If your track is not glued down yet, and you really want foam, it's not too late. You could cut foam to fit the plywood strips you have already made to support your track, and slip them in between, the plywood and the track; if you want.
Latex caulk makes a good adhesive for holding track, foam, and plywood to each other. It's also slow-curing enough that you could simply lift up one 2'-3' section of track, intact, and add the foam layer under it. Then glue the track to the foam with more caulk. A dab every 8" or so is fine for holding track down. The same spacing would also work for holding the foam to the plywood.

Good luck & have fun with whatever you choose;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Is it normal or personal preference*

To do foam between track and base material? I did it when I was building the Salt Lake Route originally, but it seemed excessive.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Which kind of foam?*



usafajk324 said:


> To do foam between track and base material? I did it when I was building the Salt Lake Route originally, but it seemed excessive.


usafajk324;

Pretty much everything in this hobby is a mater of personal preference, and relatively little is "normal" including model railroaders themselves! :laugh:

I'm not sure if we are talking about the same kind of foam, or not. I thought you meant a 1"-2" thick layer of "extruded foam insulation board." This is the rigid, pink, blue, or green stuff sold in home improvement stores for use as home insulation. It has become very popular with model railroaders as a scenery base material. With foam installed, you can easily carve out ditches, streams, road underpasses, etc. Pieces of the same foam can be stacked, like layers of a cake, to form hills, tunnels, and any other above-track-level scenery. 

It also occurred to me that you might have been talking about "foam roadbed" instead. This foam product, like its cork cousin, is used to simulate the raised embankment that real railroad track sits on. Since you are using Kato Unitrack, which has its own built-in roadbed, this second possibility seemed unlikely, but maybe you were thinking of possible sound deadening? I don't use roadbed track myself, but I've read that it can be kind of noisy, since the plastic roadbed can act as a sounding board.

In any case, use of either kind of foam is strictly optional. I wish I could buy the foam insulation board, but its not available in Southern California, where I live.

regards;

Traction Fan :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## usafajk324 (Jul 31, 2019)

*Extruded foam*

I was thinking to do the whole layout underlayed with foam for scenery. I plan to use it for hills, I have a sheet of 2 inch, and I think 2 sheets of 1 inch. Just so expensive to make the whole layout with a layer of foam under it. 

I previously used white styrofoam, which originally had a metallic film and a plastic film on either side, about 5/8" thick, as a base. Much cheaper, but such a pain to remove the film from either side. I don't plan to use the cork road bed for anything other than around building bases in the yard


----------



## sid (Mar 26, 2018)

traction;; i thought that pink board was all over calif. i lived there till i had enough of it. but i was able to get it from home depot. it cost way more there than where i live now.


----------

