# My Dream N Layout



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

How do you like this trackplan, folks ? A double main line, branch line w/ reverse loop and staging tracks. I could not find a trackplan anywhere on the internet to suit me, so I had to come up with one of my own. Lotta skull sweat in this one, should be a blast to operate !


----------



## airshot (Jan 12, 2014)

Looks pretty awesome, I would have you double check your radii for the turns, being only 3 ft wide you have to watch tight radii or the locos will not make the turns. There is a track builder program on the net I have heard a lot of folks talk about that allows you to plan using actual track that is availiable so the radii and connecting points are real. I am using 11" radius on my N scale and would not want to go any tighter than that.


----------



## rkenney (Aug 10, 2013)

I think you might need to change your interchange track from the upper road (figure 8) to the lower road. Looks to me to be on the upper right and way to short to make a functioning grade for even N.

With a layout 6 foot long your going to need almost all 6 feet to make a grade that climbs the 1.5 " or so to allow one track to travel over another (your tunnel).


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

rkenney said:


> I think you might need to change your interchange track from the upper road (figure 8) to the lower road. Looks to me to be on the upper right and way to short to make a functioning grade for even N.
> 
> With a layout 6 foot long your going to need almost all 6 feet to make a grade that climbs the 1.5 " or so to allow one track to travel over another (your tunnel).


I'm one up on that, I did move the interchange track to the level end in my latest revision so the two connected points are at the lowest elevation. As for the grade on the branch line, a 4'6" run to max elevation of 1-3/4" at least will be required. I am onto that in my mind as well, and am considering an additional 6" in length to allow room for a 5' transition to max elevation.


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

airshot said:


> Looks pretty awesome, I would have you double check your radii for the turns, being only 3 ft wide you have to watch tight radii or the locos will not make the turns. There is a track builder program on the net I have heard a lot of folks talk about that allows you to plan using actual track that is availiable so the radii and connecting points are real. I am using 11" radius on my N scale and would not want to go any tighter than that.


Thanks, Airshot. The drawing I posted is just a sketch, and not to scale. I am probably going to have a minimum curve radius of 12" on the inner mainline loop, and more like a 15" radius to the outside so my long E-8s and 85' streamliners don't look so awkward. My branch line minimum radius can be a little less, as it will mostly only handle an 0-6-0 log train. I will be using mostly code 80 flex track on the running lines, so I will have to be careful of my wide latitude to screw something up !

Wade


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

Here at last is the completed final scale (1/8) drawing of my trackplan. 
I decided to add a foot to its length to decrease the severity of the branch line grade:


----------



## rkenney (Aug 10, 2013)

Looks good! I like the 3' width, so much easier to reach across. :smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

Ready to begin building now, I believe I _will_ paint my plywood GREEN !


----------



## rkenney (Aug 10, 2013)

wsboyette said:


> I believe I _will_ paint my plywood GREEN !



Good choice!:thumbsup:


----------



## Eric_L (Feb 11, 2011)

The tight radius turns have me worried. I think if you have the space you might go for 4' or even 5'; you'd be much happier with the breathing room. If nothing else you have more room for scenery. 
BE advised that turnouts on a grade can be problematic too, not impossible, just problematic. I had a Kato #4 on a turn that gave me grief. I switched it out for a #6 and things improved.


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

Eric_L said:


> he tight radius turns ma worried. I think if you have the space you might go for 4' or even 5'; you'd be much happier with the breathing room. If nothing else you have more room for scenery.
> BE advised that turnouts on a grade can be problematic too, not impossible, just problematic. I had a Kato #4 on a turn that gave me grief. I switched it out for a #6 and things improved.


Oh, I'll make sure that the mainline has the largest radius possible. I have this PRR passenger train consisting of a pair of E8s and 70' streamline cars, and it HATES tight curves......


----------



## Brakeman Jake (Mar 8, 2009)

I've spent months drawing my trackplan,and based on my experience so far,I can tell that quite a few of your expected measurements won't work.

Though twelve inch radius is fine with most N scale rolling stock,it is too tight for 85 footers wich would likely derail quite often unless run at creeping speeds.Then,to make it worse,your one inch track spacing is not nearly enough.The usual N scale spacing is more like 1 1/8 in. on straights and 1 1/4-1 3/8 in curves so that your 85 footers don't side swipe when meeting.

I understand you want to run steamers so I suggest you increase your loop's radius to twelve or even thirteen inches wich is fairly easy to do here.It will give you much more flexibility as to what you can run.

BTW,you'll need two inches clearance for your over/under...1 5/8 from railhead for standard cars plus an extra 3/8 for bridge structure.

Sorry to be such a critic,but it's easier (an less expensive) to correct on the plan than redo while building.I've grown gray hairs and lost a few others ironing flaws out of my own trackplan,so I have a fair idea of what you're up to.

Another point that struck me are your turnouts...they have pretty steep angles.You'll likely find out that they need much more room than what your plan suggests.


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Looks very much like the layouts.*

This looks like the layouts most of us dreamed about, and some of us actually built, when we first started out. First, it's your railroad and you have the absolute right to build it any way you want. I agree with the concerns about grades and curves and I think you may still be short on room for both. I did not see any indication of space around the layout in your drawing. will your layout be built on a 7'x 3' piece of plywood? If so, will either of the long sides,or worse, one long and one short, be against a wall? Even with your 3' width this may present serious access problems for re-railling and repairs to switches, track, Etc.
You did not mention your age or experiance . I am an old geezer, and have been model railroading over 50 year, but I am very new to this computer E-mail business. If you want my help, I am here. If not, I'll shut up and leave you alone. In either case, good luck with your ambitious project. Remember, as long as you're having fun with this hobby, that's all that matters.


----------



## jesteck (Apr 15, 2014)

Jake is probably right on all the points he mentioned. I also see that you only have one crossover between your outer mains, and in only one direction. Once you cross over to the other track, the only way to get back is to reverse the entire train through it. Not a great idea. Another minor detail- the reversing loop on your inner track is possibly in reality two interconnected reversing loops and will need very careful attention to wiring. It also presents the same problem as that single crossover- once the train is going clockwise, counterclockwise is impossible without backing through the figure 8. Don't start building just yet; instead, buy a couple of #6 turnouts so you can see exactly how much room they need. And try to leave yourself enough room between the long sides of your layout and any walls so you can get in there to work. You'll be glad you did- and can increase the width a bit more.


----------



## ScrewySqrl (Oct 7, 2014)

I'll strongly suggest getting SCARM and trying to lay out your track with it.


----------



## Train Master (Oct 17, 2014)

ScrewySqrl said:


> I'll strongly suggest getting SCARM and trying to lay out your track with it.


I have that software:urat00l:


----------



## wsboyette (Jan 25, 2014)

Oh, the drawing I have here is just a conceptual drawing, and I have many changes to make before I begin building. Increasing curve radii, testing to determine whether the trains will be able to climb the grades involved, all must be done before construction begins. I do have a copy of SCARM, and will be using it for the final precision drawings when the refinements to the design are completed. Who knows, I may even find a already refined track-plan that I like better and may discard this design !


----------

