# Help with planning expanded Christmas Tree layout



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Hi, every year my sons and I run a simple HO scale oval under our tree - Thomas the Train set with 18" EZ track. They're getting older and more into it. So this year I've decided to surprise them with an expanded layout (sure just for them and none of this is for me right :laugh

Go easy on me, this is my first shot at layout design since I was a kid 35 years ago. I found this cool software from Atlas that's allowing me to do it by scale. 

My restrictions:
- HO scale
- Walls
- Sofas
- 24" radius turns - part of my surprise is an Amtrak Superliner set that needs min 24" turns. 
- I'm thinking I'd like to stay away from reversing plans b/c I think that can be a PIA? 

Using the Atlas software here's where I am. Stuck trying to connect the two circles. That long run is behind the sofa which will be accessible.

How can I make this work??


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

That situation is a tough one.

I doubt that you can actually connect
the two circle sections for continuous
running. The sofa is a major block.
You can connect them with one track but
the train would have to back up to return
to originating circle.

A curved turnout would avoid
that awkward top track. I would simply
eliminate the left turnout on the right circle.
It is preventing smooth connection of the circle and
there is no way it's track can connect to the 
left circle.

We hope you are planning some solid base for
the tracks. Running trains on a floor results in
wheels picking up lint. This can jam a loco and
slow down the cars.

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

DonR said:


> That situation is a tough one.
> 
> I doubt that you can actually connect
> the two circle sections for continuous
> ...


Thanks Don. Wow ok thought this would be easier than it is. 

So based on your comments, how about this? To your point the train would have to back into the long section which doesnt work. Also I had to make the turnouts #4 atlas - not sure if my superliner coaches which require 24" radius would work on those.

My other thought was to run it under the sofa but I'll never have enough clearance without raising the sofa (wife wont be thrilled about this to begin with). Right now there's 3.75" of space between the carpet and the sofa. 

Oh and yes I'm planning on using sturdy 3/4" plywood as the base all around.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

You have a left-hand turnout on the left and the opposite on the right. Try swapping these turnout to the opposite sides and use the diverging leg in the turn to avoid that nasty sharp curve after the turnouts. This is how cross-overs are laid coming out of curves to a parallel track.

If it were me laying this track, I would use Flextrack. You could tighten your radius slightly to make it fit on a 4x4 piece of plywood while still having a greater than 22' radius. It would be around 23" radius.

Curved turnouts now, would only work at the upper left and upper right of your curves. It would give you a slightly longer straight section between circles, but would also require more width of your sub-roadbed. It would eliminate that sharp divergence on each circle entirely though.

I love curved turnouts but I'm in the minority here as some have written they've experienced problems with derailments and other issues. I have not experienced those problems.


----------



## Dennis461 (Jan 5, 2018)

Sofa=tunnel. Raise it up on 4" blocks of wood, use silicon caulk on the blocks to make sure the sofa legs stay put. Now it's a simple dogbone layout with no turnouts.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

MichaelE said:


> You have a left-hand turnout on the left and the opposite on the right. Try swapping these turnout to the opposite sides and use the diverging leg in the turn to avoid that nasty sharp curve after the turnouts. This is how cross-overs are laid coming out of curves to a parallel track.
> 
> If it were me laying this track, I would use Flextrack. You could tighten your radius slightly to make it fit on a 4x4 piece of plywood while still having a greater than 22' radius. It would be around 23" radius.
> 
> ...


Thanks. I'm still confused by some of the terminology but I think I get what you're saying.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Dennis461 said:


> Sofa=tunnel. Raise it up on 4" blocks of wood, use silicon caulk on the blocks to make sure the sofa legs stay put. Now it's a simple dogbone layout with no turnouts.


Yep, I think thats the only and best approach here. However 4" will never fly with my wife. Do you think I need to make it that high? 

I have 3.75" of clearance now. I'm thinking of using very thin 1/4" plywood as a base under the sofa.

So these are the coaches I need to pull (no idea of their height but pretty tall). What's the min clearance I need? Hoping I dont have to raise the sofa 4" b/c I'm pretty sure that wont fly.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)




----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

MichaelE said:


>


Thanks but its hard to see your edits. No worries as I think I'm going to run it under to sofa!


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

So I've been doing some reading and it seems like 4 inches is a good clearance for HO these days. I also believe these cars are 16-17' in real life which, I think, converts to about 2.4" in HO scale?

If so I should be good, some safe estimates:

- plywood base: 0.25"
- track height: ~0.25"
- cork roadbed: ~0.5"
- train height: ~2.5"

= 3 inches approx? 

If I put my sofa (which is ~3.5 clearance) on 1" risers that would give me 4.5" of clearance.

Does that work?

I think someone said this is a called a simple dogbone?


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Those cars are going to have a problem negotiating those #4 turnouts combined with an S curve.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Those Superliner coaches are big boys. Amtrak can't
even fit them thru the tunnels of the Northeast. The
only ones operating in the East are on the Auto Train
and it goes no further NE than Lorton, Va.

You may want to wait until you have the actual cars
so you can measure exactly the clearance you'll need
under the sofa.

The likely place for derails is on the turnouts. (someone
forgot to throw the points and the train goes off the
track). Will you be able to 'get to' the two turnouts 
for the track that runs behind the sofa? 

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

MichaelE said:


> Those cars are going to have a problem negotiating those #4 turnouts combined with an S curve.



Yikes. Ok I'll have to figure out the turnout problem then. nice digram. 



DonR said:


> Those Superliner coaches are big boys. Amtrak can't
> even fit them thru the tunnels of the Northeast. The
> only ones operating in the East are on the Auto Train
> and it goes no further NE than Lorton, Va.
> ...


Ok good idea. I'll get one first and make sure I can raise the sofas enough. 

Yea I'm seeing these turnouts are gonna be tough. 

Using the Atlas software this is a closeup of what the turnout looks like using a 24" turn track on the outlet. In the digram it doesnt look to bas.










I'm gonna mess with some more designs.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Ok if you think the turnout above will be too tight or too much of an S Curve for these Superliner Coaches how about this approach, using WYEs (Atlas 177). Removes the switches which makes it simpler but less control. 

Using some flex track I think I can make this work. Thoughts?


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Ok still tinkering. I like this one better. Using these things I found "Wye Turnouts" I can use them as turnouts on the curves, my original problem. 

I think I like this one best as it gives me the control to keep the train in specific loops where as the previous one with regular Wye's didnt. 

Thoughts (ignore the wiggly flex track pieces).


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Using Flex track and turnouts placed on the curves
you should be able to run straight across BEHIND
the sofa. You sure don't want track under the REAR
of the sofa where you can't get to it.

Use a turnout with the divert curve that approximates
the radius of your circles. It would become part
of the circle. That should let the long
straight track actually be straight.

Once you get your flex track you can see how much
better your design will fall in place.

Don


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Terminolgy and operating turnouts*



bryher said:


> Thanks. I'm still confused by some of the terminology but I think I get what you're saying.


 bryher;

This is quite a complicated little thread you have going! 
Maybe I can help, or at least try to.

The Atlas Snap switch has an 18" radius curve built in. Any car that requires a 24" minimum radius is going to have problems getting through an 18" curve.

The #4 turnouts have two straight legs, no curved track in them. The same is true of most turnouts in existence, and all numbered turnouts. #6, #8, etc. The higher the number the gentler the split between routes. 

A curved turnout is one exception to the straight leg statement above. A curved turnout has two curved routes (of different radii) and no straight routes.

A "wye turnout" is one that has both of it's straight routes splitting at equal angles from the center-line of the turnout. There is no difference in the amount of angle on either route. The name "wye turnout" comes from their use in "wyes." A wye is a triangular track arrangement that lets a train turn around in the same fashion as an automobile making a "K-turn" on a narrow street.

The attached file explains a lot of the terminology used in model railroading.

Good luck with your layout;

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:

View attachment Model Railroad Terminology 2.2.pdf


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

If you want this layout to work, rather than be a source of constant frustration at an already stressful time of year, you really need to clean up the design.

I'm not as worried about clearance under the sofa. You can figure that out (although I would SERIOUSLY consider BOTH tracks going behind the sofa rather than under it. That track running just behind the front edge of the sofa is likely to get hit by errant heels and wayward packages, causing separations and derailments.

Secondly, if you want to use those long Amfleet coaches, a 22" radius curve is already flirting with disaster, and a #4 turnout is basically a non-starter. Pick up several #7 or #8 curved turnouts to avoid the s curves coming off the turnouts.

Lastly, consider whether you actually want those loops around the tree and the table. Are you really going to want to throw points to change the route? How are you planning to do that without crawling over your layout? Sure, there are ways, but doing it needs to be part of your design. If it were me, I would eliminate the hassle and just do a long loop. At a minimum, eliminate the loop around the table and just have a balloon return track.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

traction fan said:


> bryher;
> 
> This is quite a complicated little thread you have going!
> Maybe I can help, or at least try to.
> ...


Thanks Traction Fan. Yep this is how I do things -- and to me its the best part. The planning, finding problems, updating, etc. Thanks for all of your help and patience. And that terminology doc will stay open on my PC for a long time.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> If you want this layout to work, rather than be a source of constant frustration at an already stressful time of year, you really need to clean up the design.


Yes, definitely dont want that. So thank you for helping.



CTValleyRR said:


> I'm not as worried about clearance under the sofa. You can figure that out (although I would SERIOUSLY consider BOTH tracks going behind the sofa rather than under it. That track running just behind the front edge of the sofa is likely to get hit by errant heels and wayward packages, causing separations and derailments.


I tried a modified design and seems like it will be trickier to get both to go behind the sofa. 



CTValleyRR said:


> Secondly, if you want to use those long Amfleet coaches, a 22" radius curve is already flirting with disaster, and a #4 turnout is basically a non-starter. Pick up several #7 or #8 curved turnouts to avoid the s curves coming off the turnouts.


Ok so in the latest design I used #8 turnouts



CTValleyRR said:


> Lastly, consider whether you actually want those loops around the tree and the table. Are you really going to want to throw points to change the route? How are you planning to do that without crawling over your layout? Sure, there are ways, but doing it needs to be part of your design. If it were me, I would eliminate the hassle and just do a long loop. At a minimum, eliminate the loop around the table and just have a balloon return track.


Ok great points I definitely do want the loop around the tree. But, yea, def dont need one around the table. Didn't even think of that!

Ok I think this is the simplest I can come up with. Using two #8 turnouts on the straight sections and then flex track coming out of them to keep the curve gradual. (note the sections behind/under the sofa will be flex track but used straight pieces for accuracy in the software).

So here's my latest:


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

bryher --

Have you decided on _WHICH_ kind of track you'll be using?

Almost certainly some kind of "sectional" track designed to be laid down on top of a carpet, and easily removable later on, is that correct?

If this is the case, you ought to consider one of the prefab track types that is made with "integrated ballast".

Kato Unitrack and Bachmann "EZ track" come to mind, but there may be another one or two types out there.

If you use an app like RailModeler Pro (there is a free version as well called RailModeler Express), you can load up one of their templates that has all the Unitrack pieces, and I'll bet they have one for EZ Track as well.

This should make it easier to do the pre-planning.

I found Kato Unitrack to be very easy to work with. They have a particularly good way of connecting power feeders and getting power switches hooked up. The electrical connectors are modular and there are "extension cables" available for longer reaches.

Even though the Unitrack is still _"modular, snap-together",_ it looks quite pleasing once assembled...


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

J.Albert1949 said:


> bryher --
> 
> Have you decided on _WHICH_ kind of track you'll be using?
> 
> ...


That was my next question. 

So yes. My plan is to lay the track directly on top of 3/4" plywood. Might be overkill? But figured it would keep things sturdy overtop of the carpet. 

As of now planning on code 100 track. I heard that's the best for running new stock I'm planning on buying as well as older rolling stock which I've had since I was a boy.

Was thinking going with new Atlas Nickel track. 

And directly onto the plywood base with felt. No roadbed.

And to your point I do need a way to secure and then remove it as needed. On one hand this layout would be used each year. But of course my boys will want to try different things so would like to make changes. 

Should I nail/tack it down? was reading on here people like glue and / or caulk? If glue/caulk can''t use felt and would probably just paint the platform.

Have I said yet how much fun this is??


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

The most recent track design seems ideal for
your purposes.

Track nails, or spikes can be used with a 'soft'
base that they can be pushed into. But nailing
into a 3/4"plywood is like to cause damage to
the tracks. 

Instead, use an adhesive.

You can easily remove flex track that has been
glued sparingly. Just a dab here and there to
keep the track from moving. Then when you want
to make changes, use a wide blade such as a
putty knife to break the glue hold.

I use a diluted Elmer's white glue, but others 
prefer some caulks.

Many of us prefer to use foam or cork roadbed
under the track. It looks better and has some
noise abatement capabilities. Again, tho, use
adhesive very sparingly so it and the track can be reused
in a new layout.

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

DonR said:


> The most recent track design seems ideal for
> your purposes.
> 
> Track nails, or spikes can be used with a 'soft'
> ...


Cork would be ideal. Both for aesthetics and sound. But the extra time and cost I'm leaning away from it. 

I like the idea of using adhesive so I know its in place, esp since alot of the layout will be in hard to reach places. 

Only question: you mention i the adhesive can easily be removed from flex track. Does that go the same for sectionals like curves and switches?


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

CTValleyRR said:


> If you want this layout to work, rather than be a source of constant frustration at an already stressful time of year, you really need to clean up the design.
> 
> I'm not as worried about clearance under the sofa. You can figure that out (although I would SERIOUSLY consider BOTH tracks going behind the sofa rather than under it. That track running just behind the front edge of the sofa is likely to get hit by errant heels and wayward packages, causing separations and derailments.
> 
> ...


I said as much in my edited version of his layout but the comments on his trackplan were not visible to most due to the resolution.

A pair of #8 curved turnouts and flextrack will solve this delema once and for all as my revision indicates. As invisible as it is.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

Run a figure eight or an oval with that goes under the sofa or right in front of it.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

I like it much better. I still think you should at least move the front track farther in, but it becomes a tradeoff: further in is less likely to get bumped, so less likely to have a problem, but it becomes harder to get to if you DO have a problem. 

Have you given a thought to controlling those turnouts? Probably best to handle them as a crossover, where one control input operates BOTH turnouts. You could use a Tam Valley Depot crossover controller to operate a servo on each turnout, and mount the operating switch on the wall to the right. A structure or tree, or even a mount of snow, could hide the servo.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Nikola said:


> Run a figure eight or an oval with that goes under the sofa or right in front of it.


I thought about that. Simpler yes but I really want the control. 



CTValleyRR said:


> I like it much better. I still think you should at least move the front track farther in, but it becomes a tradeoff: further in is less likely to get bumped, so less likely to have a problem, but it becomes harder to get to if you DO have a problem.


Exactly. I'll have to negotiate that one a bit. 



CTValleyRR said:


> Have you given a thought to controlling those turnouts? Probably best to handle them as a crossover, where one control input operates BOTH turnouts. You could use a Tam Valley Depot crossover controller to operate a servo on each turnout, and mount the operating switch on the wall to the right. A structure or tree, or even a mount of snow, could hide the servo.


 I was just planning on using conventional switches. aka - what was there 35 years ago when I tried this  Yea I'm up for anything. Didn't even know the concept of a crossover but I think I get it and like it. One button to control both switches?


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

bryher said:


> Cork would be ideal. Both for aesthetics and sound. But the extra time and cost I'm leaning away from it.
> 
> I like the idea of using adhesive so I know its in place, esp since alot of the layout will be in hard to reach places.
> 
> Only question: you mention i the adhesive can easily be removed from flex track. Does that go the same for sectionals like curves and switches?


There is really nothing to distinguish foam from cork roadbeds from a performance and quieting standpoint. The foam is perhaps easier to shape, while the cork is easier to cut.

Adhesives are generally not removeable without a lot of effort. Not a problem for a permanent layout that you change infrequently, but not good for a temporary holiday arrangement.

The natural solution would be to use roadbed track (the kind more or less permanently mounted to molded plastic roadbed. The problem is that this means returning to sectional track, which doesn't have the parts you need to make this work (and will ratchet up the cost as well). Perhaps the best solution would be to make your OWN roadbed track out of hardboard or thin plywood, foam or cork roadbed, and your track. You could then use adhesive to build these, and rail joiners and perhaps screws to hold the sections together.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

bryher said:


> I was just planning on using conventional switches. aka - what was there 35 years ago when I tried this  Yea I'm up for anything. Didn't even know the concept of a crossover but I think I get it and like it. One button to control both switches?


Well, the hobby has come a long way since then.

If you try local manual control, that will mean crawling or stepping over your layout, possibly straddling a moving train, and dodging Christmas tree and furniture, and flipping a lever. Then making sure you can get back and throw the other turnout before the train comes around and derails or shorts on the misaligned switch. That will get old fast.

A crossover control would mechanically throw BOTH sets of points at the same time to either the diverging legs of the turnouts (tree loop) or the through legs long loop around sofa / table. 

The control itself would be either manual or electronic. Manually, a stiff rod (music wire / throttle cable) to push / pull the throwbars (one would have to be crank mounted because the points actually move in opposite directions to set the diverging routes). Not hard. Electronically, you have a servo, solenoid, or stall motor installed next to the throwbar (on a layout that is above the floor, these would actually be mounted under the table in most cases). These use a small wire or pin to move the throwbar / points). The command is sent from a switch, usually a push button, mounted remotely, telling each motor to move in the appropriate direction when pushed. Motors and operating circuit are powered from AC output of the power pack or a separate wall plug.

The electronic solution I am familiar with is manufactured by Tam Valley Depot (basically, an engineer working in his basement). Check the website here: www.tamvalleydepot.com There are diagrams -- I think it's self-explanatory.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

The Elmer's glue can be washed off of track after
soaking if needed.

But a better way to fasten track to the plywood
than nails is to use tiny screws. Drill proper size
holes in the ties and on into the plywood. Then slowly
drive the screw until the head touches the tie. Any
further tension will distort the tie. You can easily
remove the screws when it's time to make changes.
Using flex track a screw every foot or so should be
sufficient.

Make sure the screw heads are small enuf that trains
don't trip on them.

Our neighborhood ACE Hardware has an extensive
stock of small screws.

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> There is really nothing to distinguish foam from cork roadbeds from a performance and quieting standpoint. The foam is perhaps easier to shape, while the cork is easier to cut.
> 
> Adhesives are generally not removeable without a lot of effort. Not a problem for a permanent layout that you change infrequently, but not good for a temporary holiday arrangement.
> 
> The natural solution would be to use roadbed track (the kind more or less permanently mounted to molded plastic roadbed. The problem is that this means returning to sectional track, which doesn't have the parts you need to make this work (and will ratchet up the cost as well). Perhaps the best solution would be to make your OWN roadbed track out of hardboard or thin plywood, foam or cork roadbed, and your track. You could then use adhesive to build these, and rail joiners and perhaps screws to hold the sections together.



Hmmm, this is interesting. My plan is the layout will stay attached when the holidays are over, and I'll just store the tracks adhered to the plywood in the offseason. But I'm sure over the years we'll want to tweak it. I keep reading the caulk is easy to remove.

I like the idea of making my own beds. Could I do this:

1) Caulk or nail cork roadbed to the plywood
2) Caulk the track to the cork roadbed?

If/when I want to make a change, just cut and pry up the cork and leave the track attached? then I have a built in roadbed?




CTValleyRR said:


> Well, the hobby has come a long way since then.
> 
> If you try local manual control, that will mean crawling or stepping over your layout, possibly straddling a moving train, and dodging Christmas tree and furniture, and flipping a lever. Then making sure you can get back and throw the other turnout before the train comes around and derails or shorts on the misaligned switch. That will get old fast.
> 
> ...


Definitely want electronic here and not jumping over stuff to manually throw switches. 

I was just thinking these:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*More info available*



bryher said:


> Thanks Traction Fan. Yep this is how I do things -- and to me its the best part. The planning, finding problems, updating, etc. Thanks for all of your help and patience. And that terminology doc will stay open on my PC for a long time.


bryher;

You are quite welcome!
If/when you decide to build a permanent model railroad, there are other files, like the terminology one I sent you, available. If you wish, you can check them out in the "Beginner's Q&A" section 0f this forum. Click on the very first thread there, titled "Help a new modeler to get started." All my files are in there, along with some very good info from other members.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## traction fan (Oct 5, 2014)

*Lousy control*



bryher said:


> Hmmm, this is interesting. My plan is the layout will stay attached when the holidays are over, and I'll just store the tracks adhered to the plywood in the offseason. But I'm sure over the years we'll want to tweak it. I keep reading the caulk is easy to remove.
> 
> I like the idea of making my own beds. Could I do this:
> 
> ...


bryher;

The control in your photo is notorious for shorting out and welding itself and burning out the coils in an Atlas switch machine. This has been reported many times here on the forum. A much better way would be to use a capacitive discharge system (CDU) and two doorbell buttons. The CDU prevents coil burnouts, and the buttons can handle the current much better than that Atlas P.O.C. in the photo. DonR made his own simple CDU, and has been using it successfully for may years. If you ask him nicely he might send you the diagram.

Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

I'd be glad to provide the circuit for the homemade 
CDU but I would rather suggest the use of 
the Stapleton 751D to control turnouts. It has a built
in CDU and also provides terminals for panel indicators.
You'd need one for each turnout.

http://www3.sympatico.ca/kstapleton3/751D.HTM

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

traction fan said:


> bryher;
> 
> The control in your photo is notorious for shorting out and welding itself and burning out the coils in an Atlas switch machine. This has been reported many times here on the forum. A much better way would be to use a capacitive discharge system (CDU) and two doorbell buttons. The CDU prevents coil burnouts, and the buttons can handle the current much better than that Atlas P.O.C. in the photo. DonR made his own simple CDU, and has been using it successfully for may years. If you ask him nicely he might send you the diagram.
> 
> Traction Fan:smilie_daumenpos:


Wow, had no idea. Once again you all saved me a bunch of time and frustration. Ok I'll look into that. I'm pretty capable with with electronics so I would rather go this route.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

DonR said:


> I'd be glad to provide the circuit for the homemade
> CDU but I would rather suggest the use of
> the Stapleton 751D to control turnouts. It has a built
> in CDU and also provides terminals for panel indicators.
> ...


Very cool. I read the instructions and should be able to do this. Ken also has his email for questions. thanks!


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

So last question is: code 100 or 83 track? I heard 100 is more versatile for running old locos and stock? I have a few old engines that I was able to get working again. 

BTW here's an updated layout. I added a small yard. I probably wont put electronic switches in the yard for simplicity sake and to allow my boys (two of them) to play at both ends of the layout. But if these CDUs appear to be great maybe I'll add them.


----------



## tankist (Jun 11, 2009)

Code 83 looks more in scale with scenery when installed on layout. Or so they say, I didn't find C100 out of place to much. 
In your case you can use either but I don't think the added cost of C83 going to provide you with any benefit. 

I'd say for floor/carpet operation stay with cheaper and more abundant C100.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

The code of track you use really doesn't matter in this case. If you look at your older stuff, does it appear to have larger flanges than the newer equipment? If so, code 100 will be a better investment. Otherwise, use whatever is available the cheapest.

I'm not sure what the yard buys you, really. You don't really have enough track for two simultaneous trains. Also, unless you're planning two isolated sections and two controllers, "playing at each end" needs DCC.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

tankist said:


> Code 83 looks more in scale with scenery when installed on layout. Or so they say, I didn't find C100 out of place to much.
> In your case you can use either but I don't think the added cost of C83 going to provide you with any benefit.
> 
> I'd say for floor/carpet operation stay with cheaper and more abundant C100.


Ok great


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> The code of track you use really doesn't matter in this case. If you look at your older stuff, does it appear to have larger flanges than the newer equipment? If so, code 100 will be a better investment. Otherwise, use whatever is available the cheapest.
> 
> I'm not sure what the yard buys you, really. You don't really have enough track for two simultaneous trains. Also, unless you're planning two isolated sections and two controllers, "playing at each end" needs DCC.


Oh yea. So I'll have 3 or 4 different locomotives and a bunch of different rolling stock that we'll want to run: amtrak superliner set (just purchased!), 2 older diesels, and the thomas the train set that we usually run under the tree. one train at a time of course. 

So I'm thinking, where do we keep all of it? the rolling stock primarily. I would keep the locomotives in a safe place. but let's say we want to switch out the superliner cars with a bunch of freight cars. 

I thought it would be easy to back the engine into the siding. The other boy could manually uncouple. Then back the engine into the other siding where he assembled a consist. 

One boy could run the engine, the other could manage the yard. That was my thinking at least.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Ok, I get it.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Hi everybody making great progress here. Countdown to having the layout ready, moved upstairs, and under the tree is -18 days  

I've got the main layout down, have been fine tuning and testing it to make sure it runs smoothly. Once i get it in place it will be tricky to access it. I'll post pictures once I'm happy but basically followed the original design with some minor changes. 

So right now I'm ready to automate the turnouts. I have new Atlas #8 Switches with no switch machines. Following the advice here in the thread I've been looking at alternatives to the Atlas switch boxes and machines. 

1) Tam Valley Depot - Singlet Micro control: these are awesome but one they're a bit pricey at $30 each. And two I'd have to mount them directly on the platform (not under in my case) and I think that could be tricky. 

2) Ken Stapleton's 751D unit: I've been emailing Ken, its been very slow as I know he's busy. But I learned per ken I need to "check with my Atlas dealer to get a hold of the solenoids I'll need for my turnouts" since mine aren't fitted with coils. 

I'm thinking even though the Atlas setups aren't reliable, the other options seem over m head and I might just go with Atlas.


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

Update: I'm now researching simple manual methods of switching the turnouts without having to crawl across the platform. 

= Simpler and something to keep the kids busy while running the trains. 

Some cool ideas out there. If anyone has done this before LMK!


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Atlas switch machines are available for your #6 turnouts.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Atl...turnouts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1

These are designed to attach to the side of the turnout
so no under table alignment is needed.

I would definitely recommend the Stapleton 751D which
is made to control twin coil units such as this Atlas.
It has a built in Capacitor Discharge unit to protect
the machine coils from accidental burn out such as can
happen when youngsters are at the controls.

Don


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

DonR said:


> Atlas switch machines are available for your #6 turnouts.
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=Atl...turnouts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1
> 
> ...


Thanks Don. So I think this is where I'm confused. Ken at Stapleton said my switch needs coils/solenoids to work with his device. Are you saying the Atlas side mounted "switch machine" would be this device?










If so I connect the 751D to the atlas switch machine?


----------



## bryher (Dec 17, 2011)

*Big Update*

Hi everyone and Happy Holidays! When I started this thread I kept envisioning coming back with a full update of the results. So here I am. In the holiday spirit and the spirit of gratitude for everyone here who helped along the way, I took some pictures and video of the end result - also a few of the progress. 

To recap I built this layout in my basement in 5 modular pieces. It was truly some of the most fun I've had and also a huge learning experience. Be kind as I'm still a newbie. But overall very please with the result. I've learned so much that I know how I'm going to do it differently next year.

So once I had it all running and wired in the basement, a few days before we got our Christmas Tree I moved it upstairs. Had to do it in the dark of night b/c my wife wasn't thrilled about the idea so wanted it to be a seamless as possible. So I moved the sofa out of the way and moved each piece upstairs.










[













































Put the sofa and end table back in place, went to bed, and in the morning my wife had a full layout under her sofa 

I had to work out alot of kinks -- again learned a ton I'll detail later. Got it working pretty well before our tree.

I think I mentioned how my boys love to setup the "town" under the tree with the train. So we did that. Now have two towns, one of each side of the layout and one for each boy to run.

First train run was a childhood set I got running again for the first time in 40+ years:










Video: https://i.imgur.com/PUBXWFF.mp4









I also made my first big purchase. A brand new Kato P42 Genesis engine complete with 7 Kato superliner coaches. I've never seen an engine run so smooth and quiet (had problems tho detailed on another thread)










And lastly here's some final videos of the layout in action, across the full layout and everything (I think these were too big for Imgur so put them on youtube)










The original Thomas The Train set we've been running under the tree every year:


----------



## Magic (Jan 28, 2014)

Looks like your project came out pretty good.
Kids seem to like it.

Magic


----------

