# BIG LAYOUT FOR ART ROOM



## Commander Zarkon

Howdy! 
Just got RailModellerPro and learning to use it. So far it seems really nice, although I have only scratched the surface of its capabilities! I can see how useful it is already!

Anyway.... my layout will be in the art room. I teach art at a high school. It used to be the shop room, but now its art, and it is big! Attached is a schematic of the room. I will put pics of my layout ideas when I get them done, and hopefully I can get some further ideas-and warnings-from y'all.

I was originally planning to use O Gauge trains, but have been leaning towards HO. This is because HO is my favorite, and because there just seems to be a lot more stuff for HO. Also because I have to keep my tracks and stuff on the sides, and HO lets me do a lot more in a smaller space. I may still run an O gauge over the top of the room though. All the locomotives will likely be Steam Engines, as that's what I find the most interesting.

The trains will travel through various places including: mushroom forest, volcanic area, a winter area, zombie town, water falls, Native American area, small towns, etc. The trains will also go up and down elevations, so I will likely have one helix and some type of switchback.
The train will also cross overhead in at least one place, which will be a long outcropping of "stone" bridged by a trestle of some kind. Maybe also a "stone" arch.
I have to learn about switching and maintaining a current on such a huge set of tracks, as well as many other things, but God willing I will be able to start soon!







the room


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

Holy cow, that's going to be a huge layout!


----------



## DonR

Sounds like an ambitious layout that you have in mind. It's good that you seem to
have plenty of room for it. I agree that you should go with HO. It's a workable scale,
has a vast choice of trains, accessories, scenic effects, track and accessories. Since you have indicated a preference for steam, I would suggest that you have only 22" or qiswe radius curves.
By all means, plan on using Flex track, and quality turnouts. It will make
your plans easier to install and your operations smoother.

You definitely should plan on using the DCC control system for such a large
track plan. It will make your wiring and operation much easier.

With DCC you have 2 wires, as a bus, that powers your whole layout. There is
no complex toggle panels, multiple power sources and complex wiring. Once
you have the beginnings of a track plan, post it and ask for opinions and
suggestions. One important factor we would need to know, will there be more
than one person operating separate trains at the same time? For example,
person A is controlling a train through the mountains as person B is switching
cars building a freight train in a train yard.

We look forward to working with you.

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR

Build it in smaller modules, say 2'x8', and get each one up and running, possibly even with scenery, before going on to the next. An elephant like you envision is impossible to eat in one bite. Trying to do it will most likely result in burnout and /or frustration.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Yeah pretty big, but it mainly stays on the edges of the room, with a few crossing overs, maybe. Hopefully I won't be in a corner crying before its done!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Trying to quote but the quote button just says "Message added to multi-quote". And then can't figure out what to do to make the quotes show up!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> Sounds like an ambitious layout that you have in mind. It's good that you seem to
> have plenty of room for it. I agree that you should go with HO. It's a workable scale,
> has a vast choice of trains, accessories, scenic effects, track and accessories. Since you have indicated a preference for steam, I would suggest that you have only 22" or qiswe radius curves.
> By all means, plan on using Flex track, and quality turnouts. It will make
> your plans easier to install and your operations smoother.
> 
> You definitely should plan on using the DCC control system for such a large
> track plan. It will make your wiring and operation much easier.
> 
> With DCC you have 2 wires, as a bus, that powers your whole layout. There is
> no complex toggle panels, multiple power sources and complex wiring. Once
> you have the beginnings of a track plan, post it and ask for opinions and
> suggestions. One important factor we would need to know, will there be more
> than one person operating separate trains at the same time? For example,
> person A is controlling a train through the mountains as person B is switching
> cars building a freight train in a train yard.
> 
> We look forward to working with you.
> 
> Don


AHHH! GOT IT!!! 
*I'm QUOTING!!! I'M QUOTIIIIIING!!!!!!!*

Anyway....
Yeah DCC seems like the way to go from the little I understand, and from your recommendation, I am certain. 
I hadn't thought of more than me operating the system, but now that you mention it, it would be neat to have the ability for some students to work the different trains. 

I really appreciate all the input!

Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> Build it in smaller modules, say 2'x8', and get each one up and running, possibly even with scenery, before going on to the next. An elephant like you envision is impossible to eat in one bite. Trying to do it will most likely result in burnout and /or frustration.


Makes sense. I am going to design the whole track on the software, then put it up here for advice on whether it is nuts, and/or how to go about dividing it up into sections.


----------



## Severn

Do you have a rough sketch of your ideas inside the outline above?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So far looks like at least one helix and then a winding switchback path down the side of mountains or a canyon. 
The options for radii in the software that I see are:

1. Full section 15" radius 30
2. Full section 18" radius 30
3. 22" radius 22.5

Seems like the 30 radius is best, no? Especially for a helix and switchbacks?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Severn said:


> Do you have a rough sketch of your ideas inside the outline above?


I was going to do that but am messing around with Railmodeller Pro.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

This is what I did messing araound with the software. I need to kee the area of the entrance more open, so the layouts will be along the South and North walls mainly. I have a helix in the South wall area, and then a winding switchback over on the north. 
I'm just trying it out to see how it works.
Please feel free to advise.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn

FWIW, if the students are handling the trains, O-gauge is a better choice as it's more robust than HO, especially with kids handling it.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

gunrunnerjohn said:


> FWIW, if the students are handling the trains, O-gauge is a better choice as it's more robust than HO, especially with kids handling it.



I guess I'll be the one doing it then. The more I think on this the more HO seems the way to go. If it was just a train going around a simple track then O would be fine, but I'd really like to have all sorts of intricate stuff all over the place; little hidden places and things, and HO seem the best for that.
Thanks for pointing that out!


----------



## vette-kid

Looks like essentially just a big loop. Wiring for DC would be no more difficult than DCC, in fact petty much exactly the same. 

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk


----------



## Commander Zarkon

vette-kid said:


> Looks like essentially just a big loop. Wiring for DC would be no more difficult than DCC, in fact petty much exactly the same.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk


So far. 
I'm just getting used to the program. Once I put up the first draft of the track hopefully I'll get some feedback regarding adding additional track for more trains, etc.


----------



## Chaostrain

I fully agree with the sections advice, not so much the construction, although that's definitely a good idea, but for movability. You never know if life is going to tap you on shoulder and say, "I rolled the dice. You loose. Get out!" Personal experience, my layout was a total loss. Think about the ability for one person with a hand truck or two people can fairly easily move. Personally I'm going with 2.5ft X 6ft.

I'm looking forward to see what you come up with.


----------



## Severn

I guess I thought you were intending to fill the room with the layout. But perhaps just a layout against a wall.

So here's some ideas if this a student/teach project.

- although o scale is more robust, ho is much cheaper

- also if you stick with dcc, you could as a project build the base station using the open source dcc++ project...

-. and then run the trains using the open source project jmri and a cheap computer...

- if it's a team build I guess you'd want to consider the start and end time so folks could see the fruit of their labor...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Chaostrain said:


> I fully agree with the sections advice, not so much the construction, although that's definitely a good idea, but for movability. You never know if life is going to tap you on shoulder and say, "I rolled the dice. You loose. Get out!" Personal experience, my layout was a total loss. Think about the ability for one person with a hand truck or two people can fairly easily move. Personally I'm going with 2.5ft X 6ft.
> 
> I'm looking forward to see what you come up with.


I understand that point of view, but I have all my stuff there: all my model building, leather, art stuff, and even tools for vehicles. On the other side of that area, divided by some shelves, is a garage with another storage closet. I have my FJ Cruiser in there waiting to be repainted and the inside redone. 
I do plan on making it somewhat removable in sections though, even if I have to sawzall some pices I will still be able to save about 90% of the track.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Severn said:


> I guess I thought you were intending to fill the room with the layout. But perhaps just a layout against a wall.
> 
> So here's some ideas if this a student/teach project.
> 
> - although o scale is more robust, ho is much cheaper
> 
> - also if you stick with dcc, you could as a project build the base station using the open source dcc++ project...
> 
> -. and then run the trains using the open source project jmri and a cheap computer...
> 
> - if it's a team build I guess you'd want to consider the start and end time so folks could see the fruit of their labor...


I *WISH* I could have that room only for a layout!!!
I've pretty much decided to go with HO.
This won't really be having students involved except for maybe helping paint some scenery. I will have links and some materials ready for those that ask, and I can always let a students run a train under my supervision.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CONFUSED ABOUT TRACKS 

So in my current layout plan, I have the following curves:


Full Section 15In. Radius, 30 degrees
Full Section 18In. Radius, 30 degrees
Did I pick too tight of a turn with these for an HO train?

The other choice I see is 22In. Radius 22.5 degrees.

I'm using RailModellerPro with Atlas HO Code 100 track selected. There's a bunch of other brands but that was what was already selected. 

Any advice?


----------



## cfurnari

For HO trains, I suspect 18 inch radius may be tight for longer cars or engines. 15 inch will likely be tight for most rolling stock, and is not a radius I have heard of. For me, 18 is a minimum. just my opinion of course


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Also, in Railmodeller Pro I laid out 1,912.43 inches of track in a section . The track drops in that length 48 inches. The software is saying this is a 25.1% grade. That seems wrong.
A track calculator online give me 2.51% grade. 
What am I doing wrong?
Is the software wrong?


Should I aim for a 2% grade? Maybe another helix partially hidden and also a few switchbacks?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

cfurnari said:


> For HO trains, I suspect 18 inch radius may be tight for longer cars or engines. 15 inch will likely be tight for most rolling stock, and is not a radius I have heard of. For me, 18 is a minimum. just my opinion of course


I should probably go in and redo it with the 22" radius.
Confusing with the degrees.


----------



## 65446

Can we assume you are thinking 'around the walls/shelf' type construction..and not flat table(s) ? 
I think it's too big to make with small modules, especially if you believe the school will never order it removed...
Do look into 'open grid', 'L girder', and 'cookie cutter' types of benchwork..If you were to go flat tables they must be narrow enough to reach across to do scenic work, track amending and to rescue troubled trains..Open grid bench work allows you to climb under and easily reach trains and track in tunnels. (Nice book: "Model Railroad Benchwork").
Yes, no tighter than 18"r curves in HO..The wider the merrier...especially on main line curves... And, yes, HO has the vastest choice of train and structures..
Far as control, best to go DCC with either NCE (my choice) or Digitrax throttle with walk-around-plug-in panels, and locos DCC/'Sound on board'..You and kids will be able to walk along with your trains with DCC....
DCC is easier to control trains with than earlier analog DC along with its cumbersome wiring necessities...
You can get away with 3% grades but they can limit the amount of cars you can pull without wheel slip..7-10 cars, OK.. 25 or more may be a problem..But you can also double-head locos (2-3 steam/3-4 diesels) and, again, DCC control makes this easy once you get the hang of it programming-wise.
Note too that curves add drag to a train. Thus, a curve on a 2% grade will cause train to behave as if it's steeper than that; like 2.5 or 3% ...

Good luck *Commander Z*....This is a huge club-sized undertaking..Hope you have some helpers. Keep us posted...
🛤🌵🛤


----------



## Severn

I'd stick with the widest curves your space will low. I'm sure everyone has tons of advice on "this how you should do x"... Lots of experience here and other forums all scales. But there's so many ways to do things... you'll just have to decide.

Have you found the various often cited you tube channels related to both model railroad and diorama building?

These are the ones I like:

Kathy Millatt



https://youtube.com/c/KathyMillatt



Marklin of Sweden



https://youtube.com/user/marklinofsweden



Luke Towan



https://youtube.com/c/LukeTowan



Paepercuts



https://youtube.com/c/Paepercuts


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> Can we assume you are thinking 'around the walls/shelf' type construction..and not flat table(s) ?
> I think it's too big to make with small modules, especially if you believe the school will never order it removed...
> Do look into 'open grid', 'L girder', and 'cookie cutter' types of benchwork..If you were to go flat tables they must be narrow enough to reach across to do scenic work, track amending and to rescue troubled trains..Open grid bench work allows you to climb under and easily reach trains and track in tunnels. (Nice book: "Model Railroad Benchwork").
> Yes, no tighter than 18"r curves in HO..The wider the merrier...especially on main line curves... And, yes, HO has the vastest choice of train and structures..
> Far as control, best to go DCC with either NCE (my choice) or Digitrax throttle with walk-around-plug-in panels, and locos DCC/'Sound on board'..You and kids will be able to walk along with your trains with DCC....
> DCC is easier to control trains with than earlier analog DC along with its cumbersome wiring necessities...
> You can get away with 3% grades but they can limit the amount of cars you can pull without wheel slip..7-10 cars, OK.. 25 or more may be a problem..But you can also double-head locos (2-3 steam/3-4 diesels) and, again, DCC control makes this easy once you get the hang of it programming-wise.
> Note too that curves add drag to a train. Thus, a curve on a 2% grade will cause train to behave as if it's steeper than that; like 2.5 or 3% ...
> 
> Good luck *Commander Z*....This is a huge club-sized undertaking..Hope you have some helpers. Keep us posted...
> 🛤🌵🛤


Thank you!
Yes, more like shelves is the idea, with lots of switchbacks.

I will look into that book!
There's a museum here in Show Low that has a train set in it. Going to visit and see if those who built it can help me out.

DCC is what keep hearing is best, so will go that route.

Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Severn said:


> I'd stick with the widest curves your space will low. I'm sure everyone has tons of advice on "this how you should do x"... Lots of experience here and other forums all scales. But there's so many ways to do things... you'll just have to decide.
> 
> Have you found the various often cited you tube channels related to both model railroad and diorama building?
> 
> These are the ones I like:
> 
> Kathy Millatt
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtube.com/c/KathyMillatt
> 
> 
> 
> Marklin of Sweden
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtube.com/user/marklinofsweden
> 
> 
> 
> Luke Towan
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtube.com/c/LukeTowan
> 
> 
> 
> Paepercuts
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtube.com/c/Paepercuts



Yeah I realized my curves were really tight. I'd rather be safe with a wider curve than narrow. redoing the layout. Still learning so no biggie. Better to screw up in the software than in a huge diorama!

I will check out those channels! Thank you!


----------



## cfurnari

Commander Zarkon said:


> I should probably go in and redo it with the 22" radius.
> Confusing with the degrees.


I suspect we don't need to explain radius. degrees refer to how many degrees, of a complete circle, the track covers. typical 18 inch radius has 12 sections of track, covering the entire circle. 360/12 comes out to 30 degrees, per track.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> So far looks like at least one helix and then a winding switchback path down the side of mountains or a canyon.
> The options for radii in the software that I see are:
> 
> 1. Full section 15" radius 30
> 2. Full section 18" radius 30
> 3. 22" radius 22.5
> 
> Seems like the 30 radius is best, no? Especially for a helix and switchbacks?


Commander Zarkon;

No, in my experienced opinion, 30" radius sectional track (if there is such a thing) is not the best. Flex track, possibly laid to a 30" radius, would be better. I don't use track planning software, but I would think any such program would allow for using flex track at any radius. If it won't, get out some paper & pencils, a compass, and a ruler.😄
BTW on your list of three radii, the first is 15" radius, The #30 at the end is not the radius. It may refer to the number of degrees of a circle one section of track covers. A 15' radius curve in HO-scale is a very tight curve. Only suitable for trolleys, and other very short wheelbase equipment.

The advantages of using flex track rather than sectional track are:
1) Far fewer rail joiners. These can cause mechanical and electrical problems. There are solutions, but this general rule still applies, the fewer rail joiners the better. On your huge layout you're going to have a lot of joiners, even using flex track, so having triple the number by using sectional track, is a bad idea.
2) Flex track can be used as straight track, or be formed to any desired radius.
3) Flex track is generally less expensive per foot, than either sectional, or roadbed track, and you're going to need a LOT of track.

 A traditional circular helix is one way to get trains from one level of a two-deck layout to the other, but it is not the only way, and in my opinion not a particularly good one. 
A helix is not easy to build correctly, especially if your fairly new to model railroading, and/or woodworking. A helix consumes a surprisingly huge length of track. Every inch of that track will need to be cleaned periodically, just like any other track. Trains sometimes derail. Murphy's law applies just as much to model railroading as to any other human activity. Therefore, sooner or later, a train will derail inside the helix. Putting cars back on the track inside a helix is, well, very challenging, to say the least! 
The only access to the, typically covered, helix is by ducking under it and standing up inside it. To do this, and to have the essential elbow & rearward-projecting butt room (when you bend over to reach the lower tracks) means the helix should have an inside diameter of about six feet. Finally, waiting for a train to get all the way through a large helix takes a very, very, long time. Many get quite impatient, and suspect the train has stopped for some reason. My own two-level layout uses a "stretched helix." The entire main line is one long grade, laid out in a long skinny oval. My layout is about ten feet long, and by going back and forth over the twenty feet, the track climbs 16".

Since you have plenty of room, you shouldn't need a helix at all. Long grades should be able to get your trains up and down between levels. That way all of the track is exposed, and easy to clean & re-rail trains as needed. A switchback can use any radius, but bigger is better when backing up, you're right about that. Many switchbacks used more straight than curved track.

I strongly agree with the suggestion to make your railroad sectional. I would make the length of a section 4' - 6' Anything longer is awkward for one person to handle. You may not keep that art room forever, so it may be necessary to move the railroad. Sectional construction makes this possible.
I have been through one house move between cities with my sectional railroad. You might consider building your sections with a "roof" like mine have. It helps keep dust off, and provides a long shelf for books, your student's art, or whatever else you want to display. (see photo) If you put glass in the front, It will do even better with the dust, and keep kids hands off the trains. My railroad is N-scale, but the same roof supported by arches construction could easily be expanded a bit to house an HO-scale layout.
The files below are some of the many I've written for new model railroaders. They cover benchwork, track and wiring. Look through them if you wish.

Good Luck & Have Fun;

Traction Fan 🙂


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> Commander Zarkon;
> No, in my experienced opinion, 30" radius sectional track (if there is such a thing) is not the best. Flex track, possibly laid to a 30" radius, would be better. I don't use track planning software, but I would think any such program would allow for using flex track at any radius. If it won't, get out some paper & pencils, a compass, and a ruler.😄
> BTW on your list of three radii, the first is 15" radius, The #30 at the end is not the radius. It may refer to the number of degrees of a circle one section of track covers. A 15' radius curve in HO-scale is a very tight curve. Only suitable for trolleys, and other very short wheelbase equipment.
> 
> The advantages of using flex track rather than sectional track are:
> 1) Far fewer rail joiners. These can cause mechanical and electrical problems. There are solutions, but this general rule still applies, the fewer rail joiners the better. On your huge layout you're going to have a lot of joiners, even using flex track, so having triple the number by using sectional track, is a bad idea.
> 2) Flex track can be used as straight track, or be formed to any desired radius.
> 3) Flex track is generally less expensive per foot, than either sectional, or roadbed track, and you're going to need a LOT of track.
> 
> A traditional circular helix is one way to get trains from one level of a two-deck layout to the other, but it is not the only way, and in my opinion not a particularly good one.
> A helix is not easy to build correctly, especially if your fairly new to model railroading, and/or woodworking. A helix consumes a surprisingly huge length of track. Every inch of that track will need to be cleaned periodically, just like any other track. Trains sometimes derail. Murphy's law applies just as much to model railroading as to any other human activity. Therefore, sooner or later, a train will derail inside the helix. Putting cars back on the track inside a helix is, well, very challenging, to say the least!
> The only access to the, typically covered, helix is by ducking under it and standing up inside it. To do this, and to have the essential elbow & rearward-projecting butt room (when you bend over to reach the lower tracks) means the helix should have an inside diameter of about six feet. Finally, waiting for a train to get all the way through a large helix takes a very, very, long time. Many get quite impatient, and suspect the train has stopped for some reason. My own two-level layout uses a "stretched helix." The entire main line is one long grade, laid out in a long skinny oval. My layout is about ten feet long, and by going back and forth over the twenty feet, the track climbs 16".
> 
> Since you have plenty of room, you shouldn't need a helix at all. Long grades should be able to get your trains up and down between levels. That way all of the track is exposed, and easy to clean & re-rail trains as needed. A switchback can use any radius, but bigger is better when backing up, you're right about that. Many switchbacks used more straight than curved track.
> 
> I strongly agree with the suggestion to make your railroad sectional. I would make the length of a section 4' - 6' Anything longer is awkward for one person to handle. You may not keep that art room forever, so it may be necessary to move the railroad. Sectional construction makes this possible.
> I have been through one house move between cities with my sectional railroad. You might consider building your sections with a "roof" like mine have. It helps keep dust off, and provides a long shelf for books, your student's art, or whatever else you want to display. (see photo) If you put glass in the front, It will do even better with the dust, and keep kids hands off the trains. My railroad is N-scale, but the same roof supported by arches construction could easily be expanded a bit to house an HO-scale layout.
> The files below are some of the many I've written for new model railroaders. They cover benchwork, track and wiring. Look through them if you wish.
> 
> Good Luck & Have Fun;
> 
> Traction Fan 🙂



Thank you for all that information. Some of your writing was white, so I had to high-lite it to read; like a spy.
Lots of good points and I will certainly check out those articles.

The helix I was thinking of would be exposed, but I see what you mean. I will look into more switchbacks. Right now a bit confused because of he bizarre info in my software, saying I need 79 loops and 11,912 inches of track for a 48" rise helix with a 2% grade.


----------



## Magic

For a 2% grade to rise 4 feet is going to take 200 liner feet of track that's 2,400 inches. 2:100 ratio.
That's a lot of track and another 200 feet to get back down the switchbacks.
Something is wrong with 12,000 inches, data entry?

Magic


----------



## vette-kid

Commander Zarkon said:


> Thank you!
> Yes, more like shelves is the idea, with lots of switchbacks.
> 
> I will look into that book!
> There's a museum here in Show Low that has a train set in it. Going to visit and see if those who built it can help me out.
> 
> DCC is what keep hearing is best, so will go that route.
> 
> Thank you!


DCC is best in that it gives you more control. You can have multiple trains on one track and control them independently. But it is more expensive. The control station will cost you at least a few hundred, or more. Trains will be more expensive to buy and they can be more complicated to troubleshoot of something goes wrong. 

DC on the other hand, can control one train or multiple trains but they will all move together. Any train on the track will move when power is applied, vs DCC where one can remain stationary while one moves. The bandit of DC is its simplicity, especially for a basic loop... even a really large one. The controller is much cheaper and the locomotive will be a bit cheaper as well. 

For a basic loop, wiring is the same. 2 wires bus with drops to the track at intervals. 

I'm not trying to talk you out of DCC. It's great. But it has drawbacks depending on your budget here. I have a DCC and a DC setup. Both are simple track layouts, both wired the same (actually my DC is easier, one set of wires to the track and that's it). But it is fun to run 2 trains on the DCC with my son. In reality we could do it will DC since we largely stay on separate loops, but DCC allows us to do it with the ability to cross from one loop to the outer. 

Hopefully this helps you make a decision. A lot of people on here are largely fans of one of the other and don't think the other is worth considering. It looks like either would work on your layout and be simple to wire. The question would be if you want independent control of more that one train or want sound control. If yes, go DCC. If you only plan to run one train, or 2 on opposite sides of the loop, and sound is not a priority or cost is a major concern, go DC. Easy to change to DCC later.

My $.02 

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Magic said:


> For a 2% grade to rise 4 feet is going to take 200 liner feet of track that's 2,400 inches. 2:100 ratio.
> That's a lot of track and another 200 feet to get back down the switchbacks.
> Something is wrong with 12,000 inches, data entry?
> 
> Magic


I was, and am, very confused over what the software is saying. Could be something I did or did not do, since I just started using it, though. 
The 2:100 ratio is really helpful, though. Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

vette-kid said:


> DCC is best in that it gives you more control. You can have multiple trains on one track and control them independently. But it is more expensive. The control station will cost you at least a few hundred, or more. Trains will be more expensive to buy and they can be more complicated to troubleshoot of something goes wrong.
> 
> DC on the other hand, can control one train or multiple trains but they will all move together. Any train on the track will move when power is applied, vs DCC where one can remain stationary while one moves. The bandit of DC is its simplicity, especially for a basic loop... even a really large one. The controller is much cheaper and the locomotive will be a bit cheaper as well.
> 
> For a basic loop, wiring is the same. 2 wires bus with drops to the track at intervals.
> 
> I'm not trying to talk you out of DCC. It's great. But it has drawbacks depending on your budget here. I have a DCC and a DC setup. Both are simple track layouts, both wired the same (actually my DC is easier, one set of wires to the track and that's it). But it is fun to run 2 trains on the DCC with my son. In reality we could do it will DC since we largely stay on separate loops, but DCC allows us to do it with the ability to cross from one loop to the outer.
> 
> Hopefully this helps you make a decision. A lot of people on here are largely fans of one of the other and don't think the other is worth considering. It looks like either would work on your layout and be simple to wire. The question would be if you want independent control of more that one train or want sound control. If yes, go DCC. If you only plan to run one train, or 2 on opposite sides of the loop, and sound is not a priority or cost is a major concern, go DC. Easy to change to DCC later.
> 
> My $.02
> 
> Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk



Yeah I think I'll go with DCC. Maybe also a train on a separate track, like a little trolley or switcher or one for a mine that just stays going in and out of the mine, on DC if I find a good one in that configuration, but I'm pretty convinced on DCC. I like the control it provides; not only with individualizing locomotives, but with sound, etc.


----------



## DonR

On a layout the size you suggest you will definitely want to use flex track. It comes
in 3 foot sections that you can bend or cut to meet your plans. It also makes
possible the wide curve radius that you can build in the space your
have available.

There is another major factor about DCC...it's wiring, even on a large layout,
is simply a 2 wire bus with track drops to it every 6 feet or so.
But, since you can anticipate that you would have more than one operator
running trains at the same time you probably should consider 'power blocks'
at certain points in your track plan. A power block is simply an isolated track
section that has a circuit breaker. If the operation in one of these blocks
fails to trip a turnout and a train derails and shorts, only that block will
lose power. The rest of the trains will continue running. These breakers
take power from your DCC bus and pass it to it's isolated section...no
complex wiring.

Don


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> Thank you for all that information. Some of your writing was white, so I had to high-lite it to read; like a spy.
> Lots of good points and I will certainly check out those articles.
> 
> The helix I was thinking of would be exposed, but I see what you mean. I will look into more switchbacks. Right now a bit confused because of he bizarre info in my software, saying I need 79 loops and 11,912 inches of track for a 48" rise helix with a 2% grade.


Are you sure you need to have the track climb 48"? That seems like a huge distance between levels of a two-deck layout. My track climbs only 16" between decks. If you do need to climb 48" then I think the software is telling you the truth about how much track you will need in the helix. That is going to be a huge helix! It may even be a record setter. A train will take forever to travel through that large a helix. I did not realize you were planning a 48" climb. I thought it was more like 15". Climbing that far with simple, exposed grades instead of a helix, as I suggested last time, may not be practical, even with your large room. 

Another option would be a "train elevator." This is a section of straight track, long enough to hold a complete train. The track is mounted on a wood platform that can be raised & lowered vertically, like an elevator. Usually train elevators are motorized, and have limit switches that stop the elevator at precisely the right height to let the train run off onto the track of the other deck. There are several you tube videos on train elevators.

Rising 48" with switchbacks is going to require a lot of switchback tracks, and that means a lot of turnouts. Turnouts are one of the more expensive items on a model railroad. They cost between $15 and $30 each. You will need a dozen, or so just for the switchback. For that matter, just buying the huge number of 3' pieces of flex track your layout will use, will cost a small fortune. Have you made any sort of cost analysis of your railroad? 

No disrespect intended, but I think your dream of a layout all the way around the art room, or even half way, is just that, a dream. Dreaming is free. Building model railroads is not free, in fact its downright expensive. The bigger the model railroad, the more money, and time, it will consume to be built. As drawn, and described, it sounds to me like you will need thousands of dollars, and many years of time, to build your dream railroad. The best advice I can give you is to start out using what I call the "3-'S' approach" to building a model railroad.
Make your railroad"
1) Small
2) Simple &
3) Sectional 



I strongly recommend you start out by:

a) Figuring out how much money, and time, you can realistically afford to invest in a model railroad.
b) Make up an as accurate as possible "virtual shopping list" of all the materials you will need. Include lumber, extruded foam, hardware, etc. as well as the actual model train materials 
c) Then do some online "window shopping." Check www.walthers.com for the full retail prices of model railroad track, locomotives, cars, DCC systems, etc. Then check e-bay for the used prices of the same items. 
d) Divide the very large total cost you come up with by the linear foot dimensions of your art room. This should give you an approximate cost-per-foot of the railroad.
That, in turn, will give you a more realistic idea of how many, or few, feet of railroad you can afford to build. If you build it in sections, you can always add more sections as time & funds allow.

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> On a layout the size you suggest you will definitely want to use flex track. It comes
> in 3 foot sections that you can bend or cut to meet your plans. It also makes
> possible the wide curve radius that you can build in the space your
> have available.
> 
> There is another major factor about DCC...it's wiring, even on a large layout,
> is simply a 2 wire bus with track drops to it every 6 feet or so.
> But, since you can anticipate that you would have more than one operator
> running trains at the same time you probably should consider 'power blocks'
> at certain points in your track plan. A power block is simply an isolated track
> section that has a circuit breaker. If the operation in one of these blocks
> fails to trip a turnout and a train derails and shorts, only that block will
> lose power. The rest of the trains will continue running. These breakers
> take power from your DCC bus and pass it to it's isolated section...no
> complex wiring.
> 
> Don



Definitely using as much flextrack as possible!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> Are you sure you need to have the track climb 48"? That seems like a huge distance between levels of a two-deck layout. My track climbs only 16" between decks. If you do need to climb 48" then I think the software is telling you the truth about how much track you will need in the helix. That is going to be a huge helix! It may even be a record setter. A train will take forever to travel through that large a helix. I did not realize you were planning a 48" climb. I thought it was more like 15". Climbing that far with simple, exposed grades instead of a helix, as I suggested last time, may not be practical, even with your large room.
> 
> Another option would be a "train elevator." This is a section of straight track, long enough to hold a complete train. The track is mounted on a wood platform that can be raised & lowered vertically, like an elevator. Usually train elevators are motorized, and have limit switches that stop the elevator at precisely the right height to let the train run off onto the track of the other deck. There are several you tube videos on train elevators.
> 
> Rising 48" with switchbacks is going to require a lot of switchback tracks, and that means a lot of turnouts. Turnouts are one of the more expensive items on a model railroad. They cost between $15 and $30 each. You will need a dozen, or so just for the switchback. For that matter, just buying the huge number of 3' pieces of flex track your layout will use, will cost a small fortune. Have you made any sort of cost analysis of your railroad?
> 
> No disrespect intended, but I think your dream of a layout all the way around the art room, or even half way, is just that, a dream. Dreaming is free. Building model railroads is not free, in fact its downright expensive. The bigger the model railroad, the more money, and time, it will consume to be built. As drawn, and described, it sounds to me like you will need thousands of dollars, and many years of time, to build your dream railroad. The best advice I can give you is to start out using what I call the "3-'S' approach" to building a model railroad.
> Make your railroad"
> 1) Small
> 2) Simple &
> 3) Sectional
> 
> 
> 
> I strongly recommend you start out by:
> 
> a) Figuring out how much money, and time, you can realistically afford to invest in a model railroad.
> b) Make up an as accurate as possible "virtual shopping list" of all the materials you will need. Include lumber, extruded foam, hardware, etc. as well as the actual model train materials
> c) Then do some online "window shopping." Check www.walthers.com for the full retail prices of model railroad track, locomotives, cars, DCC systems, etc. Then check e-bay for the used prices of the same items.
> d) Divide the very large total cost you come up with by the linear foot dimensions of your art room. This should give you an approximate cost-per-foot of the railroad.
> That, in turn, will give you a more realistic idea of how many, or few, feet of railroad you can afford to build. If you build it in sections, you can always add more sections as time & funds allow.
> 
> Traction Fan




No offense taken! Thank you for the realistic assessment!
Based on the advice y'all have given, my plan is to create sections of track, like a town, factory area, etc. that are individual, but linked with tracks that cross over mountains etc. This will allow me to build a section at a time and enjoy it as the others are worked on. Also easier for removal should it come to that. In fact, some of the sections will be on boards resting on industrial drawers etc. that are about 36" tall, so I don't need to build legs.

The reason for the 48" rise is that there is at least one area where the track crosses a way into another area. However, since that area is not accesses by the students, I can build a hinged bridge that swings out of the way. However, I do want the train to go up high and far, thus the 48" rise to clear the 88" over the doorways. 
I can always add this later though. 

The elevator sounds intriguing. I will look into that!
Thank you!


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> So far looks like at least one helix and then a winding switchback path down the side of mountains or a canyon.
> The options for radii in the software that I see are:
> 
> 1. Full section 15" radius 30
> 2. Full section 18" radius 30
> 3. 22" radius 22.5
> 
> Seems like the 30 radius is best, no? Especially for a helix and switchbacks?


So, why a helix? That is a very complicated section of a layout to build, normally used to change levels where space is at a premium. You have scads of space available. I'd ditch the helix, and if you want to have multiple levels (again, why?; you have tons of space), just use an incline. Reduce the vertical separation. Your plan to put continuous running tracks up and over doors will be far more difficult than I think you appreciate.

Just to echo some of the things that traction fan said (and I hinted at in my first post), I think that you are letting your imagination run wild right now with all the things that could be done in this wonderfully large space. I don't think you're realistically considering what you can actually achieve, especially doing it by yourself. Lets assume that this is your full time job, and you're getting paid to do that and nothing else. Filling that layout area with the level of stuff that you're discussing would still be a multi-year effort, and not counting your salary, a budget running into the tens of thousands of dollars.

If this is your first attempt to build a layout, ever, then honestly, I'd put long odds against you ever getting it off the ground. If you have build a layout of some size, perhaps you do have something of a grasp of the magnitude of what you're trying to do. I'm not trying to be Johnny Raincloud, here, but to continue the metaphor, you're going to take a bite out of that elephant, and it's going to sit on you and crush you! I'd really rather see you dial back your ambitions to a more achievable level than fail on this.


----------



## 65446

If you ever get finished reading all these posts, I have yet one more for you, about flex track:

Best get 'Xuron Rail Nippers' soon ($7 ebay)..When you do use them the flat side of the jaws goes against the good rail you're keeping. The concave side faces the clipped off rail..And you cut rail top to bottom, not side to side..
When forming a curve with 2-3 flex sections, first lay them out straight, add rail joiners, then solder joiners.
This is so that when you do bend them to a curve there will be no kink formed in the curve. 
(Where you do have clipped rail to be put in use, file/sand the ends a tad to smooth them)..
Each section has one fixed rail and one rail which slides. Match sections up so as to have them all with the sliding rail on the outside of the curve. This permits cross ties to fan out a smidge like the 1:1 scale ties do on curves.... 
Finally: keep away from anything that's called SnapTrack and/or has brass rail..Go with nickle silver, code 83, or lower at code 70. Avoid code 100..
🌳 🛤🌄🛤🌲


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> So, why a helix? That is a very complicated section of a layout to build, normally used to change levels where space is at a premium. You have scads of space available. I'd ditch the helix, and if you want to have multiple levels (again, why?), just use an incline.


Yeah. after thinking on it with the advice from you gentlemen, I figured the helix is a waste. I can do the same thing with switchbacks, maybe an elevator, etc.
As far as why multiple levels: because it would look fascinating. The train can ascend to a "snowy" area and come down etc. It just adds more dimensions to the layout. But I will design the whole thing based on smaller areas that are connected by the longer tracks and elevation, that way enjoying this is not dependent upon finishing all of it: I can buiod a section at a time, leaving a section of track for expansion, and continue afterwards.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> If you ever get finished reading all these posts, I have yet one more for you, about flex track:
> 
> Best get 'Xuron Rail Nippers' soon ($7 ebay)..When you do use them the flat side of the jaws goes against the good rail you're keeping. The concave side faces the clipped off rail..And you cut rail top to bottom, not side to side..
> When forming a curve with 2-3 flex sections, first lay them out straight, add rail joiners, then solder joiners.
> This is so that when you do bend them to a curve there will be no kink formed in the curve.
> (Where you do have clipped rail to be put in use, file/sand the ends a tad to smooth them)..
> Each section has one fixed rail and one rail which slides. Match sections up so as to have them all with the sliding rail on the outside of the curve. This permits cross ties to fan out a smidge like the 1:1 scale ties do on curves....
> Finally: keep away from anything that's called SnapTrack and/or has brass rail..Go with nickle silver, code 83, or lower at code 70. Avoid code 100..
> 🌳 🛤🌄🛤🌲


Wow! Thanks!
Had no idea of some of that. 
So code 100 is brass?
I will get those clippers.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> No offense taken! Thank you for the realistic assessment!
> Based on the advice y'all have given, my plan is to create sections of track, like a town, factory area, etc. that are individual, but linked with tracks that cross over mountains etc. This will allow me to build a section at a time and enjoy it as the others are worked on. Also easier for removal should it come to that. In fact, some of the sections will be on boards resting on industrial drawers etc. that are about 36" tall, so I don't need to build legs.
> 
> The reason for the 48" rise is that there is at least one area where the track crosses a way into another area. However, since that area is not accesses by the students, I can build a hinged bridge that swings out of the way. However, I do want the train to go up high and far, thus the 48" rise to clear the 88" over the doorways.
> I can always add this later though.
> 
> The elevator sounds intriguing. I will look into that!
> Thank you!


There are also you tube videos on hinged bridges to span doorways. Also, one of the files I sent you (Section 3 & 4 of "How to build a better first layout") discusses the various options for getting track across a doorway, including the advantages & disadvantages of each.

I too once thought about adding a third level to my layout and having track go over a doorway.
I ended up not doing that because it would have involved very steep grades, a tremendous amount of extra work, and when a train was up that high, all I would see would be the bottom of the bridge, not the train. In short, the result wasn't worth the effort. However, you might consider making the door itself the base structure for a "swinging gate" type of track across that doorway. I've added the two other parts of the "How to build a better first layout" series below.

Traction Fan


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Wow! Thanks!
> Had no idea of some of that.
> So code 100 is brass?
> I will get those clippers.


Code of the track is simply the height of the rail in thousandths of an inch. It has nothing to do with what it's made out of. There is code 100 in brass, steel, and nickel-silver. Whatever code you chose, you're going to want to use nickel-silver (despite its name, actually a copper alloy). You won't live long enough to keep a layout that size made with brass or steel free from corrosion and running well.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Yeah. after thinking on it with the advice from you gentlemen, I figured the helix is a waste. I can do the same thing with switchbacks, maybe an elevator, etc.
> As far as why multiple levels: because it would look fascinating. The train can ascend to a "snowy" area and come down etc. It just adds more dimensions to the layout. But I will design the whole thing based on smaller areas that are connected by the longer tracks and elevation, that way enjoying this is not dependent upon finishing all of it: I can buiod a section at a time, leaving a section of track for expansion, and continue afterwards.


 I actually added more to my first post after you read it (I was guilty of "premature postage" by accidentally tapping the touch pad with my thumb). I already kind of addressed this. Lots of things that would look cool require the investment of far more time and effort than most of us have to finish it.

My personal opinion on multi-deck layouts is that a single, thematically unified, and well built layout, with outstanding scenery and attention to detail, is infinitely superior to multi-deck affair, because the decks actually detract from the illusion of reality created by gorgeous scenery.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So I’m designing a sort of dog bone layout on each side of where I sit: about 52” deep by 16feet long, then about 10 feet of straight rack going behind fridge and my desk area to the other side of the dog bone. Not sure the shape of the second side yet. Will post diagram soon.


----------



## Chops124

Great thunder, switch backs? Elevators? My hat is off to you if you can pull that off. Especially if this is going to be above the door way.

Brass rail is typically considered passe. The frequent headache of model rail is oxidized track. The methods to clean it are numerous, and even the mere mention of the best track cleaning methods will inevitably start controversy, up to, and including name calling. In fact, I suspect the mere mention will invite some snappy replies.

Never the less, brass rail, if you can find it, is fairly cheap, and works fine (JMO), although some will swear it oxidizes more easily and faster than Nickel Silver track. In any event, beware of buying old brass track that is affixed to fiber ties and held on with brass staples, if found, is incredibly cheap because nobody wants it. Hasn't been made for many years. This fiber tie track was sold as a cheap alternative, back in the day, and the paper fiber ties will warp and contract in contact with water, as when ballasting the track. And that will make your trains fall-go-boom.

And...you may have already heard this a few hundred times, Commander, but the rule of thumb with radii is the wider, the better. Model trains, particularly HO and smaller, are sensitive to the lateral pressures generated around a curve. The tighter the curve, the greater the chance of fall-go-boom.

18 inches is the tightest radius typically used in HO, but for trolleys and very short wheel base rolling stock, 15 inches can be obtained- at a hazard of fall-go-boom. Typically, a larger layout will use 22 inch radii, if space permits. The broader radius also helps to conceal overhang on passenger coaches and what not.

If 54 inches is your widest depth, that rules out ready made 33 inch track. For greater reliability, I favor sectional track made by Bachann, or Life Like, that has a premolded plastic roadbed. It can still be covered in ballast, if you want more realism, but it alone can even out little bumps and warps that make model trains fall-go-you guessed it. It is a little more expensive, perhaps a lot more expensive, but if running trains reliably in a circle, or oval, it works pretty good. 

Same goes for switches, or turnouts. #4 is the minimum radius, and longer cars and longer locomotives don't like it much, and may go...fall...#6, or bigger, create less lateral tension.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Chops124 said:


> Great thunder, switch backs? Elevators? My hat is off to you if you can pull that off. Especially if this is going to be above the door way.
> 
> Brass rail is typically considered passe. The frequent headache of model rail is oxidized track. The methods to clean it are numerous, and even the mere mention of the best track cleaning methods will inevitably start controversy, up to, and including name calling. In fact, I suspect the mere mention will invite some snappy replies.
> 
> Never the less, brass rail, if you can find it, is fairly cheap, and works fine (JMO), although some will swear it oxidizes more easily and faster than Nickel Silver track. In any event, beware of buying old brass track that is affixed to fiber ties and held on with brass staples, if found, is incredibly cheap because nobody wants it. Hasn't been made for many years. This fiber tie track was sold as a cheap alternative, back in the day, and the paper fiber ties will warp and contract in contact with water, as when ballasting the track. And that will make your trains fall-go-boom.
> 
> And...you may have already heard this a few hundred times, Commander, but the rule of thumb with radii is the wider, the better. Model trains, particularly HO and smaller, are sensitive to the lateral pressures generated around a curve. The tighter the curve, the greater the chance of fall-go-boom.
> 
> 18 inches is the tightest radius typically used in HO, but for trolleys and very short wheel base rolling stock, 15 inches can be obtained- at a hazard of fall-go-boom. Typically, a larger layout will use 22 inch radii, if space permits. The broader radius also helps to conceal overhang on passenger coaches and what not.
> 
> If 54 inches is your widest depth, that rules out ready made 33 inch track. For greater reliability, I favor sectional track made by Bachann, or Life Like, that has a premolded plastic roadbed. It can still be covered in ballast, if you want more realism, but it alone can even out little bumps and warps that make model trains fall-go-you guessed it. It is a little more expensive, perhaps a lot more expensive, but if running trains reliably in a circle, or oval, it works pretty good.
> 
> Same goes for switches, or turnouts. #4 is the minimum radius, and longer cars and longer locomotives don't like it much, and may go...fall...#6, or bigger, create less lateral tension.



LOL!
Whether discussing cars, firearms, knives, working out, or model trains, there is always some controversy! 
I will stay away from brass tracks!
I am trying to use 22" curves in my layout and no less. 
There may be one area with a small mine and a tiny train or something, or one of those lever powered " but that's it.

I'm learning so maybe some of my ideas won't work, but I'm sure you all will help to guide me in making what can work be successful!
I think I will nix the helix idea, except maybe for a short one somewhere, like a foot tall, maybe, and probably not. 
I like the idea of visible switchbacks. The train should be visible mostly, unless for the effect of going through a tunnel. Just my view on it. 

I am pretty sure now that the cross over will be on a swinging gate type of deal for the lower level, and a bridge at the 88" mark. 

Working on the first part of the layout right now (in the software) and will post it soon to get as much input as possible. 

Again, thank you! This is all very helpful!


----------



## DonR

A switchback would be a very interesting feature on a model railroad. It also would provide interesting
work for the operator. He would have to be quite active...operating the loco controls and
working the turnouts...no sit back to watch continuous running trains...But it sure is going to use up
a lot of your benchwork...each switchback would have to be long enuf to accomodate the longest
train on your system and at a slope that the trains can make.
You do have the space to build it though, so we look forward to seeing it
in action. I would suggest that it be a 'power district' of it's own since the probability of a
derail is fairly great. You wouldn't want that to shut down the rest of your layout.
Since operations on the switchback will take time, you may want to consider
a 'by pass' track so that other trains could go by and not have to idle waiting for the
switchback operations to complete.

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> A switchback would be a very interesting feature on a model railroad. It also would provide interesting
> work for the operator. He would have to be quite active...operating the loco controls and
> working the turnouts...no sit back to watch continuous running trains...But it sure is going to use up
> a lot of your benchwork...each switchback would have to be long enuf to accomodate the longest
> train on your system and at a slope that the trains can make.
> You do have the space to build it though, so we look forward to seeing it
> in action. I would suggest that it be a 'power district' of it's own since the probability of a
> derail is fairly great. You wouldn't want that to shut down the rest of your layout.
> Since operations on the switchback will take time, you may want to consider
> a 'by pass' track so that other trains could go by and not have to idle waiting for the
> switchback operations to complete.
> 
> Don


I'm still new, so who knows what I am thinking of that may or may not work.
Definitely will have a bypass track for some of these area. In fact I am thinking of two totally separate tracks or more.


DonR said:


> A switchback would be a very interesting feature on a model railroad. It also would provide interesting
> work for the operator. He would have to be quite active...operating the loco controls and
> working the turnouts...no sit back to watch continuous running trains...But it sure is going to use up
> a lot of your benchwork...each switchback would have to be long enuf to accomodate the longest
> train on your system and at a slope that the trains can make.
> You do have the space to build it though, so we look forward to seeing it
> in action. I would suggest that it be a 'power district' of it's own since the probability of a
> derail is fairly great. You wouldn't want that to shut down the rest of your layout.
> Since operations on the switchback will take time, you may want to consider
> a 'by pass' track so that other trains could go by and not have to idle waiting for the
> switchback operations to complete.
> 
> Don


I may be using the wrong terminology!? What I am thinking of regarding "switchbacks" are turns up and down mountains etc. Reading some info, it seems I am not correctly expressing this. Seems like a "switchback" is where the train stops in a pullout, reverses, etc. That is not what I meant, and sorry for the confusion! 
I am speaking of zig-zag turns up and down mountains and also loops around stuff to gain elevation.

I will have two independent tracks that span the room (eventually). This will allow me to run two trains without worrying about a collision etc. 
Those two tracks I want to be able to handle large locomotives like one of those articulated ones. I'll probably run a freight train on one and a passenger train on the other.
I will also have at least one other track working as a mine train and/or a snowplow on higher levels, with "snow" etc. This will be a small switcher type locomotive and I will use the tightest turns possible for that one.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Here is my initial design for now. It's two areas that connect behind my desk. The railroad that juts out at the NW section will be where there is a swinging bridge on a "door" which will allow the train to continue on to the other areas. I am going to continue designing those other areas, but focus on building this part for now. I think I've designed it to be able to self contain the engines and two tracks on a long "dog bone" loop with switches to move to the other areas later.

The green track will be pretty flat and more or less ground level. The red track will be about 6 or 8" up on cliffs, bridges, etc.

Please let me know if you have any suggestions or foresee any issues.

Thanks!










Biggest issue I am having right now is with RailModeller Pro doing some weird stuff, or maybe me not knowing I am screwing up.

1. Giving me very steep grade numbers when I set up a climb or drop, but when I check it online I get the 2-3% I want.
2. Trying to adjust track elevation but getting a message that the tracks are in different sections. I have checked that they are connected over and over and don't see any sign of not connected or anything else, but keep getting the same message. Driving me NUTS!!! Contacted tech support and awaiting a reply.

Well, that's it for now and thanks again to all!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Here's a quick sketch of ideas.


----------



## CTValleyRR

First of all, if you're using layout design software, trust it. If you're using a third party calculator, and getting a different result, then you're comparing apples and oranges. A height change of x over a distance of y will ALWAYS be a slope of x/y.. You're all over the place in this process: you start at step 3, then go back to step 1, jump to step 7, go back to 6, leap ahead to step 12, them come back to finish up step 3. Stop. Take a Valium. 

Now sit down and figure out what you want to do, divided into the "must do's" and the "would likes". Decide on a theme, prototype road, and era (or make a conscious decision to have none of these). Take your space sketch that you've created and draw some ovals: mountains here, town here, etc. Now LEARN TO USE THAT SOFTWARE WELL. THEN start working on a detailed plan, incorporating all your must haves and as many of your would likes as possible.

The chaotic, haphazard "planning" process you're using is most likely simply going to result in an unworkable mess? Again, not trying to be Johnny Raincloud, but I've seen this before, and it results in a lot of enthusiasm and energy, followed by a quick exit from the hobby.

And as far as I know, you still haven't answered the question: have you ever built a layout before? If the answer is no, then take a corner of the room and plan and build something small. Once you have done this, and evaluated your mistakes, you will have a decent chance of success with something as massive as you envision. Otherwise, good luck.


----------



## MichaelE

Commander Zarkon said:


> Here is my initial design for now. It's two areas that connect behind my desk. The railroad that juts out at the NW section will be where there is a swinging bridge on a "door" which will allow the train to continue on to the other areas. I am going to continue designing those other areas, but focus on building this part for now. I think I've designed it to be able to self contain the engines and two tracks on a long "dog bone" loop with switches to move to the other areas later.
> 
> The green track will be pretty flat and more or less ground level. The red track will be about 6 or 8" up on cliffs, bridges, etc.
> 
> Please let me know if you have any suggestions or foresee any issues.
> 
> Thanks!
> View attachment 567850
> 
> 
> 
> Biggest issue I am having right now is with RailModeller Pro doing some weird stuff, or maybe me not knowing I am screwing up.
> 
> 1. Giving me very steep grade numbers when I set up a climb or drop, but when I check it online I get the 2-3% I want.
> 2. Trying to adjust track elevation but getting a message that the tracks are in different sections. I have checked that they are connected over and over and don't see any sign of not connected or anything else, but keep getting the same message. Driving me NUTS!!! Contacted tech support and awaiting a reply.
> 
> Well, that's it for now and thanks again to all!


The software may be calculating effective grade if your ascents and descents are on curves. That may be why you are getting very high grade percentages.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> First of all, if you're using layout design software, trust it. If you're using a third party calculator, and getting a different result, then you're comparing apples and oranges. A height change of x over a distance of y will ALWAYS be a slope of x/y.. You're all over the place in this process: you start at step 3, then go back to step 1, jump to step 7, go back to 6, leap ahead to step 12, them come back to finish up step 3. Stop. Take a Valium.
> 
> Now sit down and figure out what you want to do, divided into the "must do's" and the "would likes". Decide on a theme, prototype road, and era (or make a conscious decision to have none of these). Take your space sketch that you've created and draw some ovals: mountains here, town here, etc. Now LEARN TO USE THAT SOFTWARE WELL. THEN start working on a detailed plan, incorporating all your must haves and as many of your would likes as possible.
> 
> The chaotic, haphazard "planning" process you're using is most likely simply going to result in an unworkable mess? Again, not trying to be Johnny Raincloud, but I've seen this before, and it results in a lot of enthusiasm and energy, followed by a quick exit from the hobby.
> 
> And as far as I know, you still haven't answered the question: have you ever built a layout before? If the answer is no, then take a corner of the room and plan and build something small. Once you have done this, and evaluated your mistakes, you will have a decent chance of success with something as massive as you envision. Otherwise, good luck.



Thanks for the reality check.
I'm focusing on the area that I did on the software for now. I added the additional drawings because I want to have an idea of where I want to go in the future and plan the current setup to compliment it. But yes, I understand your warning and appreciate it.

I built a couple of very simple layouts as a kid, that's it. I do have a good deal of experience in model building (1:24 scale vehicles), painting murals for kid's rooms, making props, scenery, and doing set design... I know its no the same, but it all involves a certain amount of conceptualizing, so seems to spill over into this.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> The software may be calculating effective grade if your ascents and descents are on curves. That may be why you are getting very high grade percentages.


Maybe, but the calculations seem way, way over what I get from doing them using other methods. Still, you know better than I do about this stuff, so I'm keeping my mind open.


----------



## MichaelE

I'm not familiar with any track planning software. This is a logical deduction if your figures are far different than what the software is coming up with.

There is an effective grade calculator here: Effective Grade Calculator Scroll to the bottom. This will allow you to compare what the calculator results are and what the track planning software is calculating.

I still use drafting tools and paper to draw track plans.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> I'm not familiar with any track planning software. This is a logical deduction if your figures are far different than what the software is coming up with.
> 
> There is an effective grade calculator here: Effective Grade Calculator Scroll to the bottom. This will allow you to compare what the calculator results are and what the track planning software is calculating.
> 
> I still use drafting tools and paper to draw track plans.



That's a great site! Thank you!


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> I'm still new, so who knows what I am thinking of that may or may not work.
> Definitely will have a bypass track for some of these area. In fact I am thinking of two totally separate tracks or more.
> 
> I may be using the wrong terminology!? What I am thinking of regarding "switchbacks" are turns up and down mountains etc. Reading some info, it seems I am not correctly expressing this. Seems like a "switchback" is where the train stops in a pullout, reverses, etc. That is not what I meant, and sorry for the confusion!
> I am speaking of zig-zag turns up and down mountains and also loops around stuff to gain elevation.
> 
> I will have two independent tracks that span the room (eventually). This will allow me to run two trains without worrying about a collision etc.
> Those two tracks I want to be able to handle large locomotives like one of those articulated ones. I'll probably run a freight train on one and a passenger train on the other.
> I will also have at least one other track working as a mine train and/or a snowplow on higher levels, with "snow" etc. This will be a small switcher type locomotive and I will use the tightest turns possible for that one.


The term "switchback" is used on hiking trails in somewhat the fashion you're describing above. The trail runs sort of straight in one direction, then usually makes a sharp 180 degree turn and then goes straight again but back in the opposite direction. It climbs pretty steeply throughout its length.

In railroad terms, a "switchback" sort of performs the same steep climbing maneuver, but without the curves. Instead of a 180 degree curve at the end of each straight section, the railroad uses a "turnout" or "switch". The train runs forward up the first section of straight (or possibly curved) track grade, Then it passes through the turnout and stops. The turnout's points are then thrown to the other position, which lines them up with the next section of track, which is also steep, and lets the train climb even higher, to the next turnout, where the back & forth routine is repeated. This is why, when you mentioned "switchbacks", I thought you were going to need a lot of turnouts, especially if you were going to try climbing 48" on a switchback.
Going back to the hiking trail example, the train's movements would be like you walking forward up the first gradient, then walking backward up the next section, then forward again. Crazy way to hike, but necessary for trains.

What I think you're explaining that you meant by "switchback" is a series of straight grades with turns at each end joining one part of the overall grade to the next part. In Highway planning these are sometimes called "switchback curves" so you're not that far off in that sense. Interstate 5 in the Barstow, Calif. area has a fairly dangerous set of switchback curves, on a steep grade known as "the grapevine." Many big rigs have had accidents there.

A potential big problem with your "switchback curve grade" scheme is size. It takes a little over 4' of width for a 180 degree turn with 22" radius track. So those alternate direction "switchback curves" are going to be very big, and project out across the room like a coiled snake striking out at something. Sounds a bit impractical to me.
I have a suggestion to help you. Go on Amazon and order a copy of the book, "Getting Started in Model Railroading" by Jeff Wilson. It covers all the aspects of building a first layout in simple text, and many color photos. I think it will help you get a better grasp of what's practical to build.

Don't sweat not knowing all the terms & techniques of model railroading. Its complicated, and you're new, and nobody, no matter how experienced, actually knows it all. (Though occasionally we get the odd Bozo who thinks he does! 😄 They usually don't stay all that long.)

When you encounter a term you're not familiar with, try looking it up in the file attached below.

Traction Fan 🙂


----------



## DonR

Commander, I see in your layout drawing, that you have at least 2 'reverse loop'
situations. A reverse loop occurs when a train arrives on a track, goes around
a loop, and comes back on the same track but going the other way. This is a
normal layout feature, but does require a special 'reverse loop' controller
for each instance. 

A reverse loop is an electrical situation....the right rail may never touch
the left rail, that would result in a short circuit. This results when a turnout
creates a loop than comes back to the same track which would be
an electrical short circuit. Therefore, there must be
a buffer to avoid this, it is a section of track insulated from the
layout main DCC bus. It is powered through
a device called a reverse loop controller. It has the capability of reversing the phase (polarity)
of the iso section to match the main, thus avoidiing a short..It is fully
automatic and once installed requires no operator attention. More about this
when you get closer to a final track plan.

You can avoid the 'reverse loop' situation by running a double track
main line at the end of which the train coming in on track 1 goes around
a loop and goes back the other way on track 2.

One other idea for your consideration when designing
your track plan is passing sidings. With DCC you can
run train A Eastbound on a track while on that same track train B can
run Westbound. A single track main line, such as you have in 
your drawing, would need passing sidings so that Train A can stop
and wait for Train B to pass going the other way. This is common
on real railroads. Each siding should be long enuf to hold the
longest train your your system.

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> The term "switchback" is used on hiking trails in somewhat the fashion you're describing above. The trail runs sort of straight in one direction, then usually makes a sharp 180 degree turn and then goes straight again but back in the opposite direction. It climbs pretty steeply throughout its length.
> 
> In railroad terms, a "switchback" sort of performs the same steep climbing maneuver, but without the curves. Instead of a 180 degree curve at the end of each straight section, the railroad uses a "turnout" or "switch". The train runs forward up the first section of straight (or possibly curved) track grade, Then it passes through the turnout and stops. The turnout's points are then thrown to the other position, which lines them up with the next section of track, which is also steep, and lets the train climb even higher, to the next turnout, where the back & forth routine is repeated. Going back to the hiking trail example, the train's movements would be like you walking forward up the first gradient, then walking backward up the next section, then forward again. Crazy way to hike, but necessary for trains.
> 
> What I think you're explaining that you meant by "switchback" is a series of straight grades with turns at each end joining one part of the overall grade to the next part. In Highway planning these are sometimes called "switchback curves" so you're not that far off in that sense. Interstate 5 in the Barstow, Calif. area has a fairly dangerous set of switchback curves, on a steep grade known as "the grapevine." Many big rigs have had accidents there.
> 
> A potential big problem with your "switchback curve grade" scheme is size. It takes a little over 4' of width for a 180 degree turn with 22" radius track. So those alternate direction "switchback curves" are going to be very big and project out across the room like a coiled snake striking out at something. Sounds a bit impractical to me.\
> I have a suggestion to help you. Go on Amazon and order a copy of the book, "Getting Started in Model Railroading" by Jeff Wilson. It covers all the aspects of building a first layout in simple text, and many color photos. I think it will help you get a better grasp of what's practical to build.
> 
> Don't sweat not knowing all the terms & techniques of model railroading. Its complicated, and you're new, and nobody, no matter how experienced actually knows it all. When you encounter a term you're not familiar with, try looking it up in the file attached below.
> Traction Fan


OK
That makes sense!
Thank you fir the explanation, the patience, and the guidance.
I will have to experiment with this stuff and get that book you mentioned!
Thank you!


----------



## 65446

Had to add just one more ! : 
If, IF you were to go with open grid or L girder benchwork you could have whole bench free standing so that door will never be a problem, layout not against the wall / aisle way all around..
DCC (if you are not already aware) has a 'daisy chained' plug-in-panels system..
You're plugged in one panel..As train continues on, you unplug (will not affect train's movement) and plug into next one, and next one, etc.. walking along following your train.. Or, remain in one panel only, if you wish.
But main throttle (such as an NCE 'PowerCab') can't do this..You must purchase auxiliary 'PowerProCab(s)' for the activity I describe.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> Commander, I see in your layout drawing, that you have at least 2 'reverse loop'
> situations. A reverse loop occurs when a train arrives on a track, goes around
> a loop, and comes back on the same track but going the other way. This is a
> normal layout feature, but does require a special 'reverse loop' controller
> for each instance.
> 
> A reverse loop is an electrical situation....the right rail may never touch
> the left rail, that would result in a short circuit. This results when a turnout
> creates a loop than comes back to the same track which would be
> an electrical short circuit. Therefore, there must be
> a buffer to avoid this, it is a section of track insulated from the
> layout main DCC bus. It is powered through
> a device called a reverse loop controller. It has the capability of reversing the phase (polarity)
> of the iso section to match the main, thus avoidiing a short..It is fully
> automatic and once installed requires no operator attention. More about this
> when you get closer to a final track plan.
> 
> You can avoid the 'reverse loop' situation by running a double track
> main line at the end of which the train coming in on track 1 goes around
> a loop and goes back the other way on track 2.
> 
> One other idea for your consideration when designing
> your track plan is passing sidings. With DCC you can
> run train A Eastbound on a track while on that same track train B can
> run Westbound. A single track main line, such as you have in
> your drawing, would need passing sidings so that Train A can stop
> and wait for Train B to pass going the other way. This is common
> on real railroads. Each siding should be long enuf to hold the
> longest train your your system.
> 
> Don


Wow! I did not know that about the tracks touching!
I did not think about the passing sidings at all! I will add that to my layout!
Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> Had to add just one more ! :
> 
> 1) If, IF you were to go with open grid or L girder benchwork you could have whole bench free standing so that door will never be a problem, layout not against the wall / aisle way all around..
> DCC (if you are not already aware) has a 'daisy chained' plug-in-panels system..
> You're plugged in one panel..As train continues on, you unplug (will not affect train's movement) and plug into next one, and next one, etc.. walking along following your train.. Or, remain in one panel only, if you wish.
> But main throttle (such as an NCE 'PowerCab' can't do this..You must purchase auxiliary (in NCE) 'Pro Cab(s)' for the activity I describe.


I am planning to rest the surface boards on cabinets with support legs in the back.
I had not thought about a walk-around but that may be something.
My current setup is planned on a set of boards that will equal about 5’x16’, so when I go back into work I will check out if this is possible.
I do kind of like a background though.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I was reading that a big boy locomotive needs a minimum of a 22” track curve. Pretty sure that’s what I used for my layout design. Do you guys think that’s ok or is that minimum not really reliable?


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> I was reading that a big boy locomotive needs a minimum of a 22” track curve. Pretty sure that’s what I used for my layout design. Do you guys think that’s ok or is that minimum not really reliable?


I would go bigger if you can, and with the giant space you have, that shouldn't be a problem. The manufacturer tends to give the Minimum radius curve a locomotive can possibly get around. The radius where it will stay on the track reliably is usually a good deal larger. Kato, the manufacturer of my N-scale, 2-8-2 Mikado locomotives, said they should use a minimum radius of 11" I found by testing that 16" radius curves were the radius that actually worked reliably. So for an HO-scale big boy you might go with 30" radius curves. The loco will look better on the wider curve, and should stay on the track reliably with that size curve.

Traction Fan


----------



## 65446

With a free-standing bench you keep wall of room blank and paint it sky blue with wisps of clouds.. There's your 'background' if that's what you meant..You still have Mtns./ hills, their backs flat fascia board where right up to edge..But if track is closest to edge, anywhere, then Mtns/hills are behind track as usual...
One of the oldest and largest MRR clubs, the Pasadena MRRC (check YT vids) is complete walk around perimeter with walls the way I describe..I think the effect is even better than the more common 'backdrop-on-bench-rear' type..

btw. This club has converted to DCC..Those banks of analog control panels with operators sitting at them is history..

I think in the end you'll be happier with it free standing; the freedom of movement it affords...
If a 'U' shape, of course you walk in the middle as well..No swing bridges, no grades to go over doors..No duck unders.. 
'Open grid' affords this and is easier than may look to you. 
It's a horizontal grid of 1X4s with 2x3 legs..You make a perimeter(s) and fill it in with cross members, yellow glued and screwed...Risers and sub-roadbed (jig sawed 0.5" ply) on top.. 
Dat's all...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> I would go bigger if you can, and with the giant space you have, that shouldn't be a problem. The manufacturer tends to give the Minimum radius curve a locomotive can possibly get around. The radius where it will stay on the track reliably is usually a good deal larger. Kato, the manufacturer of my N-scale, 2-8-2 Mikado locomotives, said they should use a minimum radius of 11" I found by testing that 16" radius curves were the radius that actually worked reliably. So for an HO-scale big boy you might go with 30" radius curves. The loco will look better on the wider curve, and should stay on the track reliably with that size curve.
> 
> Traction Fan



OK thanks!
Maybe what I’ll do is make the red track for the big boy and the green one for smaller locos. Or screw it and redo both! Thank you for letting me know!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> With a free-standing bench you keep wall of room blank and paint it sky blue with wisps of clouds.. There's your 'background' if that's what you meant..You still have Mtns./ hills, their backs flat fascia board where right up to edge..But if track is closest to edge, anywhere, then Mtns/hills are behind track as usual...
> One of the oldest and largest MRR clubs, the Pasadena MRRC (check YT vids) is complete walk around perimeter with walls the way I describe..I think the effect is even better than the more common 'backdrop-on-bench-rear' type..
> 
> btw. This club has converted to DCC..Those banks of analog control panels with operators sitting at them is history..
> 
> I think in the end you'll be happier with it free standing; the freedom of movement it affords...
> If a 'U' shape, of course you walk in the middle as well..No swing bridges, no grades to go over doors..No duck unders..
> 'Open grid' affords this and is easier than may look to you.
> It's a horizontal grid of 1X4s with 2x3 legs..You make a perimeter(s) and fill it in with cross members, yellow glued and screwed...Risers and sub-roadbed (jig sawed 0.5" ply) on top..
> Dat's all...


That’s a great point about the open grid! Even a small walk space behind would serve. And it helps in making it at least somewhat removable should the need arise!
I can put up a large canvas ( I have several in rolls a good eight feet tall) and paint the sky in them!
Now I have to come up with the funds for it all! 

Thank you!!!
Now I better crank up the snack sales!!! That big boy alone is pricey!


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> Here is my initial design for now. It's two areas that connect behind my desk. The railroad that juts out at the NW section will be where there is a swinging bridge on a "door" which will allow the train to continue on to the other areas. I am going to continue designing those other areas, but focus on building this part for now. I think I've designed it to be able to self contain the engines and two tracks on a long "dog bone" loop with switches to move to the other areas later.
> 
> The green track will be pretty flat and more or less ground level. The red track will be about 6 or 8" up on cliffs, bridges, etc.
> 
> Please let me know if you have any suggestions or foresee any issues.
> 
> Thanks!
> View attachment 567850
> 
> 
> 
> Biggest issue I am having right now is with RailModeller Pro doing some weird stuff, or maybe me not knowing I am screwing up.
> 
> 1. Giving me very steep grade numbers when I set up a climb or drop, but when I check it online I get the 2-3% I want.
> 2. Trying to adjust track elevation but getting a message that the tracks are in different sections. I have checked that they are connected over and over and don't see any sign of not connected or anything else, but keep getting the same message. Driving me NUTS!!! Contacted tech support and awaiting a reply.
> 
> Well, that's it for now and thanks again to all!


Your plan shows about 20 turnouts, (@ $20-$30 each) and also has, in my opinion, way too much track in general. Those are two of the most common newbie mistakes.
Drawing & dreaming in far more expensive turnouts than they need (or can afford $$$$$) and trying to fill the table with track. Just about everybody does this when they are new. My advice is to keep it simple, and "less is more." The simpler any layout is, the easier it is to build, the less it costs, and the more realistic it looks. Look at the real, full-size railroad track in your area. Is it laid out in loops? Are there multiple turnouts that feed into super-short stub tracks that could barely hold a single freight car? I think you will find that a real railroad's "track plan" is very simple indeed. 
The track that goes behind the fridge and desk is going to be a cleaning and train rescue problem, unless the fridge and desk can be moved out to let you get in behind them. You might look into those low-level furniture moving slide gadgets. 

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> Your plan shows about 20 turnouts, (@ $20-$30 each) and also has, in my opinion, way too much track in general. Those are two of the most common newbie mistakes.
> Drawing & dreaming in far more expensive turnouts than they need (or can afford $$$$$) and trying to fill the table with track. Just about everybody does this when they are new. My advice is to keep it simple, and "less is more." The simpler any layout is, the easier it is to build, the less it costs, and the more realistic it looks. Look at the real, full-size railroad track in your area. Is it laid out in loops? Are there multiple turnouts that feed into super-short stub tracks that could barely hold a single freight car? I think you will find that a real railroad's "track plan" is very simple indeed.
> The track that goes behind the fridge and desk is going to be a cleaning and train rescue problem, unless the fridge and desk can be moved out to let you get in behind them. You might look into those low-level furniture moving slide gadgets.
> 
> Traction Fan



Again, thank you!
Some great points I didn’t even think of!
I will re-assess the plan. 
The fridge is on wheels and moves very easily.
I will, however, do something about access behind desk.
I have a cabinet there at the moment, but may move it to allow for free access to, and view of, the track.
Or, I may cut into the cabinet and let the tracks travel through it.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Thanks to everyone for your patience and your guidance!
I look forward to your posts each day!
I am currently rearranging the room.
Should start building the platforms in mid October, maybe sooner, and go from there. I will continue to post updates.
Thank!!!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

PS

What would you recommend for the turnouts that hold extra cars; how long should those be at least?


----------



## JeffHurl

Commander Zarkon said:


> That’s a great point about the open grid! Even a small walk space behind would serve. And it helps in making it at least somewhat removable should the need arise!
> I can put up a large canvas ( I have several in rolls a good eight feet tall) and paint the sky in them!
> Now I have to come up with the funds for it all!
> 
> Thank you!!!
> Now I better crank up the snack sales!!! That big boy alone is pricey!


Telltale gives good advice regarding a floating U table. It's movable, and allows for the operator to reach in from either side, effectively doubling the width of a table before it becomes too onerous of a reach should you need to clean track or correct a derailment.

Here is a very rough draft of my layout printed 1:1 scale and set out ony table. This is made from four 5.5' x 4.5' tables. This is N Gauge. I did this just so I could get a feel how my collection of structures will fit into the village on the East side of the river, which runs north/south in the center. You can see a couple barges there.

























I'm going to leave seams in the base layer of foam board so if needed, I can break down the layout into the four different tables. Each table is an old modular desk... A 66"x30" desk and a 66"x24" return. I just connected them into a large rectangle rather than a desk with a return.I got them free when the company I work with was going to toss them. They are on metal legs with casters.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> PS
> 
> What would you recommend for the turnouts that hold extra cars; how long should those be at least?


The "turnouts" themselves don't hold any cars. Remember "turnout" is the model railroader's name for what real railroads call a "switch." They wouldn't "spot" (park) a car on a switch, since the switch points couldn't be aligned for the other route through the turnout/switch with a car sitting on it.

I think you're asking about how long "sidings" or "yard tracks" should be. Well, the answer to that would be "As long as they need to be." That may sound flippant, but its true. Seriously, railroads (real or model) usually install sidings to serve one, or more, customers. Manufacturers, warehouses, mines, smelters, power plants, or any industry that ships their products and/or raw materials, by rail.
The location of the customer's building, and the amount of freight car traffic that customer ships, determine how many, and how long, the necessary siding(s) will be. Some sidings, at large industrial customers, may be owned & maintained by the customer. Some large industries even have their own switching locomotives. However, most sidings serving customers were installed by the railroad, in order to get the customer's business.

Another common type of siding is a "passing siding." These are owned by the railroad, and used to let its trains pass each other. The length desired in this case would be the length of the longest train likely to be run.

Some model railroaders prefer to call the first (customer serving) type of siding a "spur" as it typically only has a turnout at one end. They reserve the name "siding" for the second (passing) siding, which has turnouts at both ends. This is a technicality, and I only mention it because you may encounter the terms "spur" & "siding" in your research or planning.

"Yard tracks" are a different mater. They are owned, and operated, by the railroad company, and their purpose is to accept, sort, and ship out, freight cars. In the first & third operations the cars are usually in a train. Some will go to one city, and others to different points along the railroad. They need to be sorted into new trains headed for those destinations. Yards also have some tracks used for refueling, and otherwise servicing, locomotives, and repairing cars. There are huge major yards, and quite small yards too. Real railroads exist to make a profit. They don't build, or buy, anything they don't need, & have plans for using.

Some people have told you that you're "jumping all over the place" with your questions and plans. That is not a good way to try building a railroad, and I think its going to end up disappointing you.

There are two main schools of thought on planning a model railroad.

The first, and most popular, is to look at lots of published track plans, and pick one. (A variation on this same method is to pick parts of several different published plans, and combine them.) 
The resulting layout will typically have lots of track & turnouts arraigned in geometric patterns, like ovals & figure eights. There will likely be alternate routes that both go from place 'A' to place 'B' for no rational reason. There are also likely to be several tunnels that the trains can pop in and out of. Nothing about this plan will resemble anything a real railroad would ever build, but the folks who build them may not know that, or care about it if they do happen to know. Their layout is all about watching trains run along the various routes available, and realism is not a factor. This is a perfectly OK option, and many model railroads are built this way.

The second method is to start, not with plans of model railroads, but rather to start by researching some real railroads, and looking for a small part of one that offers some interesting operating possibilities. Trains are put together in a yard based on what they need to haul where. They then go out onto the main line and deliver loaded cars to the customers who are scheduled to get them. The train my pick up empty cars from the same customers too. Everything on the layout has a purpose that is based on what the real railroad being modeled did. Now this is advanced model railroading, and not for everyone. I am working on my seventh layout, and it was researched for years, then planned & re-planned many times. However, my first six layouts were simple clones of published track plans with all the non-realistic stuff mentioned in method one.

You are new to this.
I've got more than 50 years of experience. (Not all of it good 😄)

I think, at this point, you should not be planning, let alone preparing to build. I think you should be reading that book I recommended, and the files I sent you, plus any other Pre-organized, by somebody with experience, research. Instead, you seem to be hopping here, there, and everywhere, in cyberspace, encountering little nuggets of oddball information, and dreaming about somehow throwing them all into a magic digital "melting pot" of track planning software, that will disgorge a finished, elaborate, track plan for a large layout. Now I've never used track planning software. Maybe it can actually do that, maybe it can't. I don't know. My layouts were all planned with pencil & paper.
If you read my files already, you will have encountered something I call "The 3-'S' method." Make your layout Small, Simple, and Sectional. I will add that since its your first layout, use a published track plan for now. You can always add on to it later.

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> Telltale gives good advice regarding a floating U table. It's movable, and allows for the operator to reach in from either side, effectively doubling the width of a table before it becomes too onerous of a reach should you need to clean track or correct a derailment.
> 
> Here is a very rough draft of my layout printed 1:1 scale and set out ony table. This is made from four 5.5' x 4.5' tables. This is N Gauge. I did this just so I could get a feel how my collection of structures will fit into the village on the East side of the river, which runs north/south in the center. You can see a couple barges there.
> View attachment 567966
> 
> View attachment 567967
> 
> View attachment 567968
> 
> 
> I'm going to leave seams in the base layer of foam board so if needed, I can break down the layout into the four different tables. Each table is an old modular desk... A 66"x30" desk and a 66"x24" return. I just connected them into a large rectangle rather than a desk with a return.I got them free when the company I work with was going to toss them. They are on metal legs with casters.


That is really a great way to do it! Gonna look awesome!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> The "turnouts" themselves don't hold any cars. Remember "turnout" is the model railroader's name for what real railroads call a "switch." They wouldn't "spot" (park) a car on a switch, since the switch points couldn't be aligned for the other route through the turnout/switch with a car sitting on it.
> 
> I think you're asking about how long "sidings" or "yard tracks" should be. Well, the answer to that would be "As long as they need to be." That may sound flippant, but its true. Seriously, railroads (real or model) usually install sidings to serve one, or more, customers. Manufacturers, warehouses, mines, smelters, power plants, or any industry that ships their products and/or raw materials, by rail.
> The location of the customer's building, and the amount of freight car traffic that customer ships, determine how many, and how long, the necessary siding(s) will be. Some sidings, at large industrial customers, may be owned & maintained by the customer. Some large industries even have their own switching locomotives. However, most sidings serving customers were installed by the railroad, in order to get the customer's business.
> 
> Another common type of siding is a "passing siding." These are owned by the railroad, and used to let its trains pass each other. The length desired in this case would be the length of the longest train likely to be run.
> 
> Some model railroaders prefer to call the first (customer serving) type of siding a "spur" as it typically only has a turnout at one end. They reserve the name "siding" for the second (passing) siding, which has turnouts at both ends. This is a technicality, and I only mention it because you may encounter the terms "spur" & "siding" in your research or planning.
> 
> "Yard tracks" are a different mater. They are owned, and operated, by the railroad company, and their purpose is to accept, sort, and ship out, freight cars. In the first & third operations the cars are usually in a train. Some will go to one city, and others to different points along the railroad. They need to be sorted into new trains headed for those destinations. Yards also have some tracks used for refueling, and otherwise servicing, locomotives, and repairing cars. There are huge major yards, and quite small yards too. Real railroads exist to make a profit. They don't build, or buy, anything they don't need, & have plans for using.
> 
> Some people have told you that you're "jumping all over the place" with your questions and plans. That is not a good way to try building a railroad, and I think its going to end up disappointing you.
> 
> There are two main schools of thought on planning a model railroad.
> 
> The first, and most popular, is to look at lots of published track plans, and pick one. (A variation on this same method is to pick parts of several different published plans, and combine them.)
> The resulting layout will typically have lots of track & turnouts arraigned in geometric patterns, like ovals & figure eights. There will likely be alternate routes that both go from place 'A' to place 'B' for no rational reason. There are also likely to be several tunnels that the trains can pop in and out of. Nothing about this plan will resemble anything a real railroad would ever build, but the folks who build them may not know that, or care about it if they do happen to know. Their layout is all about watching trains run along the various routes available, and realism is not a factor. This is a perfectly OK option, and many model railroads are built this way.
> 
> The second method is to start, not with plans of model railroads, but rather to start by researching some real railroads, and looking for a small part of one that offers some interesting operating possibilities. Trains are put together in a yard based on what they need to haul where. They then go out onto the main line and deliver loaded cars to the customers who are scheduled to get them. The train my pick up empty cars from the same customers too. Everything on the layout has a purpose that is based on what the real railroad being modeled did. Now this is advanced model railroading, and not for everyone. I am working on my seventh layout, and it was researched for years, then planned & re-planned many times. However, my first six layouts were simple clones of published track plans with all the non-realistic stuff mentioned in method one.
> 
> You are new to this.
> I've got more than 50 years of experience. (Not all of it good 😄)
> 
> I think, at this point, you should not be planning, let alone preparing to build. I think you should be reading that book I recommended, and the files I sent you, plus any other Pre-organized, by somebody with experience, research. Instead, you seem to be hopping here, there, and everywhere, in cyberspace, encountering little nuggets of oddball information, and dreaming about somehow throwing them all into a magic digital "melting pot" of track planning software, that will disgorge a finished, elaborate, track plan for a large layout. Now I've never used track planning software. Maybe it can actually do that, maybe it can't. I don't know. My layouts were all planned with pencil & paper.
> If you read my files already, you will have encountered something I call "The 3-'S' method." Make your layout Small, Simple, and Sectional. I will add that since its your first layout, use a published track plan for now. You can always add on to it later.
> 
> Traction Fan


I will do that; more reading, including your articles.
I appreciate the advice!
Also, my track will be pretty much a fantasy track; traveling through different environments etc. but I do understand what you’re saying and will do more research.
Thank you!


----------



## 65446

What he shows in post *#75* is not 'open grid'..It's still a flat (to me, archaic, problematic) design..
Open grid is just that; open..There is no flat table..You can stand up within the grid while under construction to add risers which support 4" wide, jig sawed .5", 5-ply plywood sub-roadbed
'right of way', roadbed (of cork/foam) and track following it atop of...

*CZ*, this is what you want to learn and do...Once you've settled on a main line track plan, from that you determine the shape of the grid below it..The grid is built and lifted up high on legs..
Grades are made by installing risers attached to the cross members, sub-roadbed then cut and screwed to ends of vertical risers;..the entire benchwork away from the walls...
When the time comes to do scenic-ing the open spaces between sub-roadbed get filled with either stapled wire screening or glued foam; plaster added atop to shape into rock/hills...
From underneath *all* track remains reachable, not trapped on the upper side of a flat table..
The great majority of club layouts are done this way; reason and logic becoming clearer and clearer as the project unfolds..


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> What he shows in post *#75* is not 'open grid'..It's still a flat (to me, archaic, problematic) design..
> Open grid is just that; open..There is no flat table..You can stand up within the grid while under construction to add risers which support 4" wide, jig sawed .5", 5-ply plywood sub-roadbed
> 'right of way', roadbed (of cork/foam) and track following it atop of...
> 
> *CZ*, this is what you want to learn and do...Once you've settled on a main line track plan, from that you determine the shape of the grid below it..The grid is built and lifted up high on legs..
> Grades are made by installing risers attached to the cross members, sub-roadbed then cut and screwed to ends of vertical risers;..the entire benchwork away from the walls...
> When the time comes to do scenic-ing the open spaces between sub-roadbed get filled with either stapled wire screening or glued foam; plaster added atop to shape into rock/hills...
> From underneath *all* track remains reachable, not trapped on the upper side of a flat table..
> The great majority of club layouts are done this way; reason and logic becoming clearer and clearer as the project unfolds..


OK so no plywood sheets screwed onto the framework? The layout is then easily lifted up at some sections as well as being easily changed or even moved to another place. 
That seems like a great idea!
Thinking that insulation foam at the hardware stores would be really good fit that.
Thanks!!!


----------



## 65446

Well, you don't build it and move it 'to another place' (if I understand you).. You finalize the place where layout will sit and grow, the grid up to as high as your chest or higher if you wish, placing 2x3 legs in all corners where it needs them.
There will be some flat surfaces for rail yards or industries..perhaps a village..The rest is 4" wide right of way connecting those areas..For a straight run of say 8' of main line at '0' Altitude you will have an 8' x 4" ply right down on the grid, or better, *all* 0 Alt..on risers, putting ply about 2-3" above grid..This allows you to have embankments down from ply..
Then all the rest of right of way and yards will be on risers, grades formed by higher and higher risers to where track again levels off...Curves 4" wide as well, all up on risers..
*CZ*, it may sound like allot of work..But it's really quite simple and goes up quickly..the basic grid that is...
The 4" right of way sub-roadbed requires allot of jig sawing but becomes easier as you go along..Soon you're gluing in either cork or black foam roadbed then adding track.. 
The risers don't ever get glued as to allow you to readjust their height(s) and position against the grid's cross members..
When complete you wind up with vast open areas between sub-roadbed ply to be filled as explained; bridge, trestle, roads, rock, water, town, ferry slip...
If you go to ebay, Model Railroad Benchwork, just the pix alone you can see the open grid style..
Get "How To Build Model Railroad Benchwork by Linn Westcott, or the Jeff Wilson book looks good too...$10 pre-owned'd probably suffice...
*CZ*, I've certainly inundated you with info along with the others...Time for me to shut up and time for you to start building. Mistakes will occur...Just fix 'em and keep on going until you have what you dream of....


----------



## 65446

*PS*..
I had to add this !!
You may skip all that above and build it all along the walls as a shelf layout with various ways to do that, keeping it shallow at say, 12-15" deep, except where you may want it to loop back..

*PPS*. (This edited in later) : Go to YouTube "Sam's HO Model Railroad Part 1" and you will see *exactly* what open grid MRR benchwork looks like...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> *PS*..
> I had to add this !!
> You may skip all that above and build it all along the walls as a shelf layout with various ways to do that, keeping it shallow at say, 12-15" deep, except where you may want it to loop back..
> 
> *PPS*. (This edited in later) : Go to YouTube "Sam's HO Model Railroad Part 1" and you will see *exactly* what open grid MRR benchwork looks like...


Thank you!
I checked it out. Looks like the best way to go. 
What I meant by moving it somewhere else was in case I have to move on, I can take it with me, at least some of it.

My thing now is I have to see about making wider truns because I want to run a big boy on the tracks and they seem to prefer something like a 30" curve. So I guess flextrack is the way to go for all curves.


----------



## DonR

I haven't been able to get out of my mind,
the fact, that you will build this huge layout in
an art class room. Finally, the thought came to me that you are
likely to have the participation of your class in the construction of
the layout. Commander, there are many model railroad clubs
in our country. Some of them take their layouts to train shows
once or twice a year. To do this, they decide on a huge main track
plan, such as you have in mind. Then they assign,
say, an 5' X 8 or 10' foot module 
of that track plan to each club member, or group of
members. The members design
and build the scenic effects on their section, while at the same
time maintaining the 'mainline' that goes thru. Perhaps one
decides to build a yard with locomotive service...another
may elect to build a cityscape while others may create
a small village or a farm scene with fields and animals.
Would this idea fit in your class plans? It would call on the artistic
creativity of the students while at the same time
building an operating model. 

The individual modules are, of course, designed to
fit together and are built to technical 'standards'
set by you...There are National Model Railroad Association
standards and rules that can guide you.

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> I haven't been able to get out of my mind,
> the fact, that you will build this huge layout in
> an art class room. Finally, the thought came to me that you are
> likely to have the participation of your class in the construction of
> the layout. Commander, there are many model railroad clubs
> in our country. Some of them take their layouts to train shows
> once or twice a year. To do this, they decide on a huge main track
> plan, such as you have in mind. Then they assign,
> say, an 5' X 8 or 10' foot module
> of that track plan to each club member, or group of
> members. The members design
> and build the scenic effects on their section, while at the same
> time maintaining the 'mainline' that goes thru. Perhaps one
> decides to build a yard with locomotive service...another
> may elect to build a cityscape while others may create
> a small village or a farm scene with fields and animals.
> Would this idea fit in your class plans? It would call on the artistic
> creativity of the students while at the same time
> building an operating model.
> 
> The individual modules are, of course, designed to
> fit together and are built to technical 'standards'
> set by you...There are National Model Railroad Association
> standards and rules that can guide you.
> 
> Don



That's a great idea. THanks! I will involve some students, yes. There is also a model railroad in the local museum and I am going to see if those who built it can help me a bit. 
I took advice from people here in this forum about the modular setup and decided on the "open grid" method. I am going to try and make the grid as light and solid as possible. Same thing for the other parts. 
I have a plan for a mountain and a volcano. Having worked in set design, scenery, and props, I know how to make something look realistic without being overly heavy etc. I will likely make the volcano/mountain modular.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> That's a great idea. THanks! I will involve some students, yes. There is also a model railroad in the local museum and I am going to see if those who built it can help me a bit.
> I took advice from people here in this forum about the modular setup and decided on the "open grid" method. I am going to try and make the grid as light and solid as possible. Same thing for the other parts.
> I have a plan for a mountain and a volcano. Having worked in set design, scenery, and props, I know how to make something look realistic without being overly heavy etc. I will likely make the volcano/mountain modular.


Open grid was originally used with plaster scenery, (not very light.) The open grid, and L-girder, benchwork designs made it easier to form below-track-level scenery features like rivers, and road underpasses, than with a solid plywood table top. Using extruded foam, those features can simply be carved directly out of the foam. However, open grid is still widely used today, often under extruded foam board. Unless you plan to crawl around on top of your layout, (not recommended) The 1-1/2" -2" thick foam won't necessarily need a grid of lumber under it. Or a sheet of plywood. Obviously something needs to keep the foam up off the floor, but if your room has desks, tables, or shelves that are the right height, then you could lay the lightweight, but rigid, foam on them if you wish. Lumber prices have risen sharply lately, but then foam ain't cheap either.

If you plan on giving students a section of layout to work on, then I would plan to divide as much of the overall layout as possible into equal size modules that each group of students can work on independently. There will need to be some sort of overall plan so that you don't end up with New York City right next to the Grand Canyon.
Also you will need to have physical, and electrical, standardization for the ends of the modules so they can connect to each other. The track(s) will also need to meet at exactly the same point on one module as they do on the mating one. I'll save you from figuring out the same thing about joining track across a joint between modules, that dozens of modelers have come up against before you. It is very impractical to have the joint in the track directly above the physical joint between modules. A better system is to pick a standard length of sectional straight track (9" in HO / 5" in N) and set the end of a module's track a half that length (4-1/2" for HO 2-1/2" for N) back from the end of the module. Then, one end of each joining straight track piece can have the spikes cut off the ties back just far enough for a rail joiner to slide back between the rail and the ties. This will make it possible to insert that joining section into the main track, after the modules have been attached to each other.

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> Open grid was originally used with plaster scenery, (not very light.) The open grid, and L-girder, benchwork designs made it easier to form below-track-level scenery features like rivers, and road underpasses, than with a solid plywood table top. Using extruded foam, those features can simply be carved directly out of the foam. However, open grid is still widely used today, often under extruded foam board. Unless you plan to crawl around on top of your layout, (not recommended) The 1-1/2" -2" thick foam won't necessarily need a grid of lumber under it. Or a sheet of plywood. Obviously something needs to keep the foam up off the floor, but if your room has desks, tables, or shelves that are the right height, then you could lay the lightweight, but rigid, foam on them if you wish. Lumber prices have risen sharply lately, but then foam ain't cheap either.
> 
> If you plan on giving students a section of layout to work on, then I would plan to divide as much of the overall layout as possible into equal size modules that each group of students can work on independently. There will need to be some sort of overall plan so that you don't end up with New York City right next to the Grand Canyon.
> Also you will need to have physical, and electrical, standardization for the ends of the modules so they can connect to each other. The track(s) will also need to meet at exactly the same point on one module as they do on the mating one. I'll save you from figuring out the same thing about joining track across a joint between modules, that dozens of modelers have come up against before you. It is very impractical to have the joint in the track directly above the physical joint between modules. A better system is to pick a standard length of sectional straight track (9" in HO / 5" in N) and set the end of a module's track a half that length (4-1/2" for HO 2-1/2" for N) back from the end of the module. Then, one end of each joining straight track piece can have the spikes cut off the ties back just far enough for a rail joiner to slide back between the rail and the ties. This will make it possible to insert that joining section into the main track, after the modules have been attached to each other.
> 
> Traction Fan


Lot's of great points-especially about the tracks and the joints! Thank you!

I'll use foam and even newspaper and foil: whatever works. As long as it _looks_ good, it doesn't have to be very tough. Like you said, no crawling on top of the thing.

My layout is going to be fantasy based. I will use ideas from real places, but won't be concerned with adhering to real areas. For example, where the bridge crosses from one layout to the other, there will be an "ocean" at each end (or a shore to be more precise). I may create a resin water area at each end and under the bridge, and put a whale or two "swimming" underneath. There will be a lighthouse, and further down there will be a castle. There will likely be a lake (loch) by the castle, and a type of Nessy swimming in it. There may also be a jungle and an active volcano etc. The idea is more to have the trains travel through different cool places than to be accurate as far as real places. I may have the transition to/from each area separated by a short tunnel. 

Right now I am focusing on one side, and just designing it so there's a way to cross over. Once I'm done with this side, I will start the other side. I know it may seem like I'm over planning or getting ahead of myself, but this helps me plan out the thing as a whole and then break it into sections. As I go, plans may change, and that's OK. Still, I appreciate and welcome warnings where I may seem to be looking at the clouds while walking to the edge of a precipice!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

OK so hopefully I am not breaking rules here, but this is same info as in another thread. I was in a hurry and didn't realize until now that I probably should have posted here.

Anyway, so I now have several steam locomotives in addition to the diesel ones. They are in O scale and I have decided to go with HO. So I am considering selling these in order to get a couple, or even one, nice HO (a big boy would be a dream). Part of me wants to go ahead and use these, but it'llcut my scale in half. The Lionel Lines and Polar Express locomotives are pretty heavy, which feels good, but I don;t know enough about this stuff yet. Regardless, HO just seems a lot more friendly for what I want to do. I have considered keeping one of the O gauge locomotives, but not sure. Any input as to any one of these being worth keeping/durable? After the experience with the diesels, I am a bit leery thinking of another burn out. The replacement diesels are identical so I expect the same motors and possible failure. And I am not a fan of diesel engines. I am also not a big fan of the triple track with O gauge. What do y'all think?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Also I could just do some giveaways with these in class.


----------



## DonR

The Forum has a very active 0 scale membership.

You should post these locos in our For Sale or Trade
forum. Be sure to add that they are new and
unused. State a price, ('or better offer' can be used)
and your policy for payment and shipping.

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> The Forum has a very active 0 scale membership.
> 
> You should post these locos in our For Sale or Trade
> forum. Be sure to add that they are new and
> unused. State a price, ('or better offer' can be used)
> and your policy for payment and shipping.
> 
> Don


Was not even aware of that possibility.
Thank you!


----------



## 65446

*CZ*, I was compelled to add just one more heads up ! Sorry.

I still say go with the open grid. But instead of screening-filled (which I prefer) you can go with layered extruded foam for mountains/hills. You'd merely glue the main shapes onto the grid and subroadbed ply, then carve it (which I hear can be really messy), add plaster/carve it.
The grid still allows you to go down below track level for obvious scenic reasons and to stand within it during work. The screening/plaster method allows you to reach track/trains from below, after completion. But I believe the solid foam scenic-ing method prohibits that after completion..
Not sure..Perhaps it gets hollowed out in tunneled areas...
It's essentially the all-flat table layout which can be so inhibiting in so many ways..

All the best in all your decisions. I hope we can all leave you be now and let you begin the process.....
Your questions are still always welcome, though
*No need reply to this.*.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Just got a bunch of flex track for free. It’s steel and code 100, which I’ve heard is not ideal, and Jack, who gave it to me, said the same thing, but it should still be useable.
Thanks to Jack at Litchfield Station!!!


----------



## JeffHurl

I wonder if you could nickel plate the whole lot? Perhaps the chemistry teacher would volunteer his or her services? Even make it into a class project?


----------



## DonR

I was given a small supply of the same sort of steel flex track.
I used it in one yard. used mainly for car storage. It was a 
perfect use for it and the steel shortcomings were unimportant
I would try to avoid using it in high traffic mainlines, though.

Don


----------



## CTValleyRR

I think you will be very unhappy with steel track. "Less than ideal" is certainly up there for Whopper of the Year.. Steel track corrodes easily, and conducts electricity poorly. On a layout such as you contemplate, it will cause you no end of grief.

The best thing you can do with that is pull the rails out and see what kind of scrap value you can get for it.


----------



## 65446

At least it's steel, and not brass..
The Highland Park Society of Model Engineers is the oldest or 2nd oldest club in Los Angeles.
It's all hand laid track of steel rail. (find them on YouTube). I asked them about rust problems and they told me there is little to none, or not enough to cause any regret.. I've visited many times and have ran trains there..Not at any time did I witness a stall out due to the steel. And it looks great ! (Mind you, this is dry Ca. climate )
The only thing I'm not keen on is that it's code 100...100 looks too tall for yard trackage which is usually allot lower than main line trackage in the 1:1 scale for obvious reasons..
So you'll have to decide to ignore this discrepancy or employ c83 in yards or c70 in order to depict the lower yard trackage if you go all 100 for main line ..
When 83 butts up against 100 you merely shim up the 83 (or 70)on a short ramp so as to have rail heads at same height..You then solder them there...1:1 RRs have same prob but solve it with fish plates called a 'stepped joint'....

*No need reply* unless you don't savvy..

My wish is you cease the questioning and start the work..It's time to get your feet wet ! 
At least find the foot print and begin the benchwork with 16', 12', or, 8' 1x4 'stringers' /perimeter(s)' and cross members all up on legs (about 50") anywhere where support is needed..Then introduce sub-roadbed .5" ply atop risers 2" and higher...
Track and scenery mistakes of any size can be amended any time..You need that bench, first....


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> I wonder if you could nickel plate the whole lot? Perhaps the chemistry teacher would volunteer his or her services? Even make it into a class project?


Do you think that would


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Commander Zarkon said:


> Do you think that would


I meant: do you think that would work?
Seems like steel is not ideal, but maybe it can get me started, and that’s something.


----------



## JeffHurl

Nickel coating would help prevent oxidation, which is what would cause electrical issues. I have no idea if the process is feasible. You would need to come up with a long, narrow tub for the pieces to sit in while the plating process does its thing. I also have no idea if it would damage the plastic ties. There are 2 types of nickel plating. One involves anodes, cathodes and an electrolyte solution that contains nickel. The other is called electroless nickel plating. I really don't know much about the process other than you end up with a thin layer of nickel that coats the steel.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> Nickel coating would help prevent oxidation, which is what would cause electrical issues. I have no idea if the process is feasible. You would need to come up with a long, narrow tub for the pieces to sit in while the plating process does its thing. I also have no idea if it would damage the plastic ties. There are 2 types of nickel plating. One involves anodes, cathodes and an electrolyte solution that contains nickel. The other is called electroless nickel plating. I really don't know much about the process other than you end up with a thin layer of nickel that coats the steel.


Interesting.
I will ask one of the science teachers.
If it’s feasible and I do it, I will post a how to.


----------



## JeffHurl

Here is a great DIY from start to finish for electroplating steel. This tutorial goes through Nickel plating, Copper plating and zinc plating, so it has some extraneous info.

I think the hardest part for you would be finding a long shallow and narrow tub.

How to Electroplate at home

Nickel plating adds a very thin layer of nickel on the surface of the steel. The process uses a low current electrical charge that carries individual ions of nickel from the anode (a piece of nickel) to the cathode (the steel in your track). The process doesn't take long, and the result is a layer of Nickel that is less than 1/1000 of an inch thick. It's very thin, but still provides excellent resistance to oxidation, because nickel doesn't oxidize as readily as the steel does...

Honestly, though... I'd start by laying out a section of teh track as is and see how well it works before going through the effort of plating, which may not really be worth it.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> I meant: do you think that would work?
> Seems like steel is not ideal, but maybe it can get me started, and that’s something.


There is a reason you got that steel rail track for free. Most likely the guy who had it couldn't sell it, since no one would buy it.
Even if you could get it nickel-plated (by no means certain) and even if the extremely thin nickel plating didn't rub off when track cleaning*, the nickel plating job might well cost the price of just buying nickel-silver track in the first place. Sow's ears do not silk purses make. 

If you go ahead with your nickel-plating scheme, (which I don't recommend.) then there are some types of track cleaning you should avoid. They include any & all abrasive types. Brite Boy track cleaning blocks, track cleaning cars that drag pieces of Masonite, sandpaper, or any sort of abrasive block along the rails, could remove the thin coat of nickel from the rail tops which would electrically put you right back to steel, rusty, rail and poor electrical pickup. Use a rag wetted with alcohol for track cleaning.

Traction Fan


----------



## MichaelE

JeffHurl said:


> Here is a great DIY from start to finish for electroplating steel. This tutorial goes through Nickel plating, Copper plating and zinc plating, so it has some extraneous info.
> 
> *I think the hardest part for you would be finding a long shallow and narrow tub.*
> 
> How to Electroplate at home
> 
> Nickel plating adds a very thin layer of nickel on the surface of the steel. The process uses a low current electrical charge that carries individual ions of nickel from the anode (a piece of nickel) to the cathode (the steel in your track). The process doesn't take long, and the result is a layer of Nickel that is less than 1/1000 of an inch thick. It's very thin, but still provides excellent resistance to oxidation, because nickel doesn't oxidize as readily as the steel does...
> 
> Honestly, though... I'd start by laying out a section of teh track as is and see how well it works before going through the effort of plating, which may not really be worth it.



Not really. Gunsmiths use long narrow troughs for hot salts bluing of rifle and shotgun barrels and actions. These tanks are available from Brownell's.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Thinking about it, I agree that the plating would likely be a waste of time and money. The person who gave me that track was honest and said that it is not ideal, and he could t sell it anyway, so there was no deception.
I think that track may be fine for part of the layout. I live in Arizona and it’s very dry here so it should be fine. I can always replace it later and/or use it for yards to park rolling stock.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Think on g about it? The plating would likely be a waste of time and money. The person who gave me that track was honest and said that it is not ideal, and he could t sell it anyway, so there was no deception.
> I think that track may be fine for part of the layout. I live in Arizona and it’s very dry here so it should be fine. I can always replace it later and/or use it for yards to park rolling stock.


It's not dry enough. The rails will corrode. "I can always replace it later" shows your inexperience. Yes you can... but it's a finicky and time consuming process that you would be well advised to avoid knowingly setting yourself up for.

Despite the value of the track being correctly represented to you when it was given, he is right now thanking you for taking that white elephant off his hands. He's probably planning to write it off as a tax-deductible donation to the school.

Do yourself a favor and treat it the same way you would treat the hideous tie your great Aunt Nellie gave you. Dispose of it appropriately and fib if you're ever asked about it. As I said earlier, the scrap value of the steel will buy you a couple lengths of good nickel-silver flex track.


----------



## 65446

*Wow* !! Now that we *KNOW* you are in Arizona I'd say go for the steel rail !! That's even dryer than where the Highland Pacific MRR is, in San Gabriel, in L.A. county, and that RR runs smoooooth, and the steel looks great !!! Again, check it out on YouTube !
My only concern is that you wind up using code 100 brass switches..*Do not* !! You'll have to instead find C100 in nickle silver or steel (rare)..though NS switches will kinda stick out, sitting within the steel rail approaches to them..Not sure if that'd be so bad or not. 
I think Shinohara and/or Walthers have C100 NS switches..(near $35 per)....


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> *Wow* !! Now that we *KNOW* you are in Arizona I'd say go for the steel rail !! That's even dryer than where the Highland Pacific MRR is, in San Gabriel, in L.A. county, and that RR runs smoooooth, and the steel looks great !!! Again, check it out on YouTube !
> My only concern is that you wind up using code 100 brass switches..*Do not* !! You'll have to instead find C100 in nickle silver or steel (rare)..though NS switches will kinda stick out, sitting within the steel rail approaches to them..Not sure if that'd be so bad or not.
> I think Shinohara and/or Walthers have C100 NS switches..(near $35 per)....


I was looking at the steel rail. It’s been sitting in that box for a long time according to the person who gave it to me, and it shows no rust that I can see.
I will do a closer inspection but they look rust and corrosion free.
So maybe they are good to use.

I want to get started but have some other stuff to get done first.
I know some here have said just get started and I agree, but need to get some other stuff sorted out. Should start on the base for the layout in open grid soon!
Been away camping during this week off.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> I was looking at the steel rail. It’s been sitting in that box for a long time according to the person who gave it to me, and it shows no rust that I can see.
> I will do a closer inspection but they look rust and corrosion free.
> So maybe they are good to use.
> 
> I want to get started but have some other stuff to get done first.
> I no know some here have said just get started and I agree, but need to get some other stuff sorted out. Should start on the base for the layout in open grid soon!
> Been away camping during this week off.


So as long as the rails aren't corroded when you install them, they'll be OK? And the conductivity of steel won't be a problem if you can't see an issue. If you think not being able to visually detect corrosion means it isn't there, then please educate yourself... or just listen to what you are being told.

You can justify and make excuses all day long. You have been warned by people who know what they're talking about, INCLUDING the guy who gave it to you. Your continual disinclination to take advice and let your own excitement run the project is going to bring the whole thing crashing down.

You will spend hundreds of hours of effort getting this whole thing set up, and then you will be back with posts like, "Why won't my trains run?". An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> So as long as the rails aren't corroded when you install them, they'll be OK? And the conductivity of steel won't be a problem if you can't see an issue. If you think not being able to visually detect corrosion means it isn't there, then please educate yourself... or just listen to what you are being told.
> 
> You can justify and make excuses all day long. You have been warned by people who know what they're talking about, INCLUDING the guy who gave it to you. Your continual disinclination to take advice and let your own excitement run the project is going to bring the whole thing crashing down.
> 
> You will spend hundreds of hours of effort getting this whole thing set up, and then you will be back with posts like, "Why won't my trains run?". An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.


I am hearing two opinions: one that the steel track is useless, another that it can indeed work.

That a huge layout in a major club uses steel track successfully seems to prove that it can work. I wrote the club that uses the steel track for some advice. Maybe they no longer use the steel track. Maybe they still do but it’s not worth the effort. Maybe they have figured out a way to make it work well.
I will wait to see what they say and decide.
Worst case scenario I can use the steel track for a train yard or something.

I am asking lots of questions now because I want to learn as much as I can getting started, and because I have to wait a little before starting.

I’m not waiting to start because I want perfect knowledge, but because of a few circumstances. I figure why not do the research now when I have some time.

I appreciate all the input and actually look forward to reading more comments all the time.


----------



## 65446

If you mean you wrote to the Highland Pacific (H. Park Society of Model Engineers) I can assuredly state that they have not replaced the hand laid steel rail..They own the house it's in and so can never be evicted..
As I said, I have visited many times and the track is better looking than NS and have never witnessed a stall-out due to the steel...But you did read my concerns over it in post #107...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Yes it was them.
I read your concerns, and that of others, and I am taking all the advice seriously. If they are running steel track as you said, then they must have found a way to make it work. Maybe they’ll tell me what to do. Maybe they’ll say that yeah, it works, but not worth it in the long run. I’ll balance whatever they say with what you and others have said

I looked at the track today and it was all shiny and I saw no signs of rust. It’s been sitting in that box for a long time, so I’d think it would have a good deal of rust spots or a coat of rust-instead it looked new. Being in AZ may help regarding the corrosion issue.
We shall see!
Hopefully they will contact me soon.


----------



## 65446

*CZ*,
As I said before, time to begin the project..You are an art teacher..I've no doubt your creativity will lead you to the logic behind all the components of a RR in miniature..In fact the logic behind it is much the same as the 1:1 scale's use of pure logic to get what they need in place.
Get the woods, glue, screws, drill-driver and saw and get it going..Nothing down the line is un-doable..Hear what HPMRRC says...You've done then enough research..
Time for the fun to begin; the art and love of MRRing !


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> I am hearing two opinions: one that the steel track is useless, another that it can indeed work.
> 
> That a huge layout in a major club uses steel track successfully seems to prove that it can work. I wrote the club that uses the steel track for some advice. Maybe they no longer use the steel track. Maybe they still do but it’s not worth the effort. Maybe they have figured out a way to make it work well.
> I will wait to see what they say and decide.
> Worst case scenario I can use the steel track for a train yard or something.
> 
> I am asking lots of questions now because I want to learn as much as I can getting started, and because I have to wait a little before starting.
> 
> I’m not waiting to start because I want perfect knowledge, but because of a few circumstances. I figure why not do the research now when I have some time.
> 
> I appreciate all the input and actually look forward to reading more comments all the time.


You misunderstand about the steel track. No one has said or implied that it can't be MADE to work. What we are saying that it is much more prone to failures and problems than nickel-silver track, ESPECIALLY in situations where track maintenance is not performed often and thoroughly. One person cannot achieve this on a layout the size you envision.

There really is no basis for comparison between a layout built and maintained by a club of experienced modelers and one built by a first-time beginner with little to no assistance, especially when it comes to maintenance. I guarantee you that they have the know-how to both minimize the potential issues and rapidly correct any that do pop up.

Likewise, the corrosion of steel track stored in a box on a store shelf or storeroom cannot be compared to track actually in use. Water-based adhesives, temperature, humidity, and micro-arcing from train wheels all affect that equation. Have you actually set up a few pieces of it and tried to run a train on it? That will tell you much more accurately than the Mark I, Mod 0 eyeball what condition it's in.

"I have some anecdotal examples of people who use steel track successfully" and other comments suggesting the concern is overblown (like calling it "not ideal") worry a lot of us that you're charging blindly down a rabbit hole in your enthusiasm to proceed. On the other hand, if you have decided that you must accept the higher risk for reasons of economics, that's a different matter altogether. Still asking for trouble, but understandable.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> *CZ*,
> As I said before, time to begin the project..You are an art teacher..I've no doubt your creativity will lead you to the logic behind all the components of a RR in miniature..In fact the logic behind it is much the same as the 1:1 scale's use of pure logic to get what they need in place.
> Get the woods, glue, screws, drill-driver and saw and get it going..Nothing down the line is un-doable..Hear what HPMRRC says...You've done then enough research..
> Time for the fun to begin; the art and love of MRRing !


Thank you.
I will be starting it soon. Been on break for the last week and away from home. I already own the tools to do this anyway; cordless circular saw, table saw, cordless drill and impact driver, nail gun... so all I need is the wood!
I will be posting pics as I go in the layout section. Looking forward to getting feedback.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> You misunderstand about the steel track. No one has said or implied that it can't be MADE to work. What we are saying that it is much more prone to failures and problems than nickel-silver track, ESPECIALLY in situations where track maintenance is not performed often and thoroughly. One person cannot achieve this on a layout the size you envision.
> 
> There really is no basis for comparison between a layout built and maintained by a club of experienced modelers and one built by a first-time beginner with little to no assistance, especially when it comes to maintenance. I guarantee you that they have the know-how to both minimize the potential issues and rapidly correct any that do pop up.
> 
> Likewise, the corrosion of steel track stored in a box on a store shelf or storeroom cannot be compared to track actually in use. Water-based adhesives, temperature, humidity, and micro-arcing from train wheels all affect that equation. Have you actually set up a few pieces of it and tried to run a train on it? That will tell you much more accurately than the Mark I, Mod 0 eyeball what condition it's in.
> 
> "I have some anecdotal examples of people who use steel track successfully" and other comments suggesting the concern is overblown (like calling it "not ideal") worry a lot of us that you're charging blindly down a rabbit hole in your enthusiasm to proceed. On the other hand, if you have decided that you must accept the higher risk for reasons of economics, that's a different matter altogether. Still asking for trouble, but understandable.



I understand what you’re saying. If I use the steel track it will be for the first section, not the whole layout. Maybe I’ll just use it for a big yard?
I plan on using nickel silver for the rest.
I could also put the steel track up for sale or trade here, but not sure if anyone would be interested.

Waiting to hear from that club though. Curious as to how they keep it working. I may even call them up.

Thank you for the reality check. I do appreciate it.


----------



## Big Ed

Commander Zarkon said:


> I understand what you’re saying.
> Thank you for the reality check. I do appreciate it.


Now your Volcano will be a working model? Right?
If not like a science project with spewing lava, maybe somehow with LED lights.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> I understand what you’re saying. If I use the steel track it will be for the first section, not the whole layout. Maybe I’ll just use it for a big yard?
> I plan on using nickel silver for the rest.
> I could also put the steel track up for sale or trade here, but not sure if anyone would be interested.
> 
> Waiting to here from that club though. Curious as to how they keep it working. I may even call them up.
> 
> Thank you for the reality check. I do appreciate it.


You have gotten plenty of advice regarding the steel track, practically all of it negative. Sometimes we have to learn by doing. Try actually running a locomotive on some steel rail track, and see how that works. As long as you clean the tops of the rails, and the wheels of the locomotive, it should run. Before deciding to go ahead with laying a lot of that track permanently, I suggest letting it sit for several weeks, and then trying to run again, without re-cleaning the rails. It may run the second time, but probably not as well as the first. Now to some degree this would be true of any model track, steel, brass, or nickel-silver. The difference is how frequently It needs cleaning. Steel, most often, brass second most, and nickel-silver least often. While I think the most sensible thing you could do with the steel track (short of throwing it away) would be to use it as display track. Locomotives sitting on display shelves don't need to pick up electricity from the rails, so the type of rail doesn't matter.

Your idea of using the steel track in a yard won't work, if you plan to use the yard by running locomotives to switch cars in that yard. The same electrical conductivity problems that will apply to steel rail on the main line, will apply equally, or perhaps even more, in an active yard. Locomotives need to run very slowly when switching. This calls for the most electrical reliability, not the least. Now if the "yard" will only be an "on layout display track," Then electrical issues won't apply.

It seems obvious, from your posts, that you are determined to use this "bonanza" of free steel rail track, no matter what advice you have been given. OK. That is, and should be, strictly your choice, since its your railroad. So go ahead and try it, and see how well, or poorly, it works. I suggest you try it in small sections, to minimize any potential disappointment, but that too is strictly your choice. Also do call that club, and get their advice from their practical experience of running on steel track. 

I strongly suspect you are correct that you will be unable to sell the steel rail track here, unless you palm it off on some newbie who doesn't know any better. That would be a rather mean thing to do, especially since the man who gave it to you free was honest about its inferiority.

Good Luck & Have Fun;

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Big Ed said:


> Now your Volcano will be a working model? Right?
> If not like a science project with spewing lava, maybe somehow with LED lights.


Likely with clouds shrouding the top and “lightning”.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

traction fan said:


> You have gotten plenty of advice regarding the steel track, practically all of it negative. Sometimes we have to learn by doing. Try actually running a locomotive on some steel rail track, and see how that works. As long as you clean the tops of the rails, and the wheels of the locomotive, it should run. Before deciding to go ahead with laying a lot of that track permanently, I suggest letting it sit for several weeks, and then trying to run again, without re-cleaning the rails. It may run the second time, but probably not as well as the first. Now to some degree this would be true of any model track, steel, brass, or nickel-silver. The difference is how frequently It needs cleaning. Steel, most often, brass second most, and nickel-silver least often. While I think the most sensible thing you could do with the steel track (short of throwing it away) would be to use it as display track. Locomotives sitting on display shelves don't need to pick up electricity from the rails, so the type of rail doesn't matter.
> 
> Your idea of using the steel track in a yard won't work, if you plan to use the yard by running locomotives to switch cars in that yard. The same electrical conductivity problems that will apply to steel rail on the main line, will apply equally, or perhaps even more, in an active yard. Locomotives need to run very slowly when switching. This calls for the most electrical reliability, not the least. Now if the "yard" will only be an "on layout display track," Then electrical issues won't apply.
> 
> It seems obvious, from your posts, that you are determined to use this "bonanza" of free steel rail track, no matter what advice you have been given. OK. That is, and should be, strictly your choice, since its your railroad. So go ahead and try it, and see how well, or poorly, it works. I suggest you try it in small sections, to minimize any potential disappointment, but that too is strictly your choice. Also do call that club, and get their advice from their practical experience of running on steel track.
> 
> I strongly suspect you are correct that you will be unable to sell the steel rail track here, unless you palm it off on some newbie who doesn't know any better. That would be a rather mean thing to do, especially since the man who gave it to you free was honest about its inferiority.
> 
> Good Luck & Have Fun;
> 
> Traction Fan


It’s difficult to throw away so much track. I guess maybe I’m grasping at straws.


----------



## DonR

You will likely have a good number of spur tracks...tracks in car storage yards...tracks that 
are 'abandoned'. Those are all great places to use this steel track. Real track in those
places are usually rusty. On a layout the size you propose you could use a big portion
of that steel track in these areas. Just avoid placing it on mainlines or yard leads where locos will run.
Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So what’s the best overall track: code 83 nickel silver?


----------



## MichaelE

There is no best track code. 83 is close to heavy mainline rail, but still slightly large. Trains run well on it though so it is widely used. Smaller code is used for sidings, yards, and spurs. Smaller rail is also used for narrow gauge.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

UPDATE:

I spoke with someone from that train club in California. He said they use Code 100 steel track throughout their layout and have zero problems. He said they run wire from each flex track connection, connected to a main wire to keep the conductivity going, and no problems. I asked about any special cleaning, corrosion, etc. and he said nothing special. He said that if I run the trains frequently there's even less problem. 
So I will be using the code 100 steel track on my first section, and nickel silver code 83 for the rest. I'll be able to provide more information once that's all up and running. I still have to build the platforms, get other track parts like switches etc., get a train, get a DCC system, build the actual track supports... 

I have an idea: to make a little dedicated car with a cleaning sponge on the track. I will then run this car at the beginning and end of each day, or at least every other day.


----------



## traction fan

Commander Zarkon said:


> UPDATE:
> 
> I spoke with someone from that train club in California. He said they use Code 100 steel track throughout their layout and have zero problems. He said they run wire from each flex track connection, connected to a main wire to keep the conductivity going, and no problems. I asked about any special cleaning, corrosion, etc. and he said nothing special. He said that if I run the trains frequently there's even less problem.
> So I will be using the code 100 steel track on my first section, and nickel silver code 83 for the rest. I'll be able to provide more information once that's all up and running. I still have to build the platforms, get other track parts like switches etc., get a train, get a DCC system, build the actual track supports...
> 
> I have an idea: to make a little dedicated car with a cleaning sponge on the track. I will then run this car at the beginning and end of each day, or at least every other day.


There are commercial track cleaning cars available. Some of them drag a felt pad, or brush, along the track. Some even have a tank to hold alcohol, or other liquid track cleaner. If you make your own track cleaning car, it will need to be heavily weighted, both to do its job, and to stay on the track. You may need to run it alone, behind a locomotive, since the track cleaning car will cause a lot of drag.

Traction Fan


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Question:
Looking at a Powercab and Powercab R.
Any input? I’m doing this with very little knowledge. Want to start on the track and layout ASAP.
I have 73 pieces of 35” long steel flex track.
That should get me through the first layout. Just need to get the switches. I will solder every track connection and run a wire from each to a bus wire/cable.
I was trying to decide where to start and as tempting as getting an engine is, I need to get this layout started! 
Thanks


----------



## CTValleyRR

So you don't think there is any value in having a locomotive so that you can test your track as you install it? I sure would, especially if I had never laid track before.


----------



## MichaelE

I remember when I started my layout. I couldn't afford the locomotive, the DCC system, and the track all at the same time. I started with track and wiring and laid it as perfectly as I knew how.

When the locomotive and DCC system was finally purchased, I was pleasantly surprised with my handiwork. But this current layout is not my first either.

But yeah, if you've never laid track before, I'd at least buy an example of the longest car you think you will run as a proof car.

I did the same thing when I laid a narrow gauge rail on my mountain spur. I did not have a narrow gauge locomotive as it was still in transit (before being sent back to Germany, thanks USPS) so I bought a used HOm passenger coach from e-bay to check the track gauge as I laid it.


----------



## kilowatt62

It would be wise to at least acquire a DC current loco and a simple power pack to test your work as you go. A used Athearn blue box version of some sort would be fine. Can be converted to DCC later if so choose. Both the loco & power pack can be had for less than 50 bucks total.


----------



## DonR

And to add to Kilowatts suggestion...the DC power pack would be 
used to power turnouts, lights and other accessories after
you get your DCC system.

Don


----------



## kilowatt62

DonR said:


> And to add to Kilowatts suggestion...the DC power pack would be
> used to power turnouts, lights and other accessories after
> you get your DCC system.
> 
> Don,
> Yep. Thanks for adding what I forgot to, before hitting the ‘post’ tab. 👍🏻


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Hey y’all are awesome! Things I hadn’t thought of!
I went down to Litchfield Station today and the Mr. Jack was there-lucky for me because I didn’t know they are closed on Saturday’s!!!

I got some rail joiners and also a simple steam locomotive. Funny because Jack mentioned that it would be a good idea to have something to test the track as I went along.
I’m heading home in a bit with the locomotive in a box on the back seat.
Once I get the money from the O scale trains I sold, I will get the switches and the controller, etc.

Of course, I gotta most on over to the lumber place and get some 1x4x8s to get the layout started!

Haven’t had an HO train in decades, so I’m pretty excited!


----------



## 65446

*CZ*.
Just be sure locos are DCC (not analog DC) and may as well go with 'Sound on board'..Because, later on, adding a speaker and a sound decoder will cost near same but will demand hours of (ugh) installation work..
Far as switch tracks, unless you can find Atlas C100 steel, *do not ever* buy 'SnapTrack' anything..especially if it's brass.
I believe you'll likely wind up with nickle silver C100 switches from Walthers, Shinohara, or Peco, and have to accept the different look between steel and NS...But as an artist I'm sure you will be able to find a way to disguise the sides of the rails with paints to hide the diff...
If you wind up with NS track as well, I'd use the steel in track closest in reach so as to be able clean in easily if, IF there is any rust build up (which I doubt based on what you've found out about it)..


----------



## DonR

There's a few small tools that you'll find very useful as you
begin work on your layout. 

1. A cheap...and I mean dirt cheap...multimeter. You can find the
ideal layout meter at Harbor Freight for around 4.95...but some days
they give them away. It reads voltage, ohms and amps. All you'll need
as your layout grows. A couple alligator clips are also helpful.

2. A razor saw. You'll need it to cut the flex track to meet your 
track design.

3. A set of small inexpensive files. They'll help you smooth out
the cuts in the flex.

4. A small CHEAP soldering iron..maybe 25 or 35 watts. Along with
it, get paste resin flux and resin core (not ACID) solder. Get acquainted
with it by soldering 'this and that'.

5. A small wire cutter. 

These suggestions are in addition to the various woodworking tools
that you'll need for building your benchwork.

Don


----------



## JeffHurl

Good advice, Don!

For me, as a beginner, the track planning software AnyRail has been worth the $60 cost, and has been great for planning my layout. I've had several months to prepare for a winter build, and I have revised my track plan at least 20 times before I got a plan I was completely happy with (sirry for the dangling participle, Commander).


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Thanks again everyone!
My loco is dcc.
I will look into an Athearn blue box used.
Thanks for the tools suggestions. I’m fortunate to have a good amount of tools for carpentry and also from model building, so it should all help.
No worries with the dangler...
here’s my locomotive...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

By the way, are these things easy to take apart as far as the shell in order to apply a custom paint job?
PS
Stupid question.
I’ll search for that info...


----------



## CTValleyRR

Yes very easy... the trick is being able to get them back together again! Steam locos are tricky, because the drivers and drive gear have to go back in a certain way with little room for error. However, it's not too hard to just mask it off while painting.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Picking up wood to start my layout this coming week.
I already started setting up cabinets etc to serve as the front support for the layout. The back will have legs.
Some cabinets that had lower half as big shelves and upper half as book shelves I cut in half, splitting the upper bookshelves from the bottom large shelves. Then I placed the bookshelf part on the ground to serve as supports for the layout along with the lower part.
This will allow me to have the same storage for supplies etc. as before, but more spread out, while giving me more room for layout,
I’ll post pics ASAP.

Got this book today:


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Here are a couple of the cabinets that will serve as bases for the layout.









the top sections are in this following picture, now on the floor. I may cut them down a bit because they are a little too tall methinks.








The big green cabinet and the other wood tall one will be moved to an area without layout. The area behind the ones above will be covered with a backdrop.
The green paint on the walls will be finished above by creating the shapes of pine trees in that green and lighter greens to simulate fog. This is to avoid having to paint all the way up-it’s a very tall ceiling!
The cages in the back will be removed except for one which will have the staging area to store up the locos and cars, since they lock up.


----------



## 65446

I'm not sure what you are planning with the cabinets if they are substitutes for front legs..I'd put the entire grid up on 2x3 or 2x4 legs (not just 4, but as many as needed anywhere under it)..Cabinets could then be underneath in rear, against the wall for storage...
In other words, why employ cabinets at all for support ? Juz put it all up high, on legs...You really want to be able to go under bench from most if not all directions. Cabinets in front will inhibit this...
Why not just go with what the book explains ? Or have I misunderstood your intent ?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> I'm not sure what you are planning with the cabinets if they are substitutes for front legs..I'd put the entire grid up on 2x3 or 2x4 legs (not just 4, but as many as needed anywhere under it)..Cabinets could then be underneath in rear, against the wall for storage...
> In other words, why employ cabinets at all for support ? Juz put it all up high, on legs...You really want to be able to go under bench from most if not all directions. Cabinets in front will inhibit this...
> Why not just go with what the book explains ? Or have I misunderstood your intent ?


I was planning on using the cabinets as the front legs. However, you make a good point about access.
Maybe I should make it so the cabinets fit underneath but can be slid out if necessary for access, as you said.
The reason the cabinets are up front is because that’s where the art stuff goes: paints, inks, etc.
But using the cabinets as legs saves me a little on wood.


----------



## 65446

I'd say put entire grid on its own legs.. Cabinets could be under ends of bench, just not in front ...

About the book:
Good to see you got it..But about it's front cover ! The sub roadbed (ply) where the diesel is sitting is too narrow....If, IF it's this width throughout book don't go with that..SRB should be at least 4" in width for an HO single track line.


----------



## JeffHurl

commander, If you are really doing this for a classroom, I'll bet a gofundme account would build up pretty quickly. I'd donate some $$


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> I'd say put entire grid on its own legs.. Cabinets could be under ends of bench, just not in front ...
> 
> About the book:
> Good to see you got it..But about it's front cover ! The sub roadbed (ply) where the diesel is sitting is too narrow....If, IF it's this width throughout book don't go with that..SRB should be at least 4" in width for an HO single track line.



Thanks!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Quick question:

As I start posting pictures of my layout build, should I start a new thread? This one is asking for help, so maybe it's better to start another? Don't want to have obnoxious multi-threads...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> commander, If you are really doing this for a classroom, I'll bet a gofundme account would build up pretty quickly. I'd donate some $$


Hadn't thought of that! Thank you!
I'll look into it!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Commander Zarkon said:


> Hadn't thought of that! Thank you!
> I'll look into it!


Looking at gofundme, I don't know how much to put. Thinking...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I put up a gofund me:









Get Trains in the Classroom, organized by Joe Ortiz


Hello, My name is Joe and I am a high school teacher in Arizona. We moved from the old tiny p… Joe Ortiz needs your support for Get Trains in the Classroom



www.gofundme.com


----------



## JeffHurl

Commander Zarkon said:


> I put up a gofund me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get Trains in the Classroom, organized by Joe Ortiz
> 
> 
> Hello, My name is Joe and I am a high school teacher in Arizona. We moved from the old tiny p… Joe Ortiz needs your support for Get Trains in the Classroom
> 
> 
> 
> www.gofundme.com


I like it!

Perhaps speak a bit to your past creative experiences and how you hope to get kids interested in being part of the build. People love stuff like that!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> I like it!
> 
> Perhaps speak a bit to your past creative experiences and how you hope to get kids interested in being part of the build. People love stuff like that!


I did a little update.
I may add the kid stuff tomorrow. Got pulled away and saved as was.
Thank you for your input!!!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Got this book:








Will be getting this one in a couple of days.








These books are very good: simply written with good color photos and glossy pages.
im really excited about this onebecause my favorite thing is the scenery:making it realistic with tiny details.
Should be getting the wood this week, hopefully tomorrow.


----------



## DonR

Commander

You are on the right track...but in the photo of the book cover I see a few
track nails...aaargh...you do not want to use them...it's much easier and
just as effective to use tiny dabs of plain old Elmer's glue to attach your
tracks and roadway. 

Don


----------



## MichaelE

Why doesn't he want to use them?

Because _you_ don't want to use them doesn't mean they are not an acceptable way to attach track to roadbed and sub-roadbed.


----------



## 65446

*DonR*
Where exactly do you see track nails, anyway !? The top photo shows joiners and spikes.. The lower photo tracks are completely hidden by the trains !!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

No worries. I will likely use either the spike or glue, or both. If I used a track nail I could maybe counter sink it a little and cover it. No biggie. Gluing it down seems best, at least for now.


----------



## MichaelE

If you choose to use nails you won't have to countersink them. The heads are tiny and flat. If you like, you can touch them with a spot of tie matching paint, but they are so small they are not usually noticed from a few feet away.


----------



## 65446

*CZ*,
White-glue cork to SRB by drawing center line of track. Cork splits in half lengthwise..Glue 1/2 along center line then hold a while using push pins..When firmly in place, of course follow with 2nd half..I assume book explains cork cutting for underneath switches. Again using push pins and weights, white-glue track to cork...I too assume you know how to cut flex, remove a few ties, file ends, and add rail joiners..Hope you've obtained the Xuron Rail Nippers...Again, flat side of jaws faces good rail...And snip top to bottom, not side to side... 
if, IF you do use nails be very careful not to sink nail so as to squash crosstie down ward..
But, hey !! Get that benchwork up !!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Thanks all. 
I ordered the Xuron clippers along with the PowerCab and turnouts. Once it all comes in I'll be good for that part. Still have to get the cork or other stuff for under the tracks.

Was going to go check on the 1x4x8 wood today but I'm feeling under the weather, so hopefully tomorrow.
I'm really wanting to get started on the layout! 
I have a good amount of plywood, 3/8, 1/2, 3/4, that's been sitting in the shop for about a year, some of it for five years or so. Should be pretty seasoned by now to the climate, so that's good.

I think I should start a new thread on the layout once I start it, since this one is a help one. What do y'all think? Don't want to do duplicate subjects.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Well, there is always the "My Layout" area, which is probably more appropriate, but it's not WRONG to continue this one. Just don't do them both in parallel.


----------



## Lemonhawk

I'm not sure the Xuron cutters will work with steel track. They work nicely with NS and brass but steel may just damage them. Check with some other before attempting this! Does any one know what to use to cut steel track? A fine hacksaw blade?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Lemonhawk said:


> I'm not sure the Xuron cutters will work with steel track. They work nicely with NS and brass but steel may just damage them. Check with some other before attempting this! Does any one know what to use to cut steel track? A fine hacksaw blade?


Good to know.
Anyone know this?
I can always keep the Xuron for when I get nickel silver and use a dreamer with a cutoff wheel for the steel track.


----------



## MichaelE

A Dremel with a cut-off wheel.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Just got twenty 1x4x8s and five 4x8 1” insulation boards. The insulation had foil on both sides so I’ll peel off what I can as I go.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Well it’s been around 40 years since I had a train set. Back then it was in my parents’ carport in Florida on a 3/4” 4x8’ plywood. Today it’s in a classroom with a planned 120’ length “U” and at least two levels.

For now I’ll be focusing on the southern part of the layout which will be about 50’ long and vary in depth around 50” with some narrower and even wider areas.

I’ll probably make this section more realistic, with the other section going more into the fantastical side after crossing a bridge over an “ocean”.

Today I went to Lowe’s and got twenty 1x4x8s and five 4’x8’x1” insulation boards.
Thanks to Jeremy the manager for his help with this project. He previously donated two five gallon drumof paint for the room.

The foam has a foil on each side. Not sure if I should bother peeling it off.

Dropped off the stuff with my wife in the evening and she decided to do some cleaning, so I took the opportunity and assembled my first open grid 4x8. Going to add some plywood gussets to the corners tomorrow for reinforcement.

















This and another grid like it will go over the following cabinets, and the track will then go behind the fridge and my desk and into another set of grids. Those will probably vary more in size.
















The cabinets are forward because they are for art supplies and the kids' portfolios and projects: they have to have easy access.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So based on advice from this forum, as well as that from the layout book, I decided to move those cabinets to another spot. I wanted to use them as the front support for this part of the layout, but then I'd have no access to wires etc. for making repairs and changes. Thanks to all again for helping me avoid a costly mistake!


----------



## DonR

If you plan to use the foil covered foam under your tracks you may have
electrical problems. Foil is electrically conductive,,,loose wires, stray parts or
frayed foam could cause frustrating shorts or intermittencies on
your tracks. If you can do so, I would suggest returning it in
favor of foam without foil. 

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> If you plan to use the foil covered foam under your tracks you may have
> electrical problems. Foil is electrically conductive,,,loose wires, stray parts or
> frayed foam could cause frustrating shorts or intermittencies on
> your tracks. If you can do so, I would suggest returning it in
> favor of foam without foil.
> 
> Don


 Can't return it, so I'll see about peeling the foil off, at least wherever it is close to any wires or tracks.


----------



## 65446

*Am confused*:
What is the 1" foam for if you are using plywood for SRB (which is commonly 5 ply, 0.5" for HO) ?...
Do you plan to laminate the foam atop the ply (which would be OK and would make drainage ditches along side track easy to dig out, but is no biggie if they're left out [as most layouts do])..
IE. Where are you using, what ?

Also, if you now have it, please post a concise drawing of the entire track plan. Would like to see what you've come up with. This is an area easy to make blunders in which are hard to amend later on..Critiques here can be valuable more than any other phase of MRRing...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Didn't take any pictures today, but will do so tomorrow. I have built three 4x8' open grid platforms (still need to make the legs). 
I still need to build a 2'x10' grid that will get some shape to it, and another 3x6' piece. 
They have been extremely easy to put together.

As you can see below, I changed the layout shape because I decided to get rid of the sofas in there. They look nice but just take up space. The two 4x8 sections to the right look a bit too square, so I will likely add a little bit of shape to them with fascia. I may also cut into one of them to make a canyon that is below the main level, but I still need to keep space for storage below these layouts.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> *Am confused*:
> What is the 1" foam for if you are using plywood for SRB (which is commonly 5 ply, 0.5" for HO) ?...
> Do you plan to laminate the foam atop the ply (which would be OK and would make drainage ditches along side track easy to dig out, but is no biggie if they're left out [as most layouts do])..
> IE. Where are you putting, what ?
> 
> Also, if you now have it, please post a concise drawing of the entire track plan. Would like to see what you've come up with.



I'm not laying down a plywood sheet. I'm going to put in the SRB cut for track, with elevations first, kind of like putting in overpasses.Once that's done, I will fill it in with the foam at different heighs.
Don't see a reason for adding the weight of plywood as a big flat piece. The 1" foam is pretty strong and can support all the scenery etc.

Kind of like this:










AND










I will redo the track next and post it.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I'm using RailModellerPro and it's great. The thing is, its difficult to really be creative regarding elevation, terrain, how the track will flow through it all, etc. using software. This is not anything negative about RMP; it's just how my brain works. I tend to think of it as a sculpture, and that requires seeing it in real life and being able to move around...


----------



## CTValleyRR

Looking at the pictures of you room above, is there any chance that you would need to move or even remove the layout to allow them to redo the floors, paint, etc?


----------



## 65446

I still don't get the 3, 4X8 grids...Is your track plan *that wide* all over ? Because it need not be...
I may be wrong but I'm thinking you are confusing framework usually dedicated to supporting 4x8 sheets of plywood for a flat layout, the way it was done in the 1950s..Open grid need only be as wide as trackwork... If, say, there is an area where there are only 2 tracks, say 1' apart, the grid need only be, say 1.5' wide (or a bit more)...IE. Why have you built these 3, 4x8s ?
Also, why do you post the huge empty square with the tiny solid green area at bottom ?...We need to see your finalized track plan. And if you haven't one yet, then why the 4x8s? What I'm asking for is a track plan schematic showing main line, sidings, yards and spurs (unless you've decided to make it up as you go along, which, ironically, is what the first real RRs did !)..


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> Looking at the pictures of you room above, is there any chance that you would need to move or even remove the layout to allow them to redo the floors, paint, etc?


The chance of redoing the floor is definitely there, yes. However, chances are that this would be a long way off, or that I would do it myself.
I have been meaning to speak with someone about the possibility of staining the floor basically as-is because maintenance said they went over that floor a couple of years ago and couldn’t get it stripped further than it is.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> I still don't get the 3, 4X8 grids...Is your track plan *that wide* all over ? Because it need not be...
> I may be wrong but I'm thinking you are confusing framework usually dedicated to supporting 4x8 sheets of plywood for a flat layout, the way it was done in the 1950s..Open grid need only be as wide as trackwork... If, say, there is an area where there are only 2 tracks, say 1' apart, the grid need only be, say 1.5' wide (or a bit more)...IE. Why have you built these 3, 4x8s ?
> Also, why do you post the huge empty square with the tiny solid green area at bottom ?...We need to see your finalized track plan. And if you haven't one yet, then why the 4x8s? What I'm asking for is a track plan schematic showing main line, sidings, yards and spurs (unless


I want to have those areas to have a lot of depth, whether its mountainous, a town, etc. I am not running a train for the sake of a train alone. Instead, I am trying to create little worlds with a bunch of stuff going on. I have no interest in a narrow track area just to have a train there: I like the idea of the trains weaving through areas: in front and behind of, and through, different areas and land features. I want to create a lot of depth and detail. 

The first two 4x8s will be in line so as to make a 4x16'. However, they may get cut in and expanded out a bit as I go, depending on the land shape. The third 4x8 will be 90 degrees, with a 2x10 off of it.

I've been working with RailModeller Pro and its great, but I am having a problem with visualizing completely, as I am more of a hands-on person. So I am planning my track in RMP as a workable idea which may be changed as I build it physically. 

As far as the huge empty square, I don't know why it came out like that. Didn't do it last time. 
Once I do the redraw of the railroad, I will post it. 

Examples of layouts that I like:


----------



## 65446

*Oh ! OK..Now I savvy !...*
It's more a huge diorama with allot of fantasy in it...I didn't get til now that it's central focus is not railroading. And I suppose it *will then* 'grow' its -right of way- for the train scenes as it unfolds..
This is certainly OK to do..

There is a fellow I haven't heard about in over 20 years or more who used to work at Model Railroader magazine named Malcolm Furlow ..He specializes in very dreamy and kookie, abstract kinds of layouts...You can Google him..
I think you'll enjoy his works. His techniques may be more along the lines of what you're going for....


----------



## MichaelE

Carlos's railroad is a masterpiece of modeling. He is a member of several German Modelleisenbahn sites.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

telltale said:


> *Oh ! OK..Now I savvy !...*
> It's more a huge diorama with allot of fantasy in it...I didn't get til now that it's central focus is not railroading. And I suppose it *will then* 'grow' its -right of way- for the train scenes as it unfolds..
> This is certainly OK to do..
> 
> There is a fellow I haven't heard about in over 20 years or more who used to work at Model Railroader magazine named Malcolm Furlow ..He specializes in very dreamy and kookie, abstract kinds of layouts...You can Google him..
> I think you'll enjoy his works. His techniques may be more along the lines of what you're going for....


Yes, exactly!
I don’t want to go too weird, but then, what’s not too weird for me may be totally bizarre for others!








And thanks for that suggestion! Will definitely look him up!!!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> Carlos's railroad is a masterpiece of modeling. He is a member of several German Modelleisenbahn sites.


Thanks! Will look him up!
I’ve actually been looking at some German locomotives and cars. Forgot the company right now. But I like how they look different and the whistle sounds different as well.
Since it’s fantasy, I can mix time periods and continents without being beaten and run out on a rail.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Just started checking out Malcolm Furlow’s work. Very awesome! Getting inspiration!
Thank you for that tip!!!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I really like this locomotive from Marklin: the big spoken wheels, the different look overall, and the whistle is also different...
But of course, first the layout!!!




https://www.maerklin.de/en/products/details/article/39004/21?tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bbacklink%5D=21&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5BbrandId%5D=1&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bera%5D=&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bfilter%5D=1&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bgaugechoice%5D=2&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bgroupchoice%5D=1&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bnewonly%5D=0&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bpage%5D=2&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bpagesort%5D=artnrasc&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bperpage%5D=18&tx_torrpdb_pi1%5Bsubgroupchoice%5D=&cHash=0325bfd33fadd26433f86c2e88750551


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> Carlos's railroad is a masterpiece of modeling. He is a member of several German Modelleisenbahn sites.


Wait: who is Carlos?


----------



## MichaelE

Carlos is the gentleman who owns the layout in your last photo. He is in Spain.

You would have to find the TRIX Br.01 to run on your layout. M*ä*rklin is all AC powered. TRIX is their DC division. Roco and Brawa also offer this locomotive.


----------



## MichaelE

I'll be adding this tank locomotive to my collection soon. This locomotive is by PIKO and has digital couplers and a smoke unit installed, mit sound.

Tank locomotives were very popular in Germany. Water was available at nearly any halt to refill the tanks and coal would last for an entire train crew shift. There were many models of these locomotives by different manufactures and they were used right up until the 1980s.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> Carlos is the gentleman who owns the layout in your last photo. He is in Spain.
> 
> You would have to find the TRIX Br.01 to run on your layout. M*ä*rklin is all AC powered. TRIX is their DC division. Roco and Brawa also offer this locomotive.


Ah! Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I just saw a couple of videos of Howard Zane's layout. WOW!!! That's the look I want! The way the tracks move around, different levels... BEAUTIFUL!
I realized that my track design software is great, but doesn't really work for me-not because there's anything wrong with it, but because I am thinking of this sort of like a sculpture with moving parts. I need to build it all up seeing it right in front of me, hands on. 

Last night I bought some more wood: enough to build the 2x10 and 3x6 sections and add the legs to all of it. Once that's done, I can setting up the sub roadbed. I am excited!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

OK, so here's a crazy idea:
A fish tank incorporated into the layout. A pump circulates the water through a filter, then up to a waterfall. The waterfall is designed to not splash, but to cascade down like those indoor waterfalls people put up in offices etc.








Water can also run down the river and back to the fish tank. I've even thought of making a type of fish tank so the fish can also hang out in the river. I would only have tiny little fish, not bigger ones. Also, no snails, unless I can figure out how to keep them from making their own 1950s horror flick and invading the towns. I can just see a snail on the track getting slammed by a locomotive, the derailure and the carnage!









Maybe its nuts, but it would be nice to see and hear real water as part of the scenery. I'm not bothered by the non-scalability of water. I just think it would be neat. Now, would it wreak havoc with my track and locomotives?! 
Just thinking, and while I am focusing on getting the layout done, something like this is good to plan ahead for, if its even doable.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

IPut in the three 4x8 open grids. You can see two here. The third is on the other side and will get a fourth.
I need get the sofas out to make room. They’re just taking up space.

I was a bit worried that these things would take up too much space, but they leave plenty of room.
What I have to figure out is how to access it all while building the scenery. If I leave space to walk behind, then I loose that space in walkway, and that’s not good.
So... I am guessing I build it while it’s still moveable and then push it back to the wall.
Or.... I frame out a little hatch area in each so I can pop up somehow and do work if necessary.


----------



## JeffHurl

Commander Zarkon said:


> OK, so here's a crazy idea:
> A fish tank incorporated into the layout. A pump circulates the water through a filter, then up to a waterfall. The waterfall is designed to not splash, but to cascade down like those indoor waterfalls people put up in offices etc.
> View attachment 570373
> 
> Water can also run down the river and back to the fish tank. I've even thought of making a type of fish tank so the fish can also hang out in the river. I would only have tiny little fish, not bigger ones. Also, no snails, unless I can figure out how to keep them from making their own 1950s horror flick and invading the towns. I can just see a snail on the track getting slammed by a locomotive, the derailure and the carnage!
> 
> View attachment 570374
> 
> Maybe its nuts, but it would be nice to see and hear real water as part of the scenery. I'm not bothered by the non-scalability of water. I just think it would be neat. Now, would it wreak havoc with my track and locomotives?!
> Just thinking, and while I am focusing on getting the layout done, something like this is good to plan ahead for, if its even doable.


That would be very cool, but not very practical. Not sure I would try it. I'm even starting to shy away from using Envirotex for my river, simply because I'm not certain I can make the riverbed water tight long enough for the resin to set up without seeping through tiny holes.

What would you use to make the river watertight? Caulking? The sealant used to build aquariums? It would have to be suitable for the fish, easy to work with and affordable.

That's more than I would want to deal with, but if you have the time, creativity and budget, you really could make something special. But then, there's the upkeep... lots of cleaning... dead fish... filters...


----------



## JeffHurl

Commander Zarkon said:


> IPut in the three 4x8 open grids. You can see two here. The third is on the other side and will get a fourth.
> I need get the sofas out to make room. They’re just taking up space.
> 
> I was a bit worried that these things would take up too much space, but they leave plenty of room.
> What I have to figure out is how to access it all while building the scenery. If I leave space to walk behind, then I loose that space in walkway, and that’s not good.
> So... I am guessing I build it while it’s still moveable and then push it back to the wall.
> Or.... I frame out a little hatch area in each so I can pop up somehow and do work if necessary.
> 
> View attachment 570460
> 
> View attachment 570461
> 
> View attachment 570462


The open grids look good, but maybe attach the gussets on the bottom so the top would be flush? 48" tall (6 courses of cinder block)? Seems like a great height for perspective while running trains! And the cabinets fit under them well.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> That would be very cool, but not very practical. Not sure I would try it. I'm even starting to shy away from using Envirotex for my river, simply because I'm not certain I can make the riverbed water tight long enough for the resin to set up without seeping through tiny holes.
> 
> What would you use to make the river watertight? Caulking? The sealant used to build aquariums? It would have to be suitable for the fish, easy to work with and affordable.
> 
> That's more than I would want to deal with, but if you have the time, creativity and budget, you really could make something special. But then, there's the upkeep... lots of cleaning... dead fish... filters...



If I do it, I’ll use rubber paint for ponds. Ive seen fish tanks made from plywood using this stuff and it works.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> The open grids look good, but maybe attach the gussets on the bottom so the top would be flush? 48" tall (6 courses of cinder block)? Seems like a great height for perspective while running trains! And the cabinets fit under them well.


Thank you.
Yeah the height seems perfect for me. Makes it more difficult to work on though.

I put the gussets on top so I could get the legs in the corners. Since I’ll be using foam for the ground, the higher gussets don’t affect me.
The height is 48”.


----------



## JeffHurl

Gussets don't need to be triangles, they can be longer pieces with just the ends at 45 degrees. You could easily cut some scrap 1x3 or 1x4 and keep the legs where they are...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> Gussets don't need to be triangles, they can be longer pieces with just the ends at 45 degrees. You could easily cut some scrap 1x3 or 1x4 and keep the legs where they are...


If these become a problem, I'll do that.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Connected the West and East sections via a 14"x9' section today.


----------



## Steve Rothstein

Commander Zarkon said:


> Maybe its nuts, but it would be nice to see and hear real water as part of the scenery.


I don't think it is a crazy idea, but what do I know? I told my wife that when we buy a house, I intend to put in a G scale railroad. Part of the railroad is a gazebo in the center for a control station. To get there you would have to walk on an elevated walkway over the track. And since I would be building a bridge anyway, I would put in a koi pond that runs the length of one side as a river scene.

I am currently modeling in N scale and I don't see a way to make it feasible for that size. I think I could build a watertight part of the layout, but finding living n scale fish might be troublesome.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Steve Rothstein said:


> I don't think it is a crazy idea, but what do I know? I told my wife that when we buy a house, I intend to put in a G scale railroad. Part of the railroad is a gazebo in the center for a control station. To get there you would have to walk on an elevated walkway over the track. And since I would be building a bridge anyway, I would put in a koi pond that runs the length of one side as a river scene.
> 
> I am currently modeling in N scale and I don't see a way to make it feasible for that size. I think I could build a watertight part of the layout, but finding living n scale fish might be troublesome.


That sounds like an awesome project.
As far as scale fish, even in Ho it’s a stretch. I guess little guppies can be really big trout...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Trying to wrap my brain around designing the track system!
The styles I like are Harold Zane’s and also George Selios’. I love how the tracks weave through the cities and towns at different elevations.
Difficult to do in the software, so I may just have to set it out as I go right on the layout. Main concern is grade. I believe I read that a 1/4 inch rise per 16” equals like a 2 % grade.

Anyone know of a tool that tell you grade?
I have one of those gauges that tells the angle with a needle, but not the grade.


----------



## MichaelE

Real water has been modelled for water wheel mills in Germany. No details for you, but it's out there in Youtube land.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

MichaelE said:


> Real water has been modelled for water wheel mills in Germany. No details for you, but it's out there in Youtube land.


Hadn’t thought of a water wheel, so thank you for bringing that up!!! I will look for it.

I will likely wait until the second section to incorporate water, but maybe...


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Trying to wrap my brain around designing the track system!
> The styles I like are Harold Zane’s and also George Selios’. I love how the tracks weave through the cities and towns at different elevations.
> Difficult to do in the software, so I may just have to set it out as I go right on the layout. Main concern is grade. I believe I read that a 1/4 inch rise per 16” equals like a 2 % grade.
> 
> Anyone know of a tool that tell you grade?
> I have one of those gauges that tells the angle with a needle, but not the grade.


Grade is a simple mathematical relationship: rise over run. 0.25 / 16 x100 = 1.56%.

If you have a ruler, you can check grade. Measure change in height and divide by the distance that the slope covers. Use the long edge of the ruler to make sure the slope is consistent.

I know you're the Art teacher, not the Math teacher, but you should be able to handle that one.


----------



## JeffHurl

1" rise in 4' of track is pretty much a 2% grade. Woodland Scenics make incline sets at a few different grades from flexible foam ramps that come in 2-foot sections.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> Grade is a simple mathematical relationship: rise over run. 0.25 / 16 x100 = 1.56%.
> 
> If you have a ruler, you can check grade. Measure change in height and divide by the distance that the slope covers. Use the long edge of the ruler to make sure the slope is consistent.
> 
> I know you're the Art teacher, not the Math teacher, but you should be able to handle that one.


Thanks,
So divide change in height from point A to point B, divide by distance from point A to point B, then divide the answer by 100?


----------



## Commander Zarkon

JeffHurl said:


> 1" rise in 4' of track is pretty much a 2% grade. Woodland Scenics make incline sets at a few different grades from flexible foam ramps that come in 2-foot sections.


Yeah I’ve seen those, thanks. Thing is I am looking to do some using bridges, so those won’t do. But yeah, they can be handy for other types of rises. I’ll look at them again.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Wondering: what's a good radius to have in my curves if I want to eventually run engines like a Big Boy? I am thinking 22" radii.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Wondering: what's a good radius to have in my curves if I want to eventually run engines like a Big Boy? I am thinking 22" radii.


Depending jn the manufacturer, you may want to go with 24" or wider. You have the space.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> Depending jn the manufacturer, you may want to go with 24" or wider. You have the space.


Sounds good.
Thanks.
I figure flex track is gonna make that easy.
So is the radius measured at track center, outer edge, or inner edge?


----------



## Lemonhawk

Grade is rise/run, thus a rise of 2 ft over 100 ft is a 2% grade. Since its a ratio, 2" over 100" is also 2% and so on. Radius is to the center of the track. Watch out for kinks in the track, easy to do with sectional to flex track and will lead to problems. Also the track should be level from side to side. Take a mirror an hold it so you can look down the track thru the mirror, makes the kinks really stand out!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Lemonhawk said:


> Grade is rise/run, thus a rise of 2 ft over 100 ft is a 2% grade. Since its a ratio, 2" over 100" is also 2% and so on. Radius is to the center of the track. Watch out for kinks in the track, easy to do with sectional to flex track and will lead to problems. Also the track should be level from side to side. Take a mirror an hold it so you can look down the track thru the mirror, makes the kinks really stand out!


Thank you!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Question: what do you all do regarding expansion/contraction with soldered track?
I have been told to solder the tracks, but that would prevent changes due to expansion and contraction.

Do I leave a small gap between certain section and connect them via a wire soldered between them?

How is the expansion and contraction affected by tracks nailed, glued, or otherwise affixed to a solid surface? Does the cork bed provide enough leeway?

I still need to determine and build the wood track supports etc. but would like to be ahead of the game. 
Thanks!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I hope I’m not being obnoxious and asking stupid questions...

Should I leave a space between the wall and the back of the layout? I’m thinking about 12-14” so I can get back there and access the layout in case I need to do repairs or changes, and also while building it.
At four feet deep and maybe a little more, I’m thinking access can become an issue.
What do you all think?


----------



## DonR

Can we assume that your class room has a year round controlled climate?: If so, you
should have no expansion or contraction. My room size layout road bed
and tracks were glued down and there were no such problems. It was
24-7 climate controlled.

You likely won't need to solder every joint in your layout if you pay
close attention when using the joiners. The exception would be
on curves.

You don't look to be a thin man. A 12" 'walk' space may be a serious
limit to your movements.

Don


----------



## Commander Zarkon

DonR said:


> Can we assume that your class room has a year round controlled climate?: If so, you
> should have no expansion or contraction. My room size layout road bed
> and tracks were glued down and there were no such problems. It was
> 24-7 climate controlled.
> 
> You likely won't need to solder every joint in your layout if you pay
> close attention when using the joiners. The exception would be
> on curves.
> 
> You don't look to be a thin man. A 12" 'walk' space may be a serious
> limit to your movements.
> 
> Don


Thank you!

I don’t know if I’d call it a controlled climate. It’s the former shop room and has no AC (they want to put some in). It does have a heater system which is very nice now in the colder season and especially once the snow starts. Maybe that’s good enough.

I can squeeze in the 12” walking sideways. Certainly not enough to have much free movement, but I was thinking I would only need to get back there to correct something briefly.
But maybe I need more room. I will have to weigh ease of access with keeping enough space for the classroom movements.


----------



## MichaelE

Not having AC is not good in the summer if you are in the deep south or midwest. Unprotected wood will swell and buckle the track

Paint both sides and the edges if you can with a cheap latex from Walmart, or save the PITA of doing that and get a couple of dehumidifiers. At least until you get funds for AC.

Two seasons ago I had a seven foot by 20" piece of plywood that my five track staging yard in on bow up in the middle so badly it pulled out even the nails. That was a week of moderate humidity but temps in the low 80s. I could tolerate it, but the staging area couldn't. 

I ended up drilling and counter sinking holes and screwing that section down like I should have in the first place. The rest of the 11x13 layout was screwed down to the benchwork, so I had no problems in other areas.


----------



## Mixed Freight

Commander Zarkon said:


> Question: what do you all do regarding expansion/contraction with soldered track?
> I have been told to solder the tracks, but that would prevent changes due to expansion and contraction.
> 
> Do I leave a small gap between certain section and connect them via a wire soldered between them?
> 
> How is the expansion and contraction affected by tracks nailed, glued, or otherwise affixed to a solid surface? Does the cork bed provide enough leeway?
> 
> I still need to determine and build the wood track supports etc. but would like to be ahead of the game.
> Thanks!


Temperature changes have a lot less affect on expansion/contraction than humidity changes do. If proper "climate control" includes proper humidity control, then you will little to no problems. By proper humidity control, we're talking "constant" humidity control. If you can maintain about the same humidity level year-round, then that's what you need to aim for.

Painting all wood framing will not necessarily totally prevent swelling and shrinking, but will help seriously slow it down, and thereby help the wood stay at a more even humidity level between high & low swings in the ambient humidity.

Soldering track is a good idea for electrical continuity, and the best thing you can do is to leave a slight gap between all rail ends at soldered joints. A very slight gap is all that's necessary, say about the thickness of business card or maybe just a tad more. That way, if you ever do experience a buckled track at some time in the future, simply heat up a few soldered joints and allow the buckling to relieve itself.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> I hope I’m not being obnoxious and asking stupid questions...
> 
> Should I leave a space between the wall and the back of the layout? I’m thinking about 12-14” so I can get back there and access the layout in case I need to do repairs or changes, and also while building it.
> At four feet deep and maybe a little more, I’m thinking access can become an issue.
> What do you all think?


Nothing wrong with asking lots of questions, provided you actually pay attention to the answers. Some of us are a little concerned that you're charging ahead and purchasing / building things without yet having a good understanding of what you're doing, but as long as you're content to make some mistakes, both minor and expensive, that's not really a problem either.

On access, you will need it. About the farthest most people of average size can reach is about 30". So yes, if your table is 4' deep, you will need to be able to either slide behind it, pop up in the middle, or pull it out from the wall. Most interior designers recommend 20" to make sure you can slide through without bumping things too much.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> Question: what do you all do regarding expansion/contraction with soldered track?
> I have been told to solder the tracks, but that would prevent changes due to expansion and contraction.
> 
> Do I leave a small gap between certain section and connect them via a wire soldered between them?
> 
> How is the expansion and contraction affected by tracks nailed, glued, or otherwise affixed to a solid surface? Does the cork bed provide enough leeway?
> 
> I still need to determine and build the wood track supports etc. but would like to be ahead of the game.
> Thanks!


Thermal expansion of metal is one of those things that everyone worries about, but few understand. The coefficient for the nickel silver alloy in common track is 9.0 x 10^(-6) in / in -Deg F. IOW, each inch of track will expand 0.00009" with every degree of temperature change. So 1000 inches of track (83 feet) of track will expand 1" with a 10 degree change in temp. This really isn't enough to worry about. Leave a 1/16" gap every 10 feet or so, and you will be fine. If you use caulk to glue your track down, this retains enough flexibility to avoid any problems as well.

What DOES kill you is humidity (which also varies with temp). Even a small change in humidity can really make wood expand and contract. So you should seal your wooden parts, either with an oil-based paint or with polyurethane (latex paint breathes, so it isn't as effective). If you use foam boards for your surface, they are dimensionally stable, so no issue there.

iIRC, you're in the desert Southwest, so maybe humidity isn't a problem for you.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I live in Show Low, Arizona. Pine Country. At about 6300 ft in elevation. Not as dry as the desert, but still dry. We get snow and a monsoon, but other than that very little humidity.
I'll do the gap between the rails as well as the caulk, just in case. There are plywood boards and some other lumber in the room. Some have been there about two years, some much longer. None show any effects of warping, so I guess that's a good sign.

Again, thank you all for your advice!


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So I was thinking..,
Been having a lot of trouble designing my layout as far as tracks. I realized I’ve been focusing on making each 4x8 section independent as sort of loops, but that makes it seem like, well, a bunch of loops. So I think the best is to keep it as 4x8s of course, but designing the track as long sections traveling along the entire layout.


----------



## CTValleyRR

Commander Zarkon said:


> So I was thinking..,
> Been having a lot of trouble designing my layout as far as tracks. I realized I’ve been focusing on making each 4x8 section independent as sort of loops, but that makes it seem like, well, a bunch of loops. So I think the best is to keep it as 4x8s of course, but designing the track as long sections traveling along the entire layout.


Can we assume that you have rejected making 2x8 sections for some overarching design consideration? These will greatly simplify the reach issue, and if you need a wider area, you can always place two (or more) side by side.

Again, though, this is the danger of building benchwork before you have finalized what will go on it.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> Can we assume that you have rejected making 2x8 sections for some overarching design consideration? These will greatly simplify the reach issue, and if you need a wider area, you can always place two (or more) side by side.
> 
> Again, though, this is the danger of building benchwork before you have finalized what will go on it.


My original idea was to make each 4x8 section an individually running area. This was so I could run a train while building the other sections. What I realized though is I’d have a bunch of oval tracks side by side. Even connected it would look silly.

I like the deep scenery like the ones by George Selios and especially Howard Zane. The only reason I don’t make them even deeper is because I have to maintain the area for seating etc.

My layout is freelance and I’m not copying existing railroads, though I have been looking at lots of pictures of prototype and model railroads. Drawing mine out was not working because of my view of the many individual loops: it just looked wrong. When it hit me about more straight or constant running track, while studying pictures and video of the above modelers, everything started to come together though.

So I may use some 2x? areas after all, or 3x?...
I still need to make more open grids so the ones already have can get spread out, or if necessary ripped in half and a 1x4x8 glued and screwed on to make it into two 2x8s.

I also just decided to rearrange the room a bit, especially my area, so that will have an effect.
I have to talk to the next door construction teacher about pulling out those green cages. They are good for storage, but I already have two large storage rooms, one small one, and a small garage in that place, not to mention the actual large garage big enough to park my FJ Cruiser or Tacoma. So those gates are really just taking up space.

The fridge is a pain because it’s tall and I have to have it near me for obvious reasons, since I’m selling snacks etc. can’t have it in a spot where it blocks my view of the kids, but I hate it in front of the tracks! So placement of the fridge is still something I need to figure out.


----------



## CTValleyRR

I still think you should go "full stop" on any future construction and plan out FULLY AND IN DETAIL what you intend to do. I think you got frustrated with the planning process and just moved into the build phase, and now you have no clear idea where you're heading and how to address some very significant issues you're facing. Your time and money are yours to spend, obviously, but personally I don't have enough of either and cringe at the thought of doing a layout this way.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

CTValleyRR said:


> I still think you should go "full stop" on any future construction and plan out FULLY AND IN DETAIL what you intend to do. I think you got frustrated with the planning process and just moved into the build phase, and now you have no clear idea where you're heading and how to address some very significant issues you're facing. Your time and money are yours to spend, obviously, but personally I don't have enough of either and cringe at the thought of doing a layout this way.


You certainly have a point, and a lot more experience.
I will heed that advice.
Just having some trouble designing the layout on the computer because it lacks the multidimensional part. But maybe I should do it on paper, then move to the computer.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

So I rearranged the art room setup: moved my area to the left/West side.
This actually gives me a good amount more space as is, not to mention once the cages are removed, which should be pretty soon, and forces me to slow down and plan this out.
I'll be picking up the stuff I ordered next week: some switches, a soldering contraption, and the PowerCab. I may get some more track if there's money left over.
Been studying the layouts of George Selios and especially Howard Zane. While mine won't be nearly that size, I love how their layouts have the feeling of the trains actually going to and coming from somewhere, with all the layers, etc.

I keep looking at my DCC engine, and also the little goat, and boy to I want to see them running! But all in good time!

I am drawing a new diagram of the room and then I will draw up my ideas for the layout. I will post ideas once I get to drawing them.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

New diagram for room. Haven't built all the open grid sections yet. 
Now I have to sit and determine what will be what and where.


----------



## Commander Zarkon

I am leaning towards a European look for my layout. No specific country really, as it’s mainly fantasy, but the idea of a castle or three, walled towns, old stone arches for overpasses... that’s cool stuff.
Will probably throw a dragon in there somewhere...
I really like the old look...


----------



## Commander Zarkon

Picking up the PowerCab and some switches/turnouts today! 
I realize I jumped the gun on this, but those parts will still get used anyway.
The gates in the room may take a while to get removed, so I will design the layout as an “L” with turnouts to connect with the other section later (which will finish the “U”).


----------

