# Full size draft of layout



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

I'm about 6 weeks or so out from beginning my build. In the mean time, I have been acquiring supplies and building structures. This past weekend, I printed a full size layout from AnyRail and laid it out on my table so I could get a better sense for how it will all fit together.

This has turned out to be a great way to visualize things in true perspective, and I have already identified a few enhancements I want to make to the West side.

This layout will be pretty large for N Gauge, with a river running north to south in the center. On the east will be a village. On the West, a dairy farm and a logging site. I'm going to modify the west side quite a bit, but I'm happy with the east side.

I'm not really into the "yard" style layout. I want long stretches, tunnels and bridges. But I believe there is enough switching opportunities to enjoy doing "jobs" while watching the trains roll.

I'm really glad I decided to print the layout and lay it out on the table. It gave me a perspective I hadn't had until now, and now I can see a few enhancements I would like to make. And the neat part is, I can simply replace a few sheets of paper and I can see the results.


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

A very nice and quite large layout. It will provide very interesting continuous running
operations. You have a vast amount of space where you could build a large
yard...something you'll need as your fleet of cars increase. There is also many
places where you could have spurs serving rail freight users. You'll find these
additions will give you the opportunity for enjoyable and challenging switching operations.
That's what you do while you have trains running on your large ovals

And, since you have basically a single track main system, very similar to
what the real railroads are using today, you might consider adding 
several 'passing sidings' so that you can have Train A wait on a siding
for Train B running the other way to pass. Remember, with DCC you can
do that.

Don


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Thanks, DonR! 

This exercise made me realize I had a lot of extra space on the west side of the river. I may add a siding on the east side, but most of the surgery will be on the west.


----------



## Bigfoot21075 (Aug 7, 2021)

First off, I have TOTAL SPACE ENVY (that looks like 12x18ish total?). That is a GREAT layout and for me would be a LOT of fun. Thanks for putting buildings , it gives great perspective! I love the long look of a running train as well. Are you planning any water? Maybe some turn outs to service stations at each town? This will perfect your model building skills for sure!

I LOVE how it is not crammed in there, that is the one thing I am not crazy about mine.

How did you get that printed out on paper? Are those just 8x11 sheets? VERY COOL Jeff! _(EDIT_ I found how to do it, THAT will make it a LOT easier!


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

11 feet wide, 10 feet deep with a 2-foot open area. This is made from 4 5.5'x4.5' tables connected together into an inverted "U." Each table is on metal wheel with lockable casters. I got the tables for free. They are solid wood, so I will need to drill holes for turnout wiring and track feeders. But that's no big deal.

If you look closely, you can see a couple tug boats where the bridges will be going over the river. The river will be 12-15 inches across, or roughly 160-200 feet at scale, and will run north to south.

When I redo the west side, I may create another, smaller river coming in from the northwest... not sure if I want too many more bridges though.

Anyrail has a feature to print 1:1 scale to a PDF file. Each page is numbered. This layout ended up being 176 letter size pages.... 11 rows of 16 pieces of paper. Each piece of paper has alignment cross hairs at the corners... super easy to lay this down with some scotch tape.

When I finally finish the layout design, I plan to glue the pages to the top of my foam boards. That way, I can lay the track directly over the design... including any risers and inclines from Woodland Scenics.

I'll have ~6 tunnels, 2 of which will be blind, so I will need to fabricate a removable top with scenery on it so I can have access to the track below if necessary. The remaining tunnels will be at the north and south ends. You can visually see the tunnels as dashed parts of the track. These tunnels will be open from the north and south faces. So they will not be visible from the east or west, but will be open from the south or north.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

A lot of trees died in this effort!  I never tried printing a full sized rendition of a plan, interesting exercise. It does allow you a different perspective than looking at a sheet of paper.


----------



## MichaelE (Mar 7, 2018)

Many, if not most Euro modelers use a full size printed track plan for laying track.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

What I don't care for is the butterfly-like pattern of the track design...
If you turn to one side you have one shape..If you turn to the other side you have a near exact reflection of the other. With all that space you could have something more flowing like the 1:1 scale, so that from wherever you look at it it's different...
Also, I see no way to be able to change a train's direction, what with no reverse loop, wye, or turntable present..This can be good, electronically speaking. But will it be sufficient RRing-wise ?
Finally, in order to not have the locomotive trapped in front of its train within the existing spurs, you will have to run clockwise only, so train can back its cars into them and be free to return to the main...
I hope you find this helpful..Some thoughts and considerations before you get too dug in...🛤🌄🛤


.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

@telltale I agree about the symmetry on both sides. When I was designing this, I was thinking that I would always be in the narrow aisle in the middle, so I wouldn't see both sides at the same time.

The inner section on both sides is elevated and is connected by the long double-track bridge. The outer loops are ground level, and the river will be sunken. I was thinking that the outer lops would be somewhat obscured by the raised area in the middle of each side.

Now that I have a bird's eye view in real size, I see an opportunity to modify the west side quite a bit... not sure yet if I will incorporate a reverse loop or a wye. I like the idea, but I'm not confident in the wiring/technical side of things.

I have no intentions of going DCC. I'm not into sound at all, and I'm fine with one fairly long consist running at a time.


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

Re think not going DCC, it will make things much more enjoyable, particular if you put in a reverse loop, or want to run more than one train at the same time. DCC without sound makes conversions easier and cheaper.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

In the second photo above, the curve we see at the bottom (with the straight section) would look better if it were "smoothed out" -- just as the inside curve looks better and more graceful.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

J.Albert1949 said:


> In the second photo above, the curve we see at the bottom (with the straight section) would look better if it were "smoothed out" -- just as the inside curve looks better and more graceful.


 The straight section at the bottom is in a tunnel. I'm trying to obscure the fact that it's an oval by having tunnels at the top and bottom of each side.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Lemonhawk said:


> Re think not going DCC, it will make things much more enjoyable, particular if you put in a reverse loop, or want to run more than one train at the same time. DCC without sound makes conversions easier and cheaper.


I need to research DCC more. I just don't see me running 2 trains at once. But if it's simpler to have reverse loops and/or a wye, then I might give it more consideration.

Every time I go to research it, it takes more time to figure things out than I can afford to devote to the research, LOL!! I know DC, and how simple wiring is without worrying about shorts / reverse polarity, etc. I plan to use Peco insulated frog turnouts and run feeders to both sides of every turnout, plus some feeders in between turnouts if the stretch is longer than 6 feet.


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Would be easy to add two wye setups on this plan for train direction changes. 
See the lower single track truss bridge? Look both east and west to where that track reconnects to outer loops. Adding two WYE, and one each LH, RH #6 turnouts and a few curves would turn both ends into a turnaround system. Wiring wouldn’t be too tough, even for DC. Viola!


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

kilowatt62 said:


> Would be easy to add two wye setups on this plan for train direction changes.
> See the lower single track truss bridge? Look both east and west to where that track reconnects to outer loops. Adding two WYE, and one each LH, RH #6 turnouts and a few curves would turn both ends into a turnaround system. Wiring wouldn’t be too tough, even for DC. Viola!


So... perhaps the elevated section (inner loop on each side plus teh double track bridge in the middle) will be DC with continuous running except for the spurs on either side. Then incorporate 2 wyes as you suggest for the ground level using DCC. There's plenty of room on teh West for a siding or 2 and a larger yard if I reconfigure things a bit on that side.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*K62 *(above).. 
I noticed that as well..But if *Jeff *doesn't go DCC and remains old analog DC he'd have to gap the rails into blocks and have a panel with toggle switches to *open/close/Fwd-Rev* each block (ugh !!) as train(s) runs in opposite direction into blocks that were previously set for the opposite direction ! 
As OP is likely reading this, to him I say, and as others have said, going DCC makes *all that go away *( the need to tediously have to break the layout into toggled blocks and the logistical confusion/frustration that can cause )..
*Jeff* ! Trust us ! Go DCC now (about $165 for an NCE PowerCab) and 'DCC equipped' loco(s)..A simple *2* wires from its main plug-in panel to the rails would likely be enough to run this large but simple trackage...2 wires, *period* !! 
Then you could run 2 or more trains in any direction anywhere, same as the real thing; one train's activity totally separate from the other, *all* controlled from your hand-held, walk-around throttle....


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

telltale said:


> *K62 *(above)..
> I noticed that as well..But if *Jeff *doesn't go DCC and remains old analog DC he'd have to gap the rails into blocks and have a panel with toggle switches to *open/close/Fwd-Rev* each block (ugh !!) as train(s) runs in opposite direction into blocks that were previously set for the opposite direction !
> As OP is likely reading this, to him I say, and as others have said, going DCC makes *all that go away *( the need to tediously have to break the layout into toggled blocks and the logistical confusion/frustration that can cause )..
> *Jeff* ! Trust us ! Go DCC now (about $165 for an NCE PowerCab) and 'DCC equipped' loco(s)..A simple *2* wires from its main plug-in panel to the rails would likely be enough to run this large but simple trackage...2 wires, *period* !!
> Then you could run 2 or more trains in any direction anywhere, same as the real thing; one train's activity totally separate from the other, *all* controlled from your hand-held, walk-around throttle....


So.. Are you saying I could add the 2 Wyes as K62 describes... And if I go DCC, I could connect 2 feed wires and the whole thing will work without any shorts? To do so, would I use insulated or electrified turnouts and wyes?


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

You can use any type TOs at all (though I'd stick with the 'All-live' type in DCC)...
You would need no feeders, bus wires or power booster if all your rail joiners are firmly connected. Just 2 little wires from NCE PowerCab plug-in panel, or Digitrax (I prefer NCE)...
The only thing is if, IF you do make a reverse loop of any kind (loop/wye/turntable) you will either have to have an auto-reverser (AR) of any make to handle the polarity or phasing of that section (about $40/One can handle several loops), or do it manually with one $4.00 DPDT toggle switch and the reverse section rails merely gapped between the TOs at ends of each...Dat's it !


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Another thing to consider is that, as it stands you have no tracks which connect your RR to the outer world/other RRs...Or else, how did that N&W hopper get onto your RR or those 3 UP refers, or that NYC box car if you've no connection ?
You can emulate this with one simple track which connects to your main somewhere and goes right to the very edge of the bench...This then can become 2 or more tracks and become an 'interchange' where you can add and remove cars by hand (0-5-0-ing 'em) as trains pick up inbound from or deliver outbound cars to it. Of course you'd add no end bumper but have it on a very slight grade inward to prevent cars from coasting off the edge...


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

JeffHurl said:


> So.. Are you saying I could add the 2 Wyes as K62 describes... And if I go DCC, I could connect 2 feed wires and the whole thing will work without any shorts? To do so, would I use insulated or electrified turnouts and wyes?


Yes. A common misconception about DCC is that the wiring is more complicated. It isn't. In most cases it's simpler. When I hooked up my first DCC set (MRC Prodigy Express), I did exactly what the advertising said: disconnected the feeders from my DC powerpack and connected them to the Prodigy. It was, in fact, just that easy.

As far as two trains at once... maybe not, but DCC also gives you the freedom to park multiple locos on the layout, without having to worry about finding an isolated section of track to place them on. You can just stop them wherever, and they will sit there until you give them another throttle command. That's actually why I went DCC. Running several trains simultaneously came later.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Far as running two trains at once, *no* "maybe not", as he claims above ! 
It's as easy as keeping tabs on what each is doing so you don't cause a realistic crash or other bad situ, *same as the 1:1 scale* has to beware of at all times !! That's what makes DCC great; the realism in running..You can, if you like, have one train rolling easily thru the main while you take a yard switcher thru its routine making up/breaking up trains. Or, run two main line trains in opposite directions, one taking a passing siding to wait for the other to pass it; ANYTHING you want, just like the real one. You can have a head on collision which can not happen in analog DC. And this means way more drama/more fun/more proto action...
The DCC throttle can hold up to 6 locos all with separate addresses (usually we use the number on the side of the cab as it's 'slotted' address). You can assign locos to any address you like. One can be 89, another 7750, another 112, another, 4...whatever...
And with added walk-around, plug-in throttles you and friends can (tho ludicrous) run up to all 6 at the same time if you want to argue it ! ..
All DCC locos come factory default address '3'...You can immediately run it as that..But locos 2-6 will need to be re-addressed, as I explained, so they can run independently.. The manual with the throttle explains the procedure to assign locos their new address other than '3'...
All the best with you decisions, Jeff


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

telltale said:


> The only thing is if, IF you do make a reverse loop of any kind (loop/wye/turntable) you will either have to have an auto-reverser (AR) of any make to handle the polarity or phasing of that section (about $40/One can handle several loops), or do it manually with one $4.00 DPDT toggle switch and the reverse section rails merely gapped between the TOs at ends of each...Dat's it !


OK, so if I add a wye to each side as you describe, all I would need is to incorporate one AR? I think I'll post a file of my mainline with the wyes inserted so I can be sure to stay on the same page. Thank you both for helping explain it to me!

This is just a rough draft, but it has both wyes so that the train can switch directions. If this is as easy as I hope it is, I'll make a bigger yard in the northwest and add some sidings. But for now, please just help me understand the wiring. I'm a pretty handy person, but I know nothing about wiring layouts.


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

telltale said:


> *K62 *(above)..
> I noticed that as well..But if *Jeff *doesn't go DCC and remains old analog DC he'd have to gap the rails into blocks and have a panel with toggle switches to *open/close/Fwd-Rev* each block (ugh !!) as train(s) runs in opposite direction into blocks that were previously set for the opposite direction !
> As OP is likely reading this, to him I say, and as others have said, going DCC makes *all that go away *( the need to tediously have to break the layout into toggled blocks and the logistical confusion/frustration that can cause )..
> *Jeff* ! Trust us ! Go DCC now (about $165 for an NCE PowerCab) and 'DCC equipped' loco(s)..A simple *2* wires from its main plug-in panel to the rails would likely be enough to run this large but simple trackage...2 wires, *period* !!
> Then you could run 2 or more trains in any direction anywhere, same as the real thing; one train's activity totally separate from the other, *all* controlled from your hand-held, walk-around throttle....


TT,
You're over thinking it, and over explaining things,,,Again. Overloading the OP’s brain. 
Let it go man, let it go...
Give the OP some time to digest and think through one thing at a time.
He was speaking of only one train there to begin with so all this talk about the necessity of multiple blocks and toggles Is simply not needed. Just one set, period. He’ll figure things out and have more questions as his mind grooves through things. DCC too, will get beat into his brain soon enough. As it should be.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Ok, so in a DCC scenario, how would you wire the draft mainline?


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Jeff,
Wiring; Pretty much the same as you mentioned in post #13 to achieve the constant continuity we all desire. A smart move btw. You then would only need to isolate/insulate a few rails at the dual divergence rails of the WYE turnouts and then, add an AR module between the bus wires and track connection you'll already have there for track between the two WYE sections. Still only two wires. Only that the module is added between them and it, automatically ‘sees’ the need for polarity/phase reversal within a minor fraction of a second. The simple and complete directions come with the module. You can do this. 

In fact: you can use the same two wires to feed that second, and separate, run of track that has the dual track bridge in it because, all locomotives have an assigned command number to operate regardless of wich track they are on. No need for a second power system there. This also includes any and all sidings and yard operations you design.
I believe also that, but not positive yet that, you do not need to use electrofrog turnouts either with DCC. While the peco insulfrog turnouts (I own 30 or more) do come from the factory as ‘power routing’ they can be changed to constant live with two rail cuts and, two jumper wires added underneath. Delicate process but not difficult. I do believe also that Peco now offers an insulfrog turnout that is easily switchable between power routing and constant live. I haven’t researched that though but, you should. Still easier than messing with electrofrog wiring.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

OK, so here's my feeble attempt to describe and visualize things. In the attached picture, thin blue lines are your typical track feeders with no shorts. Thin red line is the AR feeder, and thick red lines are isolation gaps.

I'm assuming that the east/west section between the wyes is the only section I need to be concerned about "reversing' phase.

In this example, all turnouts would be insulated EXCEPT for the 3 on each side that make up the 2 wyes... those 6 would be electrified, correct?

Is it that simple, or am I not even close?


----------



## Stejones82 (Dec 22, 2020)

JeffHurl said:


> I need to research DCC more. I just don't see me running 2 trains at once. But if it's simpler to have reverse loops and/or a wye, then I might give it more consideration.


[Ed.] WHoops - - - just realized I am late to this party, hopefully the below is of some value to OP. 

Yes, but you might. Here is a picture of my yard to date. It is the 'ell' off my main table. even doing the switching for making/breaking trains, it is pretty darn cool to see one loco gliding along at 2% and have another moving slowly in opposite direction. 










And yes, DCC gives you that kind of control. Three of my locos have the function '6' which initiates "switching mode" - - i.e. the DCC automatically halves the speed order for the loco so that you get more slow speed control. 

My Digitrax Zephyr and DT602 (dual hand-held throttle) both display speed orders in percentages. So it is very possible to order up 1% or 5% or whatever in order to control two locos without too much risk. Takes some practice, and there have been times I had to double my Blood Pressure meds, but man, it is fun!!

And by the way, I too, am a newbie stil figuring out DCC and other Model RR stuff. Learning lots and experimenting (and asking lots and lots of questions!) So research DCC until you need to but I echo the strong suggestion to start there rather than DC.

Steve J


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*Jeff*, I must add one more if you don't mind:
You do not need 2 wyes ! Just one wye is enough for this layout..Delete one of the two you show in post #26..Save the $$, work, and skip the redundancy of it..Once you reverse a train in the one, that will suffice....
Or, am I "overthinking, over explaining, and overloading your brain" according to *K62* in post *#23* ?!!

And, of course you, *K62* , are *not* overthinking it and overloading the *OP* with your huge tome of post *#25* !! Talk about hypocrisy !
I haven't heard the OP complain yet about anything I've said. He's given me thumbs up on all but one of my posts !
He seems to appreciate all the important info he's obtaining..He's not a child..He's a young man who can read the gueen's English and write it, too !


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

If I remove one of the wyes then I limit the direction I can go on that side's oval.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

JeffHurl said:


> If I remove one of the wyes then I limit the direction I can go on that side's oval.


No, sir ..
You've turned the train's direction on the one wye...Now it will go thru the entire trackage in the other direction until you utilize that same wye again to return to first direction..at which time It will require a back-up move off the main into the wye to achieve that,..properly throwing switches for...


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

So if I want both wyes, will the wiring in post #26 work?


----------



## buddymedbery (Nov 5, 2020)

What software did you use for the printout?


----------



## cutnshoots (Aug 23, 2021)

Your table looks a lot like the layout I'm currently building


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

telltale said:


> No, sir ..
> You've turned the train's direction on the one wye...Now it will go thru the entire trackage in the other direction until you utilize that same wye again to return to first direction..at which time It will require a back-up move off the main into the wye to achieve that,..properly throwing switches for...


Thanks, but I don't want to have to do a backup maneuver to tur the train around. That's the whole point of the wye.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

buddymedbery said:


> What software did you use for the printout?


AnyRail. The export to PDF seems to work better than printing to a PDF


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

cutnshoots said:


> Your table looks a lot like the layout I'm currently building
> View attachment 566748


Yes, sir! I found the inverted U to make the most of the room I have, especially since it floats in the middle of our basement.
Have fun with the build!


----------



## mulebarn (May 19, 2021)

Very nice idea with the 1:1 plan. Our club did that with a section of our layout but did so free hand. It really helps to visualize the spacing of features and track plan. Is AnyRail for PC or Mac? Good luck.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

mulebarn said:


> Very nice idea with the 1:1 plan. Our club did that with a section of our layout but did so free hand. It really helps to visualize the spacing of features and track plan. Is AnyRail for PC or Mac? Good luck.


I run AnyRail on a PC. Not sure if they have a Mac version. It was relatively inexpensive and has a reasonable learning curve.


----------



## VTtrainguy (Jan 18, 2019)

Hi Jeff!
Another Johnny-come-lately here. Impressive layout you've got planned here. A couple of questions.
Are you actually going to build it to the straight line geometric precision you've depicted? 1:1 railroads seldom look that way, as terrain, construction cost, and right-of-way acquisition issues usually force them into more irregular patterns. I think that your geometrically precise and repetitive track plan will give your layout a kind of artificial appearence. Not hard to fix. Create a few terrain driven squiggles and undulations in your various loops. A wandering river in a wandering valley could force some more scenic variations in your right-of-way.
Is your hesitancy about DCC attributable to a case of electroniphobia? As one who's made the switch, I can attest it's much more intimidating to hear explained than it is to actually use. I prefer the NCE Power Cab for this reason, as its operating instructions are so easy to use.
One of the posters upthread made a point of emphasizing JUST TWO WIRES, which is conceptually accurate and appropriate for a temporary small oval to play on while getting comfortable with DCC. However, given the length of your mainline run, you're going to want trunk and feeder wires to provide equal voltage to all points on your layout. It's still a simple two wire system, but it has many branches. Not something to worry about just yet, but keep in mind for your eventual construction. BTW, you're going to need that trunk and branch wiring, whether you go DC or DCC. But don't forget, "Have fun now, hear?"


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

VTtrainguy said:


> Hi Jeff!
> Another Johnny-come-lately here. Impressive layout you've got planned here. A couple of questions.
> Are you actually going to build it to the straight line geometric precision you've depicted? 1:1 railroads seldom look that way, as terrain, construction cost, and right-of-way acquisition issues usually force them into more irregular patterns. I think that your geometrically precise and repetitive track plan will give your layout a kind of artificial appearence. Not hard to fix. Create a few terrain driven squiggles and undulations in your various loops. A wandering river in a wandering valley could force some more scenic variations in your right-of-way.
> Is your hesitancy about DCC attributable to a case of electroniphobia? As one who's made the switch, I can attest it's much more intimidating to hear explained than it is to actually use. I prefer the NCE Power Cab for this reason, as its operating instructions are so easy to use.
> One of the posters upthread made a point of emphasizing JUST TWO WIRES, which is conceptually accurate and appropriate for a temporary small oval to play on while getting comfortable with DCC. However, given the length of your mainline run, you're going to want trunk and feeder wires to provide equal voltage to all points on your layout. It's still a simple two wire system, but it has many branches. Not something to worry about just yet, but keep in mind for your eventual construction. BTW, you're going to need that trunk and branch wiring, whether you go DC or DCC. But don't forget, "Have fun now, hear?"


Thanks for the feedback! I hear you about the geometric look. What I laid out is just a starting point. I wanted to see how big the open areas were in real size if the layout had the biggest open areas possible.

Honestly, my hesitation to DCC was more about cost than anything... And a little bit about not wanting sound or the desire to run multiple trains at the same time. But the idea of having a few locomotives on standby in a yard is appealing.

Thanks again for the feedback, I appreciate it.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

kilowatt62 said:


> I do believe also that Peco now offers an insulfrog turnout that is easily switchable between power routing and constant live. I haven’t researched that though but, you should. Still easier than messing with electrofrog wiring.


Yes, I believe they call them UniFrogs.


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Jeff, 
Yes. Unifrog. The name came to me later on. I suppose they could be a good choice since can be powered as an electrofrog or, left unpowered like the insulfrog. Might be a good idea for the two WYE sections in your latest drawing since both routes remain ‘live’ regardless of points setting. Hopefully, they don’t cost much more than the other two designs. 
Use in Yard ladders and spurs are a whole ‘nuther conversation dependent upon what one expects to do electrically.


----------



## VTtrainguy (Jan 18, 2019)

JeffHurl said:


> Thanks for the feedback! I hear you about the geometric look. What I laid out is just a starting point. I wanted to see how big the open areas were in real size if the layout had the biggest open areas possible.
> 
> Honestly, my hesitation to DCC was more about cost than anything... And a little bit about not wanting sound or the desire to run multiple trains at the same time. But the idea of having a few locomotives on standby in a yard is appealing.
> 
> Thanks again for the feedback, I appreciate it.


Once you get into the details of wiring all the different blocks and reversing sections your DC railroad empire will need, the basic simplicity of DCC wiring will start to look a lot more attractive to you. Been down that road. Once you've got your empire built, the fascination with watching long trains running will start to wear thin after a bit, and you'll want to start emulating prototype railroad operations (way freights with switching operations at various stops along the way), operating on a schedule, and eventually, coordinating multiple trains simultaneously. Pulling off a meet of two trains at a siding on a schedule, without a hitch, is quite a thrill the first few times you do it. Not possible, however, if you haven't had the foresight to build the appropriate sidings. Plan for the growth of your railroading hobby, and make allowances as you build.
And don't forget, it's all for the fun of it!


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

Compare

DAP Dynaflex 230 Clear Siliconized Acrylic Sealant 5.5 oz. It comes in tubes and since you use very little, its easier that messing with the caulk gun. And yes you do need to weight it. You may have to raid the canned pantry and line up the soup cans for a day!


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

JeffHurl said:


> Thanks, but I don't want to have to do a backup maneuver to tur the train around. That's the whole point of the wye.


I hate to burst your bubble, but all wyes require a back up move to change direction, same as a 3 point turn with an automobile..
If you don't want to back up (which the 1:1 scale does when utilizing a wye) then you need a reversing loop, not a wye.


----------



## Lemonhawk (Sep 24, 2013)

Most wyes, not the ones used in this layout! No backing required since its double ended!


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Lemonhawk said:


> Most wyes, not the ones used in this layout! No backing required since its double ended!



Thank You!!


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Double ended or not, if any train on any layout is going to reverse direction and go thru system clockwise as opposed to counterclockwise, train will either need to do a 3 point turn in a wye, which calls for a back up move (what a wye is for), or go thru a reversing loop of some design, somewhere..And if there would *be* a reversing loop somewhere then a wye anywhere becomes redundant (other than visual appeal). The only 3rd choice is a turntable (a rotating bridge), which of course is, electronically, a reversing loop as well..
You seem to be implying there is a 4th way..There isn't..Reverse loop, Wye (w/back up) and TT..
If you've changed direction on the very same track, you've employed one of the 3..


----------



## kilowatt62 (Aug 18, 2019)

Yep. Your’e right. The double ended WYE setup here creates a reversing loop. A dual one actually. So two of the three reversing systems you mentioned are handled here, times two each in fact. A quadruple threat you might say.

So in review:
The two Connected wye systems make this also act as double reverse loop setup. All in one track! And, within his basic loops as well! And, no need to back up if he chooses not to, but still can. Its really quite ingenious. Glad I saw the possibility of it all, and mentioned it.

Now heres the funny part to me. I’ll bet a turntable gets added later on. 😉😆😆
Smile. Life is good.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*Thank you* !!


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Though I could have let sleeping dogs lie, I had to say this in favor of both *OP* and *Lemonhawk*:

The terminology has been faulty..The 2 wyes are not so much wyes in the traditional sense where 2 legs are part of a through-main and 3rd leg goes off (usually into the corner of a layout), dead ends and is used to turn engines' and short trains' directions, requiring a back-up move to do so.
What the OP has really are *3 way junctions*...And because there are 2 across from one another
("double ended" as Lemonhawk stated) the OP is correct in that he doesn't need to do a back up move with this track design in order to reverse train direction...
To reiterate: I'd stated all wyes require a back-up move. And I still say that..But, again, what OP has are junctions and not traditional wyes...
I would though like to cite that one of the two junctions can be turned into a Vee or Wishbone by removing the straight track and both TOs at each end of it, and trains would still be reversible with the one remaining junction and still not require a back-up move...

I am sorry for any prior friction and confusion over this subject I might have caused..


----------

