Author Topic: Packers#1's ongoing ideas thread  (Read 6687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1071
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +28
    • Unnamed Switching Layout
Packers#1's ongoing ideas thread
« on: November 30, 2011, 10:04:37 PM »
0
A lot of you may remember my previous layout plan thread...unfortunately, due to college slapping me in the face (went to visit Presbyterian College in Clinton, SC, a few weeks ago, and it hit me just how small dorms are  :RUEffinKiddingMe: ) and financial considerations (read I'm 17, have a beat-up car to sink money into, but still love trains), and a desire for a point-to-point design since I have my NC mtn loop layout, I've come up with a design for a small yard area.
My main inspirations were the E.R. Godfrey Warehouse thread (https://www.therailwire.net/forum/index.php?topic=25002.0) and the top of some shelves in my room. I've expanded the layout size to 5' x 1'6", and will be using Atlas code 55 trackage, #5 turnouts are fine. As for the plan, the CSRY main and A/D track will be reached via sector plate or cassette or 0-5-0 switcher, while the yard tracks and industrial lead/branch will terminate right after an interstate overpass (yard tracks are three tracks closest to main, while industry lead/branch is the far track). There's an industry based off the thread mentioned earlier, but with only two interior tracks where there are 4, that each have two car spots (can be expanded to three), wherever I can fit spots on the exterior, and an added interior car spur. I also have an engine facility in the shadow of the interstate (I imagine a shot from under the bridge looking down the layout). Now the question is, should I squeeze another industry between the engine facility and major industry (this will either be cement or plastic pellets) or expand the major industry. If I do the latter, the transload facility will stay as is, since that can be both cement and plastic pellet, as well as bulk dry materials in boxcars etc (there was a shot in a recent MR of a prefab building built specifically for this purpose). I also wouldn't be opposed to another spur there. I may add a Sanitation Company with a shop like where I work, which wouldn't be that much a stretch to fit a shop and back building like where I work at.
Anyways, here's a scan of my crappy grid paper drawing, please ask away for clarification! Front is the bottom edge, only part against the wall is the top. Thanks fellas!
« Last Edit: January 04, 2012, 08:52:44 PM by GaryHinshaw »
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018

avel

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Respect: 0
    • Layout Album
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2011, 10:12:43 PM »
0
You should try out Anyrail.

http://www.anyrail.com/index_en.html

Trial has like a 50 piece limit, so should be more than enough for your size layout.
iamaman27 on the youtubes

John

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 10892
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +545
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2011, 07:35:15 AM »
0
Just my advice ..

Go to college - study hard - do a little rail fanning - keep up with the RW .. the trains will be there when you get done ..

there is an NTRAK group there .. you might be able to get a train fix with them ..   http://piedmontnsouthern.org/


pwnj

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Gender: Male
  • The Resourceful Route!
  • Respect: 0
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2011, 07:53:34 AM »
0
A potential problem I see with your track plan is the lack of space for an engine and cars to get anything done.  The ends look pretty tight.  How do you see the locomotive moving any cars across those switches? 

Here's a layout I designed that is pretty close to your specifications (and could certainly fit with very little modification).  Industries are just suggestions.  I've got a track-only on my Flickr account (just follow the link).  This would also easily integrate into a larger layout at a later date.


CSX-switching-fun2 by PW&NJ Railroad

This was built with XTrakCad, and the nice thing about it is that you can actually run trains and give it a test-drive before you start building and possibly regretting your decisions.  If you're interested, PM me and I'll send you the file. :)
« Last Edit: December 01, 2011, 07:57:12 AM by pwnj »

avel

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Respect: 0
    • Layout Album
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2011, 11:04:45 AM »
0
I totally agree with John. smart words
iamaman27 on the youtubes

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2011, 11:27:59 AM »
0
Not sure of this is of any interest or not. If you can possibly add a few inches to its length, you may be able to actually do some switching with something other than a 44-tonner.


avel

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • Respect: 0
    • Layout Album
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #6 on: December 01, 2011, 03:00:38 PM »
0
David, was that built with the Atlas code 55 library? Excellent plan!
iamaman27 on the youtubes

cv_acr

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 2361
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +19
    • Canadian Freight Railcar Gallery
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #7 on: December 01, 2011, 03:19:12 PM »
0
Let's see, the original plan has

1. no runaround
2. switches that are right at the ends of the layout, so it would be impossible for the engine to change tracks there, much less move cars between the tracks

Basically you have one track with a pair of spurs off of it both facing the same direction, and some useless parallel tracks that can't really be accessed.

Having lived in a university dorm before, I can agree that there's not too much room to play with there. Take John's advice, get through school, maybe work on some small detailing projects here and there. You're not likely to have much layout space beyond the top surface of your dresser for a few years until you're out on your own.

John

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 10892
  • Gender: Male
  • Respect: +545
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #8 on: December 01, 2011, 04:08:28 PM »
0
Having lived in a university dorm before, I can agree that there's not too much room to play with there. Take John's advice, get through school, maybe work on some small detailing projects here and there. You're not likely to have much layout space beyond the top surface of your dresser for a few years until you're out on your own.

And .. "do you want to come to my room and see my choo choo" is not much of a pickup line" :facepalm: :facepalm:  :RUEffinKiddingMe:

DKS

  • The Pitt
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 11571
  • Respect: +2064
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #9 on: December 01, 2011, 04:36:44 PM »
0
David, was that built with the Atlas code 55 library? Excellent plan!

Yes, all Atlas Code 55, all #5 TOs.

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1071
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +28
    • Unnamed Switching Layout
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #10 on: December 01, 2011, 06:14:33 PM »
0
guys, the plan is to have a sector plate or cassette for a yard lead, so that engines and cars are able to move.
This plan is meant to be a basis for a future branch/belt layout. The idea is to make something that can be expanded on after college, while providing for the ability to switch and take photos now.
pwnj, I like that plan, I could definitely make it work. Thanks!
DKS, the length can go to 7 feet, I prefer 5 because that's a bit more compact and manageable
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018

pwnj

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 399
  • Gender: Male
  • The Resourceful Route!
  • Respect: 0
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2011, 11:12:10 AM »
0
Excellent, Sawyer.  Did you click over to Flickr for the track-only version?  Otherwise, let me know and I'll send it to you.  Sure you don't want to try out XTrakCad?  It'll give you a chance to actually run the trains on the track, with working switches, etc., so you can get a feel for how it'll work in real life.  Hey, it's free, what'ya got to lose? (note: well, there's that sanity thing, but that's highly overrated...)

Dave V

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 8925
  • Gender: Male
  • The Route of the Galloping Goose
  • Respect: +3975
    • Dave Vollmer's N Scale Pennsy
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2011, 11:42:24 AM »
0
I took a haiatus from trains in college.  I read about them and modeled when I came home on break.  Just no real way to model at college.  I went to Penn State though, and probably had a bit more of a party school experience than it sounds like you will have.  Just the same, concentrate on studies and girls.
Silver San Juan Scenic Line

Member SlimRail Modular Colorado Narrow Gauge
http://www.slimrail.net/

packers#1

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 1071
  • Gender: Male
  • Modern Shortline Modeler
  • Respect: +28
    • Unnamed Switching Layout
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2011, 06:26:23 PM »
0
yeah, I saw the track only version. and actually, I think it might be buried somewhere on this computer...time to dig.
Dave, that's kinda what I'm thinking about doing, at least freshman year. A shelf switching layout will stay out of the way in the big bonus room etc. Hence the idea to keep it small. I dunno what all will end up happening with an apartment though, but a small swithcing layout can be stuck almost anywhere really
Sawyer Berry
Clemson University graduate, c/o 2018

davidgray1974

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 294
  • Gender: Male
  • "...." - Luke Skywalker
  • Respect: +147
Re: Switching Layout Design critique wanted
« Reply #14 on: December 10, 2011, 10:39:42 PM »
0
Not sure of this is of any interest or not. If you can possibly add a few inches to its length, you may be able to actually do some switching with something other than a 44-tonner.



This actually looks like fun :)

Modeling the L&N, well at least a few times a year.