marklin-users.net community | Forum
»
General topics
»
H0-scale
»
Marklin's Track Plan Book an obvious problem that no one wants to discuss
 Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Just a little banter for a slow Tuesday........feels like I've been railroaded!!  With bug-eyed  eyes from looking through a eye loupe all day at the design for, Hamburg- Layout with two faces in the Marklin Book by KLAUS ECKERT THE TRACK PLAN BOOK For HO layouts over 3 m /10 feet long.
I can officially say that this book is obviously the ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM! An “elephant in the room” means Marklin knows about something in particular but no-one is talking about it because it might be embarrassing or conflictious. “Oh look the plans for C track don't line up so hush little one................"  Now for the brighter side of life  I'm almost done with my new plan and as Mr. Winston Churchill once said: "Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." Marklin C track I do not fear because, “For me success will be a carbide tipped circular saw blade!” 
|
 3 users liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC) Posts: 6,764 Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
Hi John
In my first C layout I had to cut two pieces just to to fit a platform loop.
My second layout is complete without any cuts.
It apparently can happen - :-)
Kimball |
HO Scale - Märklin (ep II-III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail HO (Queensland Australia, UK, USA) - 3 rail OO (English Hornby Dublo) - old clockwork O gauge - Live Steam 90mm (3.1/2 inch) gauge. |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 263
|
I came across such issues on countless occasions with C and M track.
After a few surprises, I got in to the habit of checking ahead of time by transferring the paper plan to track planning software. The tolerances used in books are less precise than in the software packages, or authors omit to mention cuts they made here and there. Problems quickly become apparent using the software, so I have a chance to plan adjustments before building the real thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC) Posts: 15,870 Location: Gibraltar, Europe
|
When you see a track plan in a publication it's probably a good idea to try it yourself using track planning software to make sure all the bits fit. Using the software you can adjust problem areas before you've bought, or even worse, laid the offending tracks!
Some track plans have been converted from another type of track and the equivalents in C-track may not be quite the same. I've seen lots of plans that have been converted from M-track to C-track, and there are quite a few differences in geometry between those types.
Edit:- Just seen that we both posted more or less the same at the same time! |
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways
Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
|
1 user liked this useful post by RayF
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 19/08/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,051
|
I find that most of the time the problem is the omission of required 24071's for the slim C turnouts. Also applies to 24315's left out on recent plans that use the wide C curved turnouts. |
Modeling Immensee, mile/km 0 on the Gottard. SBB Era V.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 18/02/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,334
|
Maybe the diagrams were produced in China  |
Best regards,
Miguel
Mostly Märklin H0.
|
1 user liked this useful post by mbarreto
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
I have good news! From having five areas of misaligned track I have been able to decrease the numbers to two by replacing a variety of track with a mixture of shorter pieces using 24064's, 24077's, 24094's. I replaced the 24064's that were used instead of the 24071's at the slim turnouts. I'll post my plan later this afternoon. Not complete by getting there!!
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC) Posts: 2,319 Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
|
Originally Posted by: michelvr 
An “elephant in the room” means Marklin knows about something in particular but no-one is talking about it because it might be embarrassing or conflictious.
I think to qualify as an elephant in the room, the elephant has to be visible to everyone in the room. I don't see the elephant, because he's not there. I don't have that book nor do I see a photo of the offending track plan. Its maybe an invisible elephant?  Or the ' room' isnt' the readers of this thread, but the set of people who have the book in question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Originally Posted by: Minok Originally Posted by: michelvr
An “elephant in the room” means Marklin knows about something in particular but no-one is talking about it because it might be embarrassing or conflictious.
I think to qualify as an elephant in the room, the elephant has to be visible to everyone in the room. I don't see the elephant, because he's not there. I don't have that book nor do I see a photo of the offending track plan. Its maybe an invisible elephant? Or the ' room' isnt' the readers of this thread, but the set of people who have the book in question. Lucky you for not having the book! It's a white elephant! I've had the book from the beginning of my Marklin days.....2012. It's out of print  I did notice errors on some plans earlier. I did not realizing how they would impact my plan.  But now that my plan is almost complete (and corrected) I'll throw some peanuts to that elephant!
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 17/09/2006(UTC) Posts: 18,771 Location: New Zealand
|
I've just completed changing the M track part of my layout over to C track (because of reliability issues). I've managed to get everything lined up OK with what was there previously. One thing I found really useful was the table of track pieces needed to make up a specific length. I was able to measure the length of track needed and then used the table to determine the pieces needed. This enabled me to line everything up with the track that wasn't being replaced - the C track extension I did a few years ago, and the main bridge section which remains M track due to the bridges being designed for use with M (and K) track, but not C track. Table is attached.  cgleis.pdf (56kb) downloaded 154 time(s).BTW, I have the track plan book referred to. There are some great plans in it, I don't think it is a white elephant. Having said that, that doesn't preclude that there might be some issues being constructing a layout from the plans. I designed my layout C Track extension with Wintrack, but when I came to build it not everything matched up even though the plan said it should. That's why it is always handy to have a selection of short pieces and curves on hand, just in case.
|
3 users liked this useful post by Bigdaddynz
|
|
|
|
Joined: 18/02/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,334
|
Originally Posted by: Bigdaddynz
....
BTW, I have the track plan book referred to. There are some great plans in it, I don't think it is a white elephant. Having said that, that doesn't preclude that there might be some issues being constructing a layout from the plans. I designed my layout C Track extension with Wintrack, but when I came to build it not everything matched up even though the plan said it should. That's why it is always handy to have a selection of short pieces and curves on hand, just in case.
I also have that track plan book and I think the ideas in the book are great. Some track plans may not be accurate and that's a pitty, but the book as a track planning book seems very good, only exception seems to be those small unmatches of the track. They can be easily corrected in a new edition of the book, or maybe Märklin will produce a new book on the subject with completely new tooling; sorry: completely new text and layouts:) Miguel |
Best regards,
Miguel
Mostly Märklin H0.
|
2 users liked this useful post by mbarreto
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Hello Bigdaddynz and Miguel,
Thanks for the cgleis PDF.
I agree the book has great ideas and beautifully done illustrations.
I've been studying it on and off for the last five years. I only wished that is was accurate in the track drawings.
Once I start to assemble the C track on the layout I’ll find out how accurate Anyrail is.
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
Joined:: 01/06/2016(UTC)
Posts: 2,465
|
Originally Posted by: michelvr Hello Bigdaddynz and Miguel,
Thanks for the cgleis PDF.
I agree the book has great ideas and beautifully done illustrations.
I've been studying it on and off for the last five years. I only wished that is was accurate in the track drawings.
Once I start to assemble the C track on the layout I’ll find out how accurate Anyrail is. Well, I only know something about an elephant in the china store. But he had left 2 Märklin brochures - do you kow them too? https://www.maerklin.de/...C3%A4nzungspackungen.pdfhttp://www.ccbrailroad.c...nuales/marklin_via_c.pdf  P.S.: What is Anyrail?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Hello TEEWolf, Yes I knew about those brochures. Anyrail is a windows program for track planning and I’ve been using this software for my track plan. https://www.anyrail.com/en
|
2 users liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
Joined:: 01/06/2016(UTC)
Posts: 2,465
|
Originally Posted by: michelvr Hello TEEWolf, Yes I knew about those brochures. Anyrail is a windows program for track planning and I’ve been using this software for my track plan. https://www.anyrail.com/en Hello Michel, thanks for the link. I bought and try to use WinTrack. https://www.wintrack.de/At the time I struggle with version 14. But please do not laugh: I tried to redo my layout with WinTrack, which I had fiddled together before by hand. WinTrack tells me: it does not work! But my trains are running over the layout.  You see, I am not very familiar with WinTrack yet - learning by doing.  Regards TEEWolf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/08/2015(UTC) Posts: 1,091
|
The Marklin magazine layouts aren't any better, they had a 24130 connecting to a 24772 wide turn out - obviously thats not going to work without removable sections.
That being said, someone will say (justifiably) you can cut the 130, BUT when you present a layout plan, it should be offered in a way where it works, where you don't need a saw to modify track.
Not defending the book, but it's not the only source of poor/incorrect information either, some sources are even closer to home, so to speak |
American by Geography, Australian by Birth. I am an original Ameristraylian |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 20/07/2007(UTC) Posts: 809 Location: Leopold, Victoria
|
My orange friend says this is all fake news😁 |
Legless
Era's 1 to 111,C track,k track |
1 user liked this useful post by Legless
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Originally Posted by: Legless My orange friend says this is all fake news😁 Your orange friend just flew the coop because he knows the truth! As for you my friend, you do not have any legs to stand on! Where’s the evidence to support or justification for your argument of fake news? Seems to me you're just bumming around causing trouble!
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 01/02/2004(UTC) Posts: 7,453 Location: Scotland
|
Never use track plans. I like to design my own layout then fit C track into what is the appox design I want. Ideas come from books which are used to give me something I may not have thought of but that is all. I think half the fun is making your own layout which I think many do on here. |
Take care I like Marklin and will defend the worlds greatest model rail manufacturer. |
9 users liked this useful post by David Dewar
|
|
|
|
Joined: 20/07/2007(UTC) Posts: 809 Location: Leopold, Victoria
|
Originally Posted by: David Dewar Never use track plans. I like to design my own layout then fit C track into what is the appox design I want. Ideas come from books which are used to give me something I may not have thought of but that is all. I think half the fun is making your own layout which I think many do on here. Totally agree with you David. I to looked through lots of planning books for ideas, not for complete layouts and yes I’ll have a hiccup or two when I finally start to build my layout. |
Legless
Era's 1 to 111,C track,k track |
2 users liked this useful post by Legless
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/02/2016(UTC)
Posts: 490
|
Happens all the time. Some of the Märklin Magazine track plans have inclines that are way to steep for some trains, just to fit the often small space they take up. Okay for some, others might find it unrealistic.
The TRIX track plan book even have track pieces that do not exist. I guess they were planned, but eventually never produced. That is a bit annoying.
I also find that mostly it comes down to forgetting the 071 pieces at the slim turnouts. So check for that if you go debug the track plan.
|
2 users liked this useful post by MaerklinLife
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/02/2018(UTC) Posts: 83 Location: Midwest
|
As for the “elephant” I do hope to find a copy of this someday. It currently remains invisible to me!
I too have used most of my planning books for ideas and inspiration, sometimes I just used a portion to fill in a dead space on an old layout.
While I know planning books are sorta “universal” (meaning I can use any idea from any book and translate it to my current project etc) I do often find myself searching for Marklin-specific plans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Originally Posted by: orionstars As for the “elephant” I do hope to find a copy of this someday. It currently remains invisible to me!
I too have used most of my planning books for ideas and inspiration, sometimes I just used a portion to fill in a dead space on an old layout.
While I know planning books are sorta “universal” (meaning I can use any idea from any book and translate it to my current project etc) I do often find myself searching for Marklin-specific plans. Hello Orionstars, If in my travels I find one I’ll buy it for you and let you know I have it! Because I'm one of those modellers that sometimes when I travel and find rare items I think to myself, “ Hey self you should buy both or more of them because it's hard to find and rare!” In this case when I bought the book there were two copies and I bought one actually knowing that I should have bought both!!!! Next time I’ll know better! Regards, Michel
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/02/2018(UTC) Posts: 83 Location: Midwest
|
Michel- isn't too Hat always the way it goes. See two buy two. Own two forever.
See two buy one someone asks "where'd you find it I'd love one!"
As for the mismatch track arrangements etc. It was not realized as much back when but Now people know the old Atlas and other earlier track plan books (like some from Kalmbach) also had impossible to make arrangements.
Sometimes a saw would make it possible. Other times it was just dreaming (without a caveat that said "there is no possible way to make this unless you hand lay every tie and custom bend every curve").
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/07/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,316
|
Originally Posted by: orionstars Michel- isn't too Hat always the way it goes. See two buy two. Own two forever.
See two buy one someone asks "where'd you find it I'd love one!"
As for the mismatch track arrangements etc. It was not realized as much back when but Now people know the old Atlas and other earlier track plan books (like some from Kalmbach) also had impossible to make arrangements.
Sometimes a saw would make it possible. Other times it was just dreaming (without a caveat that said "there is no possible way to make this unless you hand lay every tie and custom bend every curve"). Hi orionstars, This is my second time building a Marklin layout. First one used K track which was easy to manipulate and cut. With C track it's not so easy to manipulate but cutting it is no problem. I like to make my dreams come true so most endeavors Ièm able to overcome. Michel
|
1 user liked this useful post by michelvr
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 18/02/2017(UTC) Posts: 71 Location: Zuid-Holland
|
Hi Marklin Users,
My experience is that a track plan op paper, or a digital one, are always not fitting totally. Your table is not 100% flat, the edges of the table not 90*, the tracks you use are not as equal as they should. There are always differences. Track software also accepts deviations. The slope is not equally steep everywhere.
I had an idea for an layout and made a track plan with software. Some connections were in the track plan not possible, but practical executable with some minor changes.
My advice: use always planning software and build your table and tracks step by step. Always check whether the next track section fits.
NB: a layout with C-tracks is more difficult to to realise than a K-track plan.
Good luck with making your layout!
|
3 users liked this useful post by LoeM
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2006(UTC) Posts: 3,997
|
|
|
4 users liked this useful post by DaleSchultz
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 3,594 Location: Spain
|
Originally Posted by: DaleSchultz I have been using your program a couple of times, and I thank you for making it available. However, there is a "feature" that I dont like; When adjusting the tolerance, the program finds track-combinations that are TOO LONG. Whereas I can use conbinations that are a fraction of millimeters short, it is impossible to fit in a track that is too long. I suggest that tolerance is configurable in + and - values, or that too long results are filtered out. |
|
1 user liked this useful post by hxmiesa
|
|
|
|
Joined:: 01/06/2016(UTC)
Posts: 2,465
|
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Originally Posted by: DaleSchultz I have been using your program a couple of times, and I thank you for making it available. However, there is a "feature" that I dont like; When adjusting the tolerance, the program finds track-combinations that are TOO LONG. Whereas I can use conbinations that are a fraction of millimeters short, it is impossible to fit in a track that is too long. I suggest that tolerance is configurable in + and - values, or that too long results are filtered out. Here are length combinations and calculations in "analogue" form as a table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2006(UTC) Posts: 3,997
|
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Originally Posted by: DaleSchultz I have been using your program a couple of times, and I thank you for making it available. However, there is a "feature" that I dont like; When adjusting the tolerance, the program finds track-combinations that are TOO LONG. Whereas I can use conbinations that are a fraction of millimeters short, it is impossible to fit in a track that is too long. I suggest that tolerance is configurable in + and - values, or that too long results are filtered out. Understood, I like the idea... I will see if I can do that.... long time since I touched that code! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2006(UTC) Posts: 3,997
|
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa Originally Posted by: DaleSchultz I have been using your program a couple of times, and I thank you for making it available. However, there is a "feature" that I dont like; When adjusting the tolerance, the program finds track-combinations that are TOO LONG. Whereas I can use conbinations that are a fraction of millimeters short, it is impossible to fit in a track that is too long. I suggest that tolerance is configurable in + and - values, or that too long results are filtered out. Hi Henrik, I just saw your post today and I was able to add the feature. You can download the new exe and try it out! If you don't want solutions that are a bit too long, you can uncheck the 'too long' checkbox and it should work, as long as the desired solution is longer than the shortest piece of track! |
|
1 user liked this useful post by DaleSchultz
|
|
|
|
marklin-users.net community | Forum
»
General topics
»
H0-scale
»
Marklin's Track Plan Book an obvious problem that no one wants to discuss
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
