Welcome to the forum   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline Trigster  
#1 Posted : 05 December 2017 21:15:40(UTC)
Trigster

United States   
Joined: 03/12/2017(UTC)
Posts: 19
Location: S.F. Bay Area

Hello All...I haven't had a layout in over 15 years and the time has come !!!...I got the SCARM Software and that makes quite a big difference in planning from days gone by...BigGrin

I've decided on the smallish side of 4 x 8...It's a busy little layout but it incorporates the 3 most important elements for me which are 1.) Bi-Directional & 2.) 3 Main Lines...
3.) 1 Elevated Line...I guess I've been a little stuck on 3 Main Lines ever since I learned as a kid how to seamlessly do that with the 2 x Double Slip Switch set-up...
And Bi-Directional is a must for me !!!...Also, the 3 mains are all on their own transformer and I allocate the switches and any other gear to the transformer powering the line
it's associated with...Reasonable distribution...Plus the 4 (Gray) feeders are all isolated as well and are controlled with a simple On/Off control box...

It's very symmetrical but it's tough cramming this much action on to an 4 x 8 layout LOL ...And I don't know...Maybe it's a bit too much...Small Yards but it is what it is...Limited Space...
The Blue Line is elevated and the Yellow Section will have a Station with a Speed Controller...That's about as close as I get to Automation...It's a full analog layout...

Still needs a tweak or two here and there...Got'a slight miss up in the "S" that'll need a fiddly bit added some where(5208 ?)...But over all it appears that I'll be able to make it work...
It'll have a grade steeper than 2% but not too bad and with a layout like this long trains just don't quite fit...Most I ever used to go was 3-4 Passenger or 6-8 Freight Cars in any train...

I'm sure this will change a little before any track goes down...So What'a Ya' Think !!!...BigGrin

EDIT: This is an up-dated version of the diagram as of 12/20/17

BestNewBase5.jpg

Edited by user 21 December 2017 05:40:35(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Trigster
Offline johnpatrickwack  
#2 Posted : 05 December 2017 23:24:35(UTC)
johnpatrickwack

United States   
Joined: 13/12/2016(UTC)
Posts: 147
Location: Silver Spring, MD, USA
Originally Posted by: Trigster Go to Quoted Post

Hello All...I haven't had a layout in over 15 years and the time has come !!!...I got the SCARM Software and that makes quite a big difference from planning in days gone by...BigGrin

I've decided on the smallish side of 8' x 4'...It's a busy little layout but it incorporates the 2 most important elements for me which are 1.) Bi-Directional & 2.) 3 Main Lines...
I guess I've been a little stuck on 3 Main Lines ever since I learned as a kid how to seamlessly do that with the 2 x Double Slip Switch set-up...And Bi-Directional is a must for me !!!
Also, the 3 mains are all on their own transformer and I allocate the switches and any other gear to the transformer powering the line it's associated with...Reasonable distribution...

It's very symmetrical but it's tough cramming this much action on to an 8 x 4 layout LOL ...And I don't know...Maybe it's a bit too much...Small Yards but it is what it is...Limited Space...
The Blue Line is elevated and the Yellow Section will have a Station with a Speed Controller...That's about as close as I get to Automation...Other than that is a full analog layout...

Still needs a tweak or two here and there...Got'a slight miss up in the "S" that'll need a fiddly bit added some where(5208 ?)...But over all it appears that I'll be able to make it work...
It'll have a grade steeper than 2% but not too bad and with a layout like this long trains just don't quite fit...Most I ever used to go was 3-4 Passenger or 6-8 Freight Cars in any train...

I'm sure this will change a little before any track goes down...So What'a Ya' Think !!!...BigGrin

BestNewBase2.jpg

This looks very nice! I did a similar layout using a combo of C and M - I used M on the elevated sections since I already had a number of bridge sections. I found that I had a lot of derailments with trains climbing up the ramps; I can't remember what grade but it was aggressive as I needed room for catenary. However, in a small space, it's difficult not to have ramps with curves. So, I wouldn't recommend using too steep of a slope on the curves. Perhaps if you could use an extra foot in width (5 x 8), you could put in some ramps to the elevated sections that would mostly be straight.
---
John P. Wack
Silver Spring, MD
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by johnpatrickwack
Offline Michael4  
#3 Posted : 05 December 2017 23:34:04(UTC)
Michael4

United Kingdom   
Joined: 02/02/2017(UTC)
Posts: 637
Location: England, South Coast
Ha! I think you are on the same journey as I though our Marklin has remained unused for something like 30 years and I am now a few months into rediscovery. In the end I extended to 3m x 1m approx and am still working to cram as much in as possible. Have a look at this thread:

https://www.marklin-user...s/t37872-Opinions-please

Right now I am up to five controllers, one for the upper layer and two each for the lower tracks (two each because one is catenary and the other track)

I like the symmetry but wonder how much the yards will get used. My objective with a small layout like this is to have as much going on as possible and by the time you have three trains running and switching tracks you won't have time for yards! Are you considering tunnels and scenery or leaving it solely 'functional'?

Another thing to consider is access. If built against a wall on the long side can you actually reach the track at the back? Also, have you thought about a passing place (terminology?) on the upper track?

Each to his own and all good fun, I am absolutely no expert...
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Michael4
Offline Trigster  
#4 Posted : 06 December 2017 02:43:54(UTC)
Trigster

United States   
Joined: 03/12/2017(UTC)
Posts: 19
Location: S.F. Bay Area

This looks very nice! I did a similar layout using a combo of C and M - I used M on the elevated sections since I already had a number of bridge sections. I found that I had a lot of derailments with trains climbing up the ramps; I can't remember what grade but it was aggressive as I needed room for catenary. However, in a small space, it's difficult not to have ramps with curves. So, I wouldn't recommend using too steep of a slope on the curves. Perhaps if you could use an extra foot in width (5 x 8), you could put in some ramps to the elevated sections that would mostly be straight.

______________________________________________________________________

Thanks John...I wish I could do an extra 1' in width but that's not in the cards...I'm only going up to 3.5" but it's still going to be a 4% (+-)
grade no matter which way I slice it !!!...Not terribly realistic but this layout is all about fun and I've done a grade that steep before...But
that was long ago so I'm sure adjusting the angle of ascent will take some testing...Trig BigGrin
Offline Trigster  
#5 Posted : 06 December 2017 03:19:52(UTC)
Trigster

United States   
Joined: 03/12/2017(UTC)
Posts: 19
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Originally Posted by: Michael4 Go to Quoted Post
Ha! I think you are on the same journey as I though our Marklin has remained unused for something like 30 years and I am now a few months into rediscovery. In the end I extended to 3m x 1m approx and am still working to cram as much in as possible. Have a look at this thread:

https://www.marklin-user...s/t37872-Opinions-please

Right now I am up to five controllers, one for the upper layer and two each for the lower tracks (two each because one is catenary and the other track)

I like the symmetry but wonder how much the yards will get used. My objective with a small layout like this is to have as much going on as possible and by the time you have three trains running and switching tracks you won't have time for yards! Are you considering tunnels and scenery or leaving it solely 'functional'?

Another thing to consider is access. If built against a wall on the long side can you actually reach the track at the back? Also, have you thought about a passing place (terminology?) on the upper track?

Each to his own and all good fun, I am absolutely no expert...


Michael...Thanks Much...

I agree we are basically on the same path...And you've made a considerable amount of progress in a very short time !!!
And, for me as well it's all about fun and manually controlling the layout...Keep'in the switches straight is half the fun
until the Operator make a mistake BigGrin...NOT !!!...Don't want any Gomez Adams action with my old beauties !!!

There will be scenery...Tunnels/Mountains/Industrial/Brewery etc...But no 'Catenary'...My eyes & hands don't work as
well as they used to and the German Spaghetti drives me nuts as it is !!!...More wire than a Server Farm !!!...As to a
passing lane up top...No, not as of now...But I don't think a layout is ever really finished...Maybe in the future...???

And you're right about the 'Yards'...To me they're basically storage and not a part of the 'Action'...2 trains on that layout
should be very doable with 3 trains more than possible...Fortunately I'll have free access around the entire layout which
was a major consideration in the final choice of size...My last (old) layout was 9 x 6 which I just can't do...If I have my
dates correct...It'll be 52 years ago this year that my Parents gave me my 1st set for Xmas...Long Ago & Far Away...

As Time Goes By...I'll try and post a pix or 2...And I'm sure I'll have some questions of you and everyone else...Trig BigGrin

Users browsing this topic
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.

| Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.790 seconds.