Gavino200s new layout

[Wolf]

Opened state

[cteno4]

The Kato extension rail part works well for this situation. You just nip the snap ears off the unijoiners and they slide in quite nice for this junction situation. Just don’t put them right at a curve as some flanges tend to ride up on the split rail of the of the expansion piece when a car is coming right out of a curve. Even a 62 seems to fix this.

 

jeff

[gavino200]

4 hours ago, Wolf said:

Opened state

 

Thanks Wolf. That's really clever. Really it doesn't look so bad at all.

 

@Martijn Meerts did something similar, I believe, though I'm not sure exactly how his is wired.

 

 

[gavino200]

2 hours ago, cteno4 said:

The Kato extension rail part works well for this situation. You just nip the snap ears off the unijoiners and they slide in quite nice for this junction situation. Just don’t put them right at a curve as some flanges tend to ride up on the split rail of the of the expansion piece when a car is coming right out of a curve. Even a 62 seems to fix this.

 

jeff

 

Yes, I've seen this done at train shows. I also use these pieces to complete non-regular tract setups. But I find they're a tad derailment prone, so I switch them out for custom cut pieces as soon as possible.

[gavino200]

On 3/14/2022 at 4:16 AM, Martijn Meerts said:

 

Have a look at my yard's turnout ladder. I did the turnouts slightly different which saves quite a bit of space and doesn't look terrible either 🙂

 

 

You're talking about this arrangement? If you branch in both directions your get to maximum width in less distance? I'm assuming you tried many configurations when coming up with this. Do you remember any pitfalls/breakthroughs that you encountered?

 

Those are Peco tracks, right? I just recently bought a single Peco turnout just to get a feel for it's quality. It looks and feels good. I haven't tried it yet but I'm going to connect it to some Peco flex track soon to check it you. I  like that it has little indents on the rails for where the moving part will sit. Kato turnouts don't have this and I think they can have derailment issues. I've seen YouTube videos of people filing a similar indent into the Kato turnouts for a similar effect.

 

What's your experience with the Peco track? What do you use to motorize those junctions? Have you been able to eliminate track related derailment completely with Peco track?

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by gavino200

[cteno4]

Most all our derailment issues went away with the extensions once we got them away from curves. A couple of trains only had some issues from time to time but I’m betting they had a few wheel sets out of gauge. I found this with a few specific trains and some consistent #4 point derailments as well.

 

jeff

[gavino200]

57 minutes ago, cteno4 said:

Most all our derailment issues went away with the extensions once we got them away from curves. A couple of trains only had some issues from time to time but I’m betting they had a few wheel sets out of gauge. I found this with a few specific trains and some consistent #4 point derailments as well.

 

jeff

 

Interesting. Once I get a bit further in my design process, I'm going to make a systematic study of all possible derailment causing issues. Probably I'll start a new thread for that.

[chadbag]

1 hour ago, gavino200 said:

 

Interesting. Once I get a bit further in my design process, I'm going to make a systematic study of all possible derailment causing issues. Probably I'll start a new thread for that.

 

On that subject you could write a book and probably become rich.

 

[Martijn Meerts]

10 hours ago, gavino200 said:

@Martijn Meerts did something similar, I believe, though I'm not sure exactly how his is wired.

 

That's just going from 1 section of the layout to another, it's not really a small lift out / slide out bit. But basically, I just soldered the track to some pcboard and screwed the pcboard into the section's base. Each section has it's own wiring, with some multi-pin connectors for things like occupancy detectors that span multiple sections.

 

 

 

11 hours ago, gavino200 said:

You're talking about this arrangement? If you branch in both directions your get to maximum width in less distance? I'm assuming you tried many configurations when coming up with this. Do you remember any pitfalls/breakthroughs that you encountered?

 

Those are Peco tracks, right? I just recently bought a single Peco turnout just to get a feel for it's quality. It looks and feels good. I haven't tried it yet but I'm going to connect it to some Peco flex track soon to check it you. I  like that it has little indents on the rails for where the moving part will sit. Kato turnouts don't have this and I think they can have derailment issues. I've seen YouTube videos of people filing a similar indent into the Kato turnouts for a similar effect.

 

What's your experience with the Peco track? What do you use to motorize those junctions? Have you been able to eliminate track related derailment completely with Peco track?

 

It's not my own design actually, I found it while trying to look for ways to minimise space used up by turnout ladders. It looks a bit weird initially, but this is actually something they use in the prototype as well where there is little space, and it runs quite smooth. I've not had any issues with it at all, but it might be a bit more difficult to build it like this with sectional track. I've had to do quite a lot of small bits of flex track to get everything lined up. I've had full length shinkansen go through it without issues, as well as the GS4 + 18 coaches of the Morning Daylight without any derailments, in both directions.

 

This is Peco code 55 track yes. I really like it. I've been building this whole layout with Peco track. Trains run smooth through the turnouts and crossings. I can definitely recommend the track. For the turnouts I'm using servos because they're just more reliable. For DCC the turnouts do need some adjustments, and you really want to power the frog, which of course need their polarity changed based on the position of the turnouts.

 

Actually, the only turnouts that run smoother than the Peco ones (in any scale I've tested), are my hand built turnouts 🙂

 

[Wolf]

2 hours ago, Martijn Meerts said:

This is Peco code 55 track yes. I really like it. I've been building this whole layout with Peco track. Trains run smooth through the turnouts and crossings. I can definitely recommend the track. For the turnouts I'm using servos because they're just more reliable. For DCC the turnouts do need some adjustments, and you really want to power the frog, which of course need their polarity changed based on the position of the turnouts.

OT: You got some sort of guide how you powered the frog? We use Peco on our club layouts too, and I love the track, but I HATE that they all biblically keep the frog unpowered to "prevent shortcircuit", but no one can explain to me why, so I assume they just do it because "everyone did it".

[Martijn Meerts]

1 hour ago, Wolf said:

OT: You got some sort of guide how you powered the frog? We use Peco on our club layouts too, and I love the track, but I HATE that they all biblically keep the frog unpowered to "prevent shortcircuit", but no one can explain to me why, so I assume they just do it because "everyone did it".

 

There's some pictures of a wired turnout here: https://jnsforum.com/community/topic/3241-jr-chiisai-storage-yard-modules/page/3/#comment-64809

 

 

Essentially, 1 of the red and blue wires is for overall power to the turnout, the other red and blue wires are soldered to the switch blades (not really needed, just for added reliability). The purple wire is soldered to the frog. Everything is wired through an ESU Switchpilot servo with extension, just following the wiring guide in the Switchpilot's manual. Also had to cut some gaps in the rail just to the left of the frog, but I think with newer turnouts that's no longer needed. They used to have electrofrog (which is what I've been using) and insulfrog, but they've combined those into 1 universal turnout.

 

This way, the entire turnout has power, and I can run trains through them at the lowest speed setting (as long as track and wheels are clean of course 😄 )

 

 

 

[gavino200]

17 hours ago, chadbag said:

On that subject you could write a book and probably become rich.

 

 

Nah, I'm a simple man. All I need is a life free of derailments to make me happy!

[Cat]

9 hours ago, Wolf said:

OT: You got some sort of guide how you powered the frog? We use Peco on our club layouts too, and I love the track, but I HATE that they all biblically keep the frog unpowered to "prevent shortcircuit", but no one can explain to me why, so I assume they just do it because "everyone did it".

The only Peco Turnouts I've ever used were the 'Electrofrog' ones which, as advertised, do have powered frogs.  They need tinkering for DCC operations though:
https://dccwiki.com/PECO_Electrofrog

[James-SNMB]

On 3/13/2022 at 6:24 PM, gavino200 said:

I realize that when I try to plan on paper of just imagining, I imagine in a much smaller scale. It's a sort of wishful thinking that the layout is bigger than it is.

 

That's a cold hard fact that I identify strongly with! My ideas/ambitions always exceed the allowable space by about 10-20%. If I extend the table or the space, the cycle just repeats. I switched from HO to N scale, and that didn't help at all, and maybe made it worse! There is no known cure for this affliction, that I'm aware of. Reality stinks sometimes. There will always be compromises.

[cteno4]

Yeah reality sucks in terms of model railroad planning! A long one ago I gave up doodling for layout planning and just resort to doing it with track planning programs. I have a pile of 180 curves at different radiuses to drag about quickly to see if ideas in my head will fit in a desired space roughly and if it looks like it might then I start laying digital track.

 

jeff

[gavino200]

A first very rough attempt with RailModeller. It gives me a rough idea of what kind of things will fit. Blue is high elevation. Red is low elevation. Pink is a tram network. Purple is a yard to be hidden in a mountain. The line on the left is the mountain. The line on the right is the border between high elevation and low elevation. 

 

 

 

Questions/problems so far. 

 

1. Kato double track viaduct curves are very limited. I'm tempted to find an alternative. 

2. I'm not completely sold on the mountain or the hidden yard. But I'll keep it for now. 

 

I'm tempted to keep adding stuff. But I think I should leave it as it is for now. Next I'll look at Peco track and try maybe drawing it again in Peco. I'll also switch to look at inspriational layouts for good ideas to rip off. 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by gavino200

[Madsing]

An alternative design for an elevated station that I would like to explore. Four tracks as close as possible to each others and the two platforms outside the outer tracks. Just to see the Shinkansen passing at full speed on the inner tracks!

 

[Madsing]

I'm sure this is just a first draft, but allow me this comment (from experience). I would change the tram layout to allow several trams at the main station, otherwise iTrain will struggle as there will always be one of the trams blocking the station. Maybe like that:

 

[gavino200]

2 hours ago, Madsing said:

An alternative design for an elevated station that I would like to explore. Four tracks as close as possible to each others and the two platforms outside the outer tracks. Just to see the Shinkansen passing at full speed on the inner tracks!

 

 

Yes, I think this is a great idea. It really doesn't make sense to have platforms at all four tracks. It makes much more sense to have a straight mainline and junctions off from it for stops. It's very hard to see the whizzing shinkansens with the island platform design. 

 

 

[gavino200]

2 hours ago, Madsing said:

I'm sure this is just a first draft, but allow me this comment (from experience). I would change the tram layout to allow several trams at the main station, otherwise iTrain will struggle as there will always be one of the trams blocking the station. Maybe like that:

 

 

Yes, I totally agree. I was a bit exhausted by the time I added the tram lines. It's really just a placeholder/demo, and something to give me an idea of what might fit. Actually I was planning on "taking inspiration" from your tram terminal. lol 🤣

[Wolf]

18 hours ago, gavino200 said:

1. Kato double track viaduct curves are very limited. I'm tempted to find an alternative

 

I think from Peco there is a "concrete sleeper" Flex Track option that I found always visually appealing and looking "modern", maybe use that and just build the curves you need on the viaduct yourself?

[gavino200]

3 hours ago, Wolf said:

 

I think from Peco there is a "concrete sleeper" Flex Track option that I found always visually appealing and looking "modern", maybe use that and just build the curves you need on the viaduct yourself?

 

That's a great idea. I actually have a five-pack of those Peco flexitracks. I've been planning on incorporating them but I haven't been sure how. It looks like I can just nip off the "seats" on the kato track and pop them down in their place. It would also make for much smoother running due to fewer joints.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by gavino200

[gavino200]

Pondering some alternative ideas for the station. The main thought here is taking the station off the mainline. That would do two things. It would decrease the number of junctions off the mainline, and it would create two extra station slots.

 

 

 

[gavino200]

I made another iteration of the layout. I decided to keep the station with the mainline going through it. The midsection is tidied up quite a bit. I switched the low red loop to double track and connected it to the high blue side. 

 

The pink tram lines will probably have a small terminal station at each end so that one tram can leave when the next arrives. I already see some changes I'll need to make to avoid bottlenecks. 

 

The tan line on the right is the High/low border. The tan line on the left may or may not be an even higher level or a mountain. I got rid of the hidden yard in the mountain.

 

[gavino200]

Looking at this fresh after leaving it for a couple of days, I think I like it. I was tempted to add more to the west side in the large empty spaces, but I think it would be better not to.

 

I do want to add a small loco service center somewhere. Possibly between the two yards, west of the station. And the track pattern for the pink tram lines is mostly provisional. I'll design the lines themselves as I design the town/street layout, but the basic terminal with three lines will be the pattern.

 

The blue lines will be made with Peco track. I'll use my Kato viaducts for the part of the blue line that's elevated in the east, but I'll put Peco flextrack in them.

 

I may use my Kato Unitrack for the red lines. It would be nice to use it as I have a lot of it. The red lines should use up most of it. I'll sell whatever's left over, on ebay.

 

Likely the tramline will be made with Tomix track. I already have some and with painting it should fit well into streets.

 

I need to repeat my height experiments and recheck my track level calculations. I'll probably also redraw the layout using Peco track, and continue to refine it.

 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by gavino200