Untitled, Ambitious, and very long term.

[lurkingknight]

I'm going to have to think of something witty to call this thing... something like "late for work" or something.

 

The goal is to create a commuter train layout with included urban cityscape large enough to accomodate full length tokyo EMUs. It will be an amalgamation of rail concepts from japan, not specifically a prototype of tokyo.

 

A shinkansen loop is a possibility but at the moment, no concrete plans exist to add it in.

 

The surface layout will consist of a commuter station complex, simulating a transfer station where 2 lines meet. They will be tied together in a loop.

 

The initial track layout plan will have to take into considerations of future expansions and additions, meaning things may turn up on the layout but might not be built. Due to the size and scope of the project, the layout will be planned in phases so that at any one step of the way, it can be considered "complete" and I can walk away from it without adding more.

 

Designing and prototyping proof of concepts:

 

Phase 1:  kitbash the station together. The entire layout more or less revolves around the station, so if it can't be built, the layout isn't going to happen. 

 

Phase 2: building lighting rig design a modular lighting system that can be dropped into any building. Also electrical design for powering the lighting rig and powering the layout. Will have to take dcc and dc into consideration. It may start out as dc, or may go right into dcc.. have to figure out how it all works.

 

Phase 3: modular table design. The layout will reside in the basement, but must be modular enough that it can be pulled out of the basement in case of house moving, or maybe public showing. Electrical planning for the layout and wiring has to be considered as well as future expansion of additional track lines.

 

 

Building:

 

Phase 1 layout: Double loop containing both stations, lit and capable of running trains. 

 

Phase 2 table: build the table sections and shape the landscape and drop the track onto it. 

 

Phase 3 urbanization: start making the city look like a city with lit buildings.

 

Phase 4 subway: With the surface being populated, this is probably the best time to drop in the subway section.

 

Phase 5 subway concourse/underground mall: There's a large section off to the side of the subway platforms that I intend to have some underground scene open to viewing. The way the subway will be designed is that the loop will hug the edges of the layout and be visible for most of it's run.

 

Phase 6 shinkansen loop: There is potentially room to put a simple shinkansen loop into the layout that parallels the viaduct portion of the mainline. 

 

Phase X tram line: In the main strip crossing under the viaduct, I had planned on a shopping district and main boulevard inspired by the tram lines of hiroshima. The main street will have a center run tram and road traffic on either side and tall buildings on either side. This phase can occur at any time after phase 2.

 

 

 

 

 

Any suggestions or input? Everything needs to be planned out so more thinking now will more than likely save on headaches later.

[Matteo_IT]

Where do you live... in a castle?! :blink:

[Martijn Meerts]

Any specific reason for the rather strange shape?

 

About the DCC thing, if you're planning on going DCC for the layout at some point, but haven't done anything with DCC yet, I would advice to go for DCC right away. It's not always easy to convert a DC layout to DCC, although it depends much on how far you want to go. If you want to do blocks, you'll want to plan those ahead of time, especially when going DCC first.

 

Of course, it's always possible to ask for help with planning if you go DC first. Some of us do have some experience with block control and automation.

[cteno4]

Lurking,

 

very cool. bit layout!

 

one thing to keep in mind that reaching out over about 2 feet to work on stuff gets hard to do on a layout. at 2.5' its tough and for most at 3' its hard to do anything but very quickly and roughly. you have some deep reaches there to try to get into. you can use those carts that let you lean over the layout, but those are big things to move around and store (even though they say they fold up they dont all the way, curt has one and its a pain). or you can make a trapeze to hang off of above the layout from the floor rafters above! i did this on a giant 3/4" exhibit model we had when i had to get into sections 4-5' into the middle of the model, but again a huge pain and if i ever slipped it would have been disaster!

 

building sectional is great to be able to move it if you ever have to. but on an odd shaped layout like this it will take some interesting carving to pull off chunks that will be easy to move out of the house (ie stairways and turns and just boxing up for the move) as where to break track. i kind of doubt it would be something that you would ever tear out for show at this size as i think you would be a day teardown and setup. when we designed the jrm sectional layout we kept it super straight forward just to make it fast for teardown and set up and even then it was a super challenge to make it with track breaking at the right places, simplifying track plan and wiring to go super connectable and thats a very simple loop layout. also the more complicated the layout when going to a show the chances of running issues shoots way up. also there is the challenge of what you will use for support at a show. this is a constant challenge for us we keep evolving and experimenting with on the jrm layout. there is not total magic bullet. a layout this large is going to need a lot of support bits. for home you may want them to have storage space etc and be very stable (thus lots of interconnections and bolts etc) which does not lend itself to come apart into smaller transportable bits and takes lots and lots of time to assemble/disassemble.

 

so thats just to say with something this complicated i would focus on it being just movable, but not for taking to shows. i think you would either loose a lot of the complexity you want or end up with something really difficult to build and tear apart if you want it for shows. better to get what you want in the layout for the 99% of the time you will play with it than the potential maybe to do a show.

 

so the red and orange are subway? not sure what elevations things go at.

 

subway sections need to have a very easy way of making them accessible for derailments, track cleaning and track work. everyone i have know who has done a subway has cursed it at some point because of accessibility issues that they did not address well in design. make sure you can easily get at the subway layer later by dropping it off or something like that. just a access from the side is no good if you find a track problem later you cant get in there to really work on the track.

 

cheers

 

jeff

[lurkingknight]

I was thinking sectional table tops with the crazy shaping. Everything is at a 90 or a 45. It's not set in stone at the moment but I was thinking that the loop portion would exist on their own section of track and have their own module so to speak when it detaches. I still have to look at where things are going to come apart, how they can be stored/transported.

 

So for the goofy contour, you notice how it more or less follows the contour of the loop, that would allow me to build trapezoidal pieces to link together. on a very square center from where I can pull squares from in the middle of the table. I can hang and cantilever the outer sections off the square table base, this would allow me to suspend the subway level under the outer portion of the main table. 

 

Also this is not meant to butt into a corner, I'm meaning for this to be something you can walk around. 2m across now becomes more like 1m into the center to reach... a bit more manageable.

 

 

It is still very large, and I would like to shorten it quite a bit as there are some rather straight runs that don't do a whole lot, aside from maybe going between rows of buildings or having it parallel a street.

 

I don't expect this to be final at the moment, as things may still change because I want to measure building footprints and have a rough idea of where buildings will go to create some height.

 

Also for the weird shape of the table, I'm trying to hide the seams of where the sectional tables join, be it with scenery or street plates that will cover the seams when it's assembled. One of the things I notice about some of the larger layouts is that they are very tiled. You can see the tiling in stuff like unitram kits, and I have an idea in my mind's eye that can help hide the grid, especially for a city layout, and make it more organic rather than just a block city.

 

I'm also planning on having groups of buildings in a chunk together that will be prepared separately off the table which would be modular in their own right, that way the layout of the city can change a bit, orientations of buildings can change, or entire sections replaced. We'll see how it goes though.. lots more work is going to be needed to be done before track even gets put down, this also helps with the reach problem in some cases. 

 

At this point, I'll probably mess around with a few more ideas before looking at refining one or another. As an animator, we tend to come up with a bunch of quick ideas before settling on one to refine, so this being shot number 1, I'll start over and see if following ideas will end up with something better. Maybe something will appear at 3 or 4... or maybe after 10 I decide number 1 really was the one to run with... but for now... playing in the sandbox is important. :P

 

 

red and yellow subway. in the green and blue the split long straight is an island platform rough in and the double viaduct that crosses it will be the elevated station.

 

At the moment I've designed this from the rail loop perspective with little regard of roads and such, on a following layout, I may just take a satellite map of somewhere and drop a couple of loops onto the roads to see how I can get it to work, or start with buildings blocked out and weave some track into it that way. Need to look at it from a few different perspectives before I'll be satisfied with a plan.

Edited February 4, 2014 by lurkingknight

[Ochanomizu]

Edit:

 

Hello,

 

My suggestion is to add a lot more trackwork.  A layout of that size should really demonstrate an urban railway which, in Japan, often has 6 or more tracks.

 

I agree not to make a model of one area but there are some prototypical events that are repeated throughout the network:

 

1. Shinkansen stations are parallel to local stations, usually constructed over;

 

2. Subways are often above ground for part of the journey;

 

3. Private railways often have separate stations but adjacent to JR network;

 

4. Branch lines often have dedicated platform;

 

5. Urban > suburban > rural can happen very quickly, eg: north Kyoto;

 

6. Over 70% of Japan is mountainous.  How about your layout?

 

If you get the prototypical events correct then your layout can be Yokohama one day, Kyoto the next, and Fukuoka the third.  Also, for such a large layout I recommend owning 2 x each consist, or more, except for 1-off originals.  For example, I have 4 x 115 Suka color to make my layout look realistic at times.

 

If you intend to go DCC then you will need to design and wire DCC from the start.  Retrofit a layout of this size is impossible.  If you are not going DCC I suggest smaller, self contained loops.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Ochanomizu

[NJHA]

Hi. 

 

I like the track plan, like you say its ambitious. 

 

One thing though. One of the issues that forced me into changing my layout several times were the track crossings. I use 60mm as a minimum clearance value and i try not to get over 3% incline. That means i need around 2m of track to make 60mm clearance.    

Are your crossings on the same level? Or on different levels? Are you considering inclines? 

 

Just my small input as i am still a baby on N scale modelling. 

[lurkingknight]

yes, that's one among many of the things I'm having issues visualizing in my mind to design around. I doubt I have enough run for grade to be able to do a clean pass. Though I wouldn't be resistant to do a lower than grade portion of track to help provide the height.. while one crosses over the lower track and slope down as well. There's a good chance that even after settling on a plan that when things start getting put together it just won't work, even with the most meticulous planning. Definitely more headscratching to be done about it. That will definitely come as I learn more about how to use anyrail.

 

There's also a possibility that I have to walk away from the whole idea, so I don't want to get anyone's hopes up. The project is set that I can walk away from it after the station diorama is built... Once the table is built though, that starts to make things a lot harder to walk away from. Up until that point, track kits can be bought and sold, as well as buildings and such, but once things start turning more permanent it becomes exponentially harder to walk away.

[Mudkip Orange]

I love it. You're obviously going to want to add in yards and short spurs and whatnot, but you can always work that out as you build.

[lurkingknight]

Nothing sets off my ocd quite like this:

 

 

instances of this are starting to build a strong case to mix in flex track.

[Densha]

While the program doesn't connect the pieces because of a 1-3mm difference, in reality such small differences are not really noticeable (especially in this case). Just move the straight tracks a tiny bit to the right and it'll fit.

[lurkingknight]

I know.... but I know in my heart it doesn't line up... and it drives me nuts :P

[kvp]

 

I know.... but I know in my heart it doesn't line up... and it drives me nuts

The problem is that the program allows a certain amount of misalignement when connecting two pieces to close a gap, but it always aligns them perfectly when connecting on one end only. If you could connect them slightly misaligned on each piece, then the you could close the gap without cheating. A long section of sectional track can be used as a long piece of flex track, with only a little flexibility. The correct solution would be to add a misalign option to every join, so you could misalign them within the given tolerances to close gaps like this. Also, sometimes the error is in the rounding precision of the program and when calculated by hand to a higher precision, they disappear.

[lurkingknight]

that's true. I'm surprised that nobody has programmed mathematical solutions into the software... you have an entire library of bits... would it be that difficult for the software to generate a solution that drew from the library of parts? 

 

meanwhile... getting smaller...

 

 

 

and smaller still:

 

 

[NJHA]

The first drawing presents a problem. You have a line that goes under another and them over it very near. That means climbing around 10cm (at least) in a small space so you may get insane inclines. 3 level track plans require a lot of space if the lines are to cross. 

On the second drawing it seems it is not normal to have lines crossing over stations. 

 

Aside from that... i like both plans, although i prefer the first one. 

[lurkingknight]

the 2nd one isn't very clear, but the diagonal station is a viaduct, so the 2 lines crossing underneath should have enough room to pass under it. The middle line drops even farther below the ground level and should have enough room to clear the line that crosses over it. If not if that's the plan I go with, I can extend that top left loop so it has enough room to drop down below the ground level.

 

The first plan is just way too big, I have to cut it down some, also like you said, there's not enough room for grade to lift the line to viaduct level in the turns I've put in. Maybe I'll take that idea and play with a bit more.

 

The space concern becomes pretty significant when I have the overlapping stations perpendicular. At a 45 it gives me less width overall.. it's less of an L or X shape.

 

The 3rd one gives me the least trouble in terms of track height as it's only 1 cross over... being the station but what concerns me with that one is the exit from the top of the viaduct station may not be long enough to drop back down to ground level as well. Also the distance between the 2 platforms is significantly shorter on that route as well. I may end up having to extend that out farther.

 

there's one more variation I haven't tried yet, and that would be doing the cross at 22.5 degrees instead of 90 and 45. That should yield the flattest but longest in length design.

 

 

I'm trying to avoid putting just 2 loops crossing over each other in a simple figure 8 but unwinding the route is making things take up a lot more space.

 

I laid out my v11 and put my extra 248 straights into it to see what the proportions are like as well as park my 11 car yamanote on the straight to see how it all looks. I wish there were 447/480 viaduct turns, that would open up a few more options as well. I might have to order a v12 and a v13 on my next order to see more of the proportions and elevations.

 

The other option I could do is abandon most of the city idea and on half of the layout do a massive terminal, complete with 4-6 emu platforms and expand the viaduct to a full shinkansen station. hmm.. more food for thought... and dreams of spending money not yet accumulated.

[NJHA]

You are suffering from layout building "virus" :)

 

We always think we need more complexity, more twists and turns, more levels, etc and in the end we realize that our dream layout, though great on paper has some problems. It is either too steep grades, or things that are not setup the way they should , like viaducts crossing over stations, that prevent you from looking at the train on the station and make small corrections a bit troublesome (the viaduct will get in the way).

I also started my layout with a crazy and complex figure,trying to put as much track and complexity as i could. Then i realized that in paper was great, but there was potential for trains colliding head on, if wrong turnout decisions were made and I also had high grades (near 3%) with tight clearance.

 

So, with a lot of help from the forum members i reduced complexity, and came up with a final design that i like.

The problem with sectional track is that odd angles are difficult to come by. With kato, you get 15 and 45º up to a point, then only 30º for single track. For double track you have to consider the easement curves for the superelevated track. So if you try to combine things get complicated. With Tomix you get a bit more options but the track is also a bit more expensive.

With a large layout, track value climbs way to fast, and before you know it, you are spending a lot of money in track, leaving us short of funds to buy the trains.   

 

Have you tried crossing at 30 or 60º ? Its easy to come by, and easy to undo on the end.