Topics

Next Test Layout 50" x 88" ...Before I go on to make an even Bigger Mistake.

Mark Cartwright
 

Years, ago; a friend of mine got this Gleam in his eye...Where you going? I said, To meet up with my next ex-wife.
Yes, he married her and yes, they got divorced.
One might think, we could eventually learn; but where's the fun in that !
=====
Before, I go on to making an even Bigger Mistake in a Main Layout....I have decided to first create a 50" x 88" Test Layout, just beyond the ramifications/specifications of NMRA's RP-11.
=====
Perhaps I should mention, I have tested nearly 200 different N Scale Locomotives and 199 of them run effectively on 28/30" Radius at 1.5% or lesser Grades, along with #10 or greater turnouts.
What I don't know is what happens to the Fleet at between 22" to a 24"radius; with only #10 layouts on a standard grade of 1.5%....Also to complete a turn yet travel over an Operational (Lionel) Bridge with a full train in tow. Took me some time, to learn NOT to test a layout with a single locomotive.
Ever try to run a prototypical train of today with 158 cars, with 8 consisted, speed matched locomotives?
Good Luck with that !
=====
To begin with...
This Test Layout will begin with basically two parallel Outside Radius.
Beyond that ?

> I really do not know, I have a specific need in me to create a Semi-Begginng Rail Layout, best described as what the Central Pacific was doing to Northern California circa 1881; but what I will probably end up with is something more akin to the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe circa 1900 in actual trackage.
WYE?
Cause that is what I grew up with....Cross-Tie Walking the old rails of the ATSF, Southern Pacific and Western Pacific. Many of these old rails have been taken out by Modern UP and BNSF Railroaders. Yet, I find within myself a mindset of what I grew up to know. Maybe BNSF/UP modern specifications; for my next Main Layout, but I have no plans for Concrete Ties on this layout; nor high speed rail.
Instead....(belaying my totes full of Kato Unitrack, nearly all salvaged from other people's layouts) I am considering for this one to go Atlas Code 55 with it's ready made #10 Turnouts.
I may create one or two #12's with Fast Track Jigs or already partially assembled by BTS. These will probably all be controlled by ESU Servers.
========
Further, what I am not yet satisfied with ...Are any basic Track Plans as found on the internet.
One of the best selected, for example has two major conflicts in it, which may derail my N Scale Brass Steam Locomotives with DCC and Sound.
Further, I have already grown flustered with the basic rectangular shape. This frustration began nearly as soon as I began an attempt to lay down some basic Northern California Scenery, along with renditions of prototype Civil War Era buildings, known to exist in 1895. However, as soon as I sided this 50" x 88" layout with yet another hollow (32"x71") door, recreating it into an even bigger L Shaped Layout, a smile returned to my lips.
===
This all prompted me to move out of my downstairs bedroom and move upstairs; taking over the entire floor.  (My main Train Room is below this.)
Seems I can't get out of my own way.
===
Now back to DCC Wiring....?
I have been using Kato Unitrack mostly for the past 5 years.
Today, at least for this test layout, I am considering using Atlas Code 55...but not on modules as I have previously created.
Instead, going back to a near old school method of continuously soldered track with a drop down 12 Gauge Lead, every 18 inches.
At best there may be just one snap together junction, at the apex of the L.
Both Tables so to speak; are on their own rolling base. However, even at this juncture, I may solder it all as well.
Here is my Mindset of Today.
LokSound DCC in N Scale Brass Locomotives, with their DCC Controller being an ESU ECoS.
Derails, Glitches and Decoder Resets...Oh My!
I would really like to stop divorcing all my layouts, as I have done so many times before.
I just turned 65, I am gettin too old to Continue to Begin Again; so I am considering a continuous solder.
Mark

See the problem yet with a 50" Width on one side but only a 32" width to the other?
I may soon regret not widening the 32" width to at least 40 inches.
This L offshoot however, will not directly affect my double 24/22" Parallel Test Ovals.