Proposed HO/HOn3 Layout. Colorado Midland/D&RG/C&S

[dcarrell8]

Please have a look at this track plan and see if I have made any obvious errors in planning.  Most Radius's are 24" or larger in HO, I tried to keep things at 18"-20" for the narrow gauge line.  Room is 26X30.  Large yard is a representation of Leadville. Narrow Gauge Yard is Como, Division point yard at Basalt with a branchline to Aspen.  Staging underneath Leadville Yard.

Black = Standard Gauge
Red = Dual Guage
Green = Narrow.

Thank You for comments and input.

[C855B]

Here's your track plan so everybody can see it without downloading the PDF:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[dcarrell8]

Here's your track plan so everybody can see it without downloading the PDF:

(Attachment Link)

Thank You!
I was just working on creating a jpg version. 

[C855B]

Ambitious. I know nothing about ambitious. [Have a couple of moments? Read here.]

Three things I noticed. First is you have a big space. That's a helluva start. Second, that is a lot of dual-gauge, and a dual-gauge wye, to boot. Wow. Are there store-bought dual-gauge turnouts in HO? If yes, great, if not, the complexity is going to be a big time eater if you hand-build. I count 10 true dual-gauge turnouts.

Third... uh... how are you getting in and out of the layout? Helicopter?   With that out of the way... are you figuring on a duck-under? Unfortunately, that's not visiting operator friendly, and you are definitely intending to build a multi-operator railroad. You might try to work a lift bridge or swing-away into the plan.

[dcarrell8]

Ambitious. I know nothing about ambitious. [Have a couple of moments? Read here.]

Three things I noticed. First is you have a big space. That's a helluva start. Second, that is a lot of dual-gauge, and a dual-gauge wye, to boot. Wow. Are there store-bought dual-gauge turnouts in HO? If yes, great, if not, the complexity is going to be a big time eater if you hand-build. I count 10 true dual-gauge turnouts.

Third... uh... how are you getting in and out of the layout? Helicopter?   With that out of the way... are you figuring on a duck-under? Unfortunately, that's not visiting operator friendly, and you are definitely intending to build a multi-operator railroad. You might try to work a lift bridge or swing-away into the plan.

I do plan on building my own turnouts with a fast-tracks jig.  Their dual fixtures will create both HO HOn3 turnouts so it's kind of a bonus.  Specialty turnouts may be built by http://jamestowntrains.com/ .  Yes, I have a hinged lift bridge in the bottom right hand corner near the door, I plan to have it swing up and to the right.  My real concern is with the grades and radius's.  I have it all worked out at the moment at a 2% grade.  I plan to test both grades and radii before committing to the design.  I hear that Brass locomotives require larger Radius's than the newer models that typically have a missing flange on the inner drivers.

[Angus Shops]

It looks to me that a lot of your mainline is within inches of the front of the layout. This will limit the scenic possibilities with little possibility for any foreground variation.
Geoff

[Dave V]

This is ambitious!  Can't wait to see it take shape!

[Hawghead]

Wow, that's a lot of railroad!

It's a very ambitious project but it'll be exciting to watch it come together, I'm looking forward to it,

I hear that Brass locomotives require larger Radius's than the newer models that typically have a missing flange on the inner drivers.

Actually if the prototype had blind flanges the brass models usually do also.  Where the radius requirements of brass sometimes get bigger is that the lead trucks don't have as much swing due to cylinders having closer to prototypical dimensions.  If you keep the HOn3 radius to a minimum of 20" you shouldn't have any trouble with C&S motive power.

Scott
 

[Cajonpassfan]

Well, ambition can be good, and the question of “how much railroad” to build is very personal. More power to you!
A couple of thoughts though: The plan uses the given space very efficiently, but perhaps too much so in my opinion? A layout this large and complex will require a number of operators and they will require isles to move about freely, especially around yards and local switching. I don’t know your isle widths, but I’m guessing they are a bit tight (and may get tighter as construction progresses with tracks close to edges).I don’t mind an occasional tight isle, as long as there are plenty of wider “passing sidings”  nearby. It gets very uncomfortable when guys are constantly squeezing by when working a yard job, especially as we get older and wider ourselves...
My second question is about your radii, especially the standard gauge. A lot of it depends on your era, with older equipment being more forgiving. Still, Leadville was on the mainline through the Rockies and the grades required big, heavy power early on....
I do love the overall concept, so I’ll be sure to follow this with interest.
Good luck,

Otto K.

[dcarrell8]

Well, ambition can be good, and the question of “how much railroad” to build is very personal. More power to you!
A couple of thoughts though: The plan uses the given space very efficiently, but perhaps too much so in my opinion? A layout this large and complex will require a number of operators and they will require isles to move about freely, especially around yards and local switching. I don’t know your isle widths, but I’m guessing they are a bit tight (and may get tighter as construction progresses with tracks close to edges).I don’t mind an occasional tight isle, as long as there are plenty of wider “passing sidings”  nearby. It gets very uncomfortable when guys are constantly squeezing by when working a yard job, especially as we get older and wider ourselves...
My second question is about your radii, especially the standard gauge. A lot of it depends on your era, with older equipment being more forgiving. Still, Leadville was on the mainline through the Rockies and the grades required big, heavy power early on....
I do love the overall concept, so I’ll be sure to follow this with interest.
Good luck,
Too K.
Otto K.

Thank you very much for the comments. This kind of input is exactly what I was hoping for. 

You raise concerns that I also have, and it's good to have a second opinion that confirms my fears to keep me on the right track!  As far operators go, more than likely i will be the only one operating.  I live in the panhandle of Oklahoma in a very VERY small town.  More than likely it will only ever be me and my grandchildren (if I ever have any) operate.  That being said, it may indeed be too much railroad.  My Isle widths are Mostly 30 inches and the tightest is 28 as I recall. 

[dcarrell8]

It looks to me that a lot of your mainline is within inches of the front of the layout. This will limit the scenic possibilities with little possibility for any foreground variation.
Geoff

Very good point. It might be back to the drawing board...

[dcarrell8]

This is ambitious!  Can't wait to see it take shape!

I may tend to over complicate things....

I have started a Youtube channel to document the construction if you are interested. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjMqL6WnMFLggSlOk8-Snqg?view_as=subscriber

Right now I only have one video, It discusses the issues I'm faced constructing the interior of my metal building where the future railroad will be. It may be several months until I'm ready to start bench work on the railroad.  I'm wanting a rock solid track plan before I begin construction.

~Dennis

[dcarrell8]

Wow, that's a lot of railroad!

It's a very ambitious project but it'll be exciting to watch it come together, I'm looking forward to it,

Actually if the prototype had blind flanges the brass models usually do also.  Where the radius requirements of brass sometimes get bigger is that the lead trucks don't have as much swing due to cylinders having closer to prototypical dimensions.  If you keep the HOn3 radius to a minimum of 20" you shouldn't have any trouble with C&S motive power.

Scott

Thanks for the input!
I didn't know that actual prototypes had blind flanges!  I had assumed this was just to help models on tighter raddii!

[Hawghead]

Dennis,

The C&S narrow gauge used fairly diminutive motive power, 2-6-0s and 2-8-0s, so you shouldn't have any trouble with 18" radius curves, but I'd still keep a 20" minimum if you can.  Harry Brunk wrote many many articles and a couple of books on the building a narrow gauge layout of the C&S, for a project of this size I'd say they are a must have.  You mentioned that this would be a project that you would be doing almost or all of the work on yourself.  I think you could be looking at many years to get this to a stage where it could be considered even close to finished.  I'm not trying to dissuade you, if you have the money, time and resources for a project this big then by all means "you go girl".    I would make one suggestion though.  At the bottom of the plan near the door is what appears to be a small town with dual gauge and narrow gauge switches and track.  Start with building that small section and see how it goes.  Then make a final decision if the rest of the layout is something you want to continue with.

Scott   

[dcarrell8]

Dennis,

The C&S narrow gauge used fairly diminutive motive power, 2-6-0s and 2-8-0s, so you shouldn't have any trouble with 18" radius curves, but I'd still keep a 20" minimum if you can.  Harry Brunk wrote many many articles and a couple of books on the building a narrow gauge layout of the C&S, for a project of this size I'd say they are a must have.  You mentioned that this would be a project that you would be doing almost or all of the work on yourself.  I think you could be looking at many years to get this to a stage where it could be considered even close to finished.  I'm not trying to dissuade you, if you have the money, time and resources for a project this big then by all means "you go girl".    I would make one suggestion though.  At the bottom of the plan near the door is what appears to be a small town with dual gauge and narrow gauge switches and track.  Start with building that small section and see how it goes.  Then make a final decision if the rest of the layout is something you want to continue with.

Scott

Thanks for the comments Scott.

I do plan on building the time-saver town of "Malta" first!   I have nearly all of the components purchased.  I plan for it to be a removable module, and documenting the build on youtube. 

You do make a very good point, one that I'm aware of. It may be too much railroad for me.  The town of "Malta" may change my mind to simplify the project.  That being said, Ive waited over 20 years to build a model railroad and I'm very motivated to actually do it and I will need something to do in my retirement!!