T-TRAK: PRR MG Interlocking

[chicken45]

Include a model of the rooftop antenna as an attention diverter:

I had not seen that photo before, but that antenna has been there for a since PRR and I do plan on modeling it! I'm going to paint it pink to distract the viewer.

[chicken45]

In relation to the Kato no. 4 turnout and these no.4 crossovers -
  They are really perfect for DCC...
Set the screws so the frog is powered and set the other screw so the turnouts are NON-power routing.
This way ALL tracks are powered; always. No need to use insulated unijoiners anywhere as the turnouts all already gapped/isolated.
   
 The way you have your track plan suggests that, for it to be used in a T-TRAK set up, that the foremost line will be red track and the next will be yellow... therefore the two rearmost tracks will also be part of the yellow line as far as power goes.
Remember that, in order to be able to actually use these crossovers between red and yellow, the yellow line power must be reversed so that both lines are the same polarity. Of course, I’m making an assumption that you will power
the module with standard T-TRAK wiring, using the BWWB (blue-white-white-blue) Kato-referenced wire drops as it refers to red and yellow tracks.

Thanks @arbomambo !
My goal is to do things "the right way" for this, but I do have some questions.
In in the real world on Pennsy's 4 track mainline, the tracks were numbered from the bottom up, 1 to 4.
Track 1 was eastward freight.
Track 2 was eastward passenger.
Track 3 was westward freight.
Track 4 was westward passenger.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]


So, I was thinking of having tracks 2 and 3 being my standard TTrack 2 tracks since there is an east and a west line, keeping true to the prototype.
Is that doable or recommended?

[pdx1955]

T-TRAK  is very flexible  so I don't see an issue with doing that. It makes it easier in the future  also if you had transition  modules going from two to four tracks on either side. The crossover wiring issue still applies . You might want to remove the rail joiners on the unused tracks temporarily  so there's  no confusion  on what pair is connected  up in a larger  group setup.

[chicken45]

I think I have this figured out...gonna do the top two tracks as yellow line, and bottom two as red line. Again, I will eventually do some sort of transition modules.
So that means these will be wired BW BW WB WB.

I drilled out some holes in case I ever need to change the power routing switch options.
I did this by...using a colored pencil and taking a rubbing off the bottom of the switch and using that as a template to drill holes. It worked great.


I tried the @robert3985 method for painting track- camo black and brown.
Here's the black and brown:


This came out a bit dark for me so I tried just using the brown.


None of this ballast is glued down here, and I forgot to sharpshoot paint some individual times the second time, but I think this is turning out nicely.

[Dave V]

You may find as I did that you have to go back and pick individual grains off the ties, but that's something you can do over time (and it appears we'll have plenty of that over the next year or so!).  Otherwise, I agree...that looks quite good!  The ultra-flat cammo paint actually makes the whole tie look flat-shaped by preventing the differential reflection of light that gives away the concrete tie contour.  I was skeptical about how effective painting the concrete ties would be given their odd shape, but wow, the ballasted track in the last photo looks indistinguishable from well-painted code 80 flex.  Well done!

[jpec]

It's tre good...

 

[chicken45]

Big thanks to @Ed Kapuscinski today for helping me figure out the wiring. 
Next I will glue the track down.

[Ed Kapuscinski]

Big thanks to @Ed Kapuscinski today for helping me figure out the wiring. 
Next I will glue the track down.

It was my pleasure to help you

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[Point353]

Next I will glue the track down.

If you'd rather not glue the track down, using small (#0) wood screws is another option.
https://cir-kitconcepts.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=12&products_id=166

[robert3985]

@chicken45 The track is looking pretty good.  Amazing what a little rattle-can ultra-flat paint can do!  I also note that the shiny railheads strongly distract from the funky rail profile of Unitrack, much more than if the rails were unpainted.  The idea of shooting Camo Brown directly from the top after shooting everything Camo Black, was to differentiate between the railweb and the color of the ties.  You can get complete coverage on your tie tops with just a bit of overspray on the sides of the rails even with a light coat, but with that large vertical slab on the sides of Kato Unitrack, I don't know if it would worth it since that is going to attract a lot of overspray anyway.

@Dave V is spot-on with suggesting that after you've ballasted your track, picked the stones off the tops of the ties and touched them up, that you weather it slightly by progressively airbrushing an appropriate color down the center of the track until it looks right...which will, at the same time, disguise any plastic roadbed peeking up through your ballast rocks.

@arbomambo Out of curiosity, is it an absolute requirement on T-Track modules to use Kato Unitrack everywhere?  From a functional standpoint, I could use the ends of Unitrack sections to allow normal coupling up of my modules with everybody else, but join ME C70 flex to the cut-down Kato Unitrack ends for the mainlines, with ME C70 #6 turnouts, and used ME C55 or even hand-lay C40 track and turnouts for industrial spurs, sidings, etc.  This arrangement would run everything, including pizza cutter flanges (yes, even on hand laid C40 on PCB ties), and look exponentially more realistic between the module ends.  If my modules were dedicated, could I forego the Unitrack ends...or just make my modules the equivalent of 2 or 3 standard length T-Track modules...with no joining tracks needed since there wouldn't be any joints?

@chicken45 One of the things that you're going to find when you start taking photos of your finely detailed,  painted and weathered cars and engines, that you've spent hours making "just right" to your tastes, is that the Kato Unitrack they're running on is going to jump out at you and slap you across your face when you look at your photos...no matter how much effort you've put into improving its stock look.  As @Dave V has so correctly pointed out, our eyes are a lot more forgiving than sharp photos are, which will show the excellent work and detailing on your rolling stock and engines, but also show all of the flaws of Kato Unitrack.  For some, it's not important and that's okay, but for me...it seems ironic to exert the effort to detail up our models to make 'em look "real", then run 'em on toy track.

Now, if you were just going to go run at the shows with the T-Track club, then that's just fine, but since you're designing this primarily for photographing your model cars and engines with a bit of running too...maybe if T-Track will allow you to insert another track brand between Unitrack ends, doing that would be more photogenic, and ultimately more satisfying for you.

Anyway, your efforts to make your photo diorama a small Layout Design Element fashioned after a prototype location is highly admirable, and I look forward to keeping track of your progress!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore
 

[MK]

T-Trak standards do not require Kato Unitrack throughout a module.  As long as the ends are Unitrack to mate with other modules you are ok.  You should avoid true Code 55 to avoid pizza cutter issues as you never know what is going to traverse your module.

[Dave V]

Thinking about what @robert3985 said, I'd like to see a side shot to see just how much the paint has hidden the wonky web (or lack thereof) of the code 80 rail.  Paint on the rail web is magical in its ability to visually shrink the rail height.  At least that's what I tell myself while I'm using code 70 rail in HO for a railroad whose absolute heaviest rail was 57 lb and who still had miles of 40 lb mainline rail by 1952...   

[robert3985]

T-Trak standards do not require Kato Unitrack throughout a module.  As long as the ends are Unitrack to mate with other modules you are ok.  You should avoid true Code 55 to avoid pizza cutter issues as you never know what is going to traverse your module.

@MK "Code 55" doesn't have pizza cutter problems.  ATLAS code 55 has pizza cutter problems.  Micro Engineering 55 and Peco 55 don't have any flange interference problems whatsoever.

Just thought I'd make sure that fact was clear! 

Additionally, hand-laid Code 40 using PCB ties every fifth tie also doesn't have pizza cutter problems.  I had some on some Ntrak modules decades ago before the term "pizza cutter" used for oversized flanges was invented, and nothing ever had problems running on it, including early German and Japanese stuff some of the club members insisted on running on my UP mainlines.

But, that is good to know, and maybe I'll build a few in the near future to take to a show if I don't want to transport my layout to do the same!

Cheerio!
Bob Gilmore

[Point353]

Amazing what a little rattle-can ultra-flat paint can do!  I also note that the shiny railheads strongly distract from the funky rail profile of Unitrack, much more than if the rails were unpainted.  The idea of shooting Camo Brown directly from the top after shooting everything Camo Black, was to differentiate between the railweb and the color of the ties.  You can get complete coverage on your tie tops with just a bit of overspray on the sides of the rails even with a light coat, but with that large vertical slab on the sides of Kato Unitrack, I don't know if it would worth it since that is going to attract a lot of overspray anyway.

Shouldn't the two uphill/westbound tracks (also) be oversprayed with Camo Sand paint to represent the rails having been sanded?

[chicken45]

@robert3985 thanks for that! My first go, I did the black on the sides of the rails, but I think my overspray made everything too dark after I applied the brown. I suppose I could have masked it, but either way, I am trying to minimize the unitrack by not drawing attention to it. 

@Point353 yes, there will be sand on the uphills, but I'm going to ballast first.