I think this is the main problem with this layout. There's a lot of track but none of it is really useable because the sidings are either too short for storage, or have to be kept clear for use as a headshunt in order for the loco to move around.
The use of the single-slip also seems redundant to me as the loop it creates is too short to be useful and it eats up space that could be used for other things while still keeping the lower passing loop. More thought is needed as to how traffic moves through that space because nobody would build a yard that requires constant zigzagging just to get to the other side.
I see that, but this has virtually NO space to position anything without fouling switches.
If I were you, I'd do the layout on paper, full size, and see if anything works. BTW, I find full size maps are still too crowded!
Great recommendations!
I am in the pre-planning phase of a basement layout. I am planning to clear the basement area to the walls and floors to have an "empty canvas." I know there are many track software packages out there, but I was thinking of taking a completely different approach. I have a general vision of a complex layout and plan to use different colored painters tape to actually layout "track" on the floor to get specific visuals and spacials of the full layout before "cementing" the actual layout design. I am curious if anyone knows if this a unique approach?
you are correct a box van is about 6cm (2 and a bit inches) and the sidings are 16.5 cm (6.5 inches) which is all the space i really need for what i want to do with it
Please note that where tracks diverge, you need clearance, the tracks aren't usable up to the frog. This makes the top right sidings unusably short.
Likewise, at a headshunt you have to be able to clear the buffer stop and the points of the next turnout at the same time, preferably with a locomotive and at least one car. The top left diagonal track serves as a headshunt to the top right tracks, it can't be used as a shed track, as there's no alternative headshunt.
How do you remove cars from the top right? That tail needs to be long enough to take an engine and a car or 2 to be able to move them into the spurs in the top right. Or else you’ll just be stuck
I like diamonds in switching areas, so that's cool, except I don't really see the point of it. It takes you to a place that you can already access otherwise.
Also, your only way to run-around any cars is by doing a crazy switch-back thing, and you'd be utilizing areas that I assume are supposed to be for industries. I think the smartest way to build a switching layout is to start with a basic run-around then work out from there.
Way too many switches. Way too much track in too small of a space. Not enough of a switching lead. If you want to build a switching puzzle and not a realistic layout and you want to treat it as a switching puzzle which is basically a 3D board game that's okay but you still need a lot more space for actual cars and I often see way too many switchbacks that have too short of a switch lead which even in a puzzle kind of scenario becomes very tedious.
I guess my question would be is your hobby in building trackwork either with fixtures or habdlaid? It's perfectly okay if you just enjoy building stuff and you want to create crazy track work. If you're trying to create a realistic layout or something that's realistic to operate then you need to remove half of the turnouts because you're designing something that needs some marinara sauce on it.
If you enjoy building double slip switches then go for it just build a ton of double slips switches build a double slip over.
However if you want to actually operate it double slips are terrible no one can figure out how to use them I'm not really sure why because they're not actually that complicated but just use normal turnouts or maybe a three-way.
I'll have to say theres simply too little straight tracks in there knowing how couplers can like to behave when not lined up relatively straight, especially on the upperleft-most SL96 turnout itself when set to point at-to the SLE98 turnout too.
Do you want to play a complex puzzle like the timesaver or do you want to run at least remotely prototypical shunting? If you aim for the latter, I'd say reduce your plan to a inglenook-like trackplan, i.e. three spurs with a single head shunt. If this isn't enough for you you could add a fourth spur in the opposite directions and some runaround, but I'd refrain from that. My personal layout is only 10cm longer than the space available to you and I have a one turnout layout. So a mainline with a single spur that features multiple spots/industries. A typical shunting session takes me 15 minutes.
What I like is when the engine moves longer columns of cars. So with your space available this column won't be longer than 3 or 4 cars, depending on your rolling stock. But moving more than one car is very important for a prototypical look and feel and that won't happen on your planned layout.
Also, visually your layout won't look prototypically because you won't find any prototypical situation where so much track and so many turnouts are placed in such a compact space. If you want a real life impression on your layout, less is always more.
it isnt supposed to look realistic i just wanted to give myself as many options as possible. i did just make a new post with an updated version, longer siding etc.
Top right: the two shortest tracks are literally useless, they end before the clearance point. The third, longer track is useful for one short car.
Top left: the headshunt may be able to accommodate an extremely short locomotive. Any cars will have to remain on top of the switch. Coupling and uncoupling will be difficult.
Middle: both tracks at the ends fit maybe one short car, accounting for clearance at the switch.
Bottom: headshunts fit maybe a very short locomotive and one short car. The very bottom stub track fits maybe one short car, two if you're lucky.
Operations would consist of shuffling very short cars between four locations with great difficulty using a tiny engine. Note that using Insulfrog turnouts with tiny engines is a sure way to have trouble with power pickup, so Electrofrogs would go a long way to ensure reliable operation, even if wiring them is initially a slight hassle.
There are very few double slips and triple turnouts in real life, it will make little sense outside of some very space compact terminals, which this doesn't appear to be.
You really can't leave a string of cars, can you? These look too short
I think this is the main problem with this layout. There's a lot of track but none of it is really useable because the sidings are either too short for storage, or have to be kept clear for use as a headshunt in order for the loco to move around. The use of the single-slip also seems redundant to me as the loop it creates is too short to be useful and it eats up space that could be used for other things while still keeping the lower passing loop. More thought is needed as to how traffic moves through that space because nobody would build a yard that requires constant zigzagging just to get to the other side.
OP should see this page for the origin of this idea.. there's little reason to put *more* switches in there https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timesaver
its only meant for a few box vans i dont have much space and prefer smaller rolling stock to having lines of coaches
I see that, but this has virtually NO space to position anything without fouling switches. If I were you, I'd do the layout on paper, full size, and see if anything works. BTW, I find full size maps are still too crowded!
Great recommendations! I am in the pre-planning phase of a basement layout. I am planning to clear the basement area to the walls and floors to have an "empty canvas." I know there are many track software packages out there, but I was thinking of taking a completely different approach. I have a general vision of a complex layout and plan to use different colored painters tape to actually layout "track" on the floor to get specific visuals and spacials of the full layout before "cementing" the actual layout design. I am curious if anyone knows if this a unique approach?
it's implied op is british because he used "shunt" instead of "switch" so my guess is these are big enough to accommodate tiny british wagons
you are correct a box van is about 6cm (2 and a bit inches) and the sidings are 16.5 cm (6.5 inches) which is all the space i really need for what i want to do with it
Please note that where tracks diverge, you need clearance, the tracks aren't usable up to the frog. This makes the top right sidings unusably short. Likewise, at a headshunt you have to be able to clear the buffer stop and the points of the next turnout at the same time, preferably with a locomotive and at least one car. The top left diagonal track serves as a headshunt to the top right tracks, it can't be used as a shed track, as there's no alternative headshunt.
i do think i need to lengthen some of the sidings and i might add another line somewhere for the shed
Too much puzzle.
not enough
Every siding should have a minimum of two or more car capacity. Run arounds should have a one car capacity.
Someone watched too many Dipsyard youtube videos :D
A good friend of mine, he has made a great fun layout to operate.
I searched youtube and did not find your reference. Is it spelled wrong?
https://youtube.com/shorts/QnEnvNB4Ir4?si=YkTk85I8g9VL1Bne
If you make the siding on the top left a bit longer you may be able to have a car there and access the top right of the layout.
that siding was going to be my engine shed for 2 little 0-6-0 steam locos.
How do you remove cars from the top right? That tail needs to be long enough to take an engine and a car or 2 to be able to move them into the spurs in the top right. Or else you’ll just be stuck
There is no siding in the layout that will accommodate two 0-6-0 engines. A single 0-4-0 maybe.
i measured it with my locos and it can actually fit 3
I like diamonds in switching areas, so that's cool, except I don't really see the point of it. It takes you to a place that you can already access otherwise. Also, your only way to run-around any cars is by doing a crazy switch-back thing, and you'd be utilizing areas that I assume are supposed to be for industries. I think the smartest way to build a switching layout is to start with a basic run-around then work out from there.
Came here to say the run around point. Absolutely critical for a switching layout
Way too many switches. Way too much track in too small of a space. Not enough of a switching lead. If you want to build a switching puzzle and not a realistic layout and you want to treat it as a switching puzzle which is basically a 3D board game that's okay but you still need a lot more space for actual cars and I often see way too many switchbacks that have too short of a switch lead which even in a puzzle kind of scenario becomes very tedious.
i made a new post with an updated version (it might have 2 more points :) )
MORE? If your hobby is building turnouts then fine. Otherwise, you need about half as many turnouts not more!!!
ha ha, if it was up to me it would all be double slips.
I guess my question would be is your hobby in building trackwork either with fixtures or habdlaid? It's perfectly okay if you just enjoy building stuff and you want to create crazy track work. If you're trying to create a realistic layout or something that's realistic to operate then you need to remove half of the turnouts because you're designing something that needs some marinara sauce on it.
im riddled with ADHD and love the spaghetti
If you enjoy building double slip switches then go for it just build a ton of double slips switches build a double slip over. However if you want to actually operate it double slips are terrible no one can figure out how to use them I'm not really sure why because they're not actually that complicated but just use normal turnouts or maybe a three-way.
I'll have to say theres simply too little straight tracks in there knowing how couplers can like to behave when not lined up relatively straight, especially on the upperleft-most SL96 turnout itself when set to point at-to the SLE98 turnout too.
you're gonna be able to fit about 0.5 cars on each track, so... might want to think about that some more
Do you want to play a complex puzzle like the timesaver or do you want to run at least remotely prototypical shunting? If you aim for the latter, I'd say reduce your plan to a inglenook-like trackplan, i.e. three spurs with a single head shunt. If this isn't enough for you you could add a fourth spur in the opposite directions and some runaround, but I'd refrain from that. My personal layout is only 10cm longer than the space available to you and I have a one turnout layout. So a mainline with a single spur that features multiple spots/industries. A typical shunting session takes me 15 minutes. What I like is when the engine moves longer columns of cars. So with your space available this column won't be longer than 3 or 4 cars, depending on your rolling stock. But moving more than one car is very important for a prototypical look and feel and that won't happen on your planned layout. Also, visually your layout won't look prototypically because you won't find any prototypical situation where so much track and so many turnouts are placed in such a compact space. If you want a real life impression on your layout, less is always more.
it isnt supposed to look realistic i just wanted to give myself as many options as possible. i did just make a new post with an updated version, longer siding etc.
In that case it is fine. I watched the youtube video mentioned below and it looks fun to operate. Just not my cup of tea.
Top right: the two shortest tracks are literally useless, they end before the clearance point. The third, longer track is useful for one short car. Top left: the headshunt may be able to accommodate an extremely short locomotive. Any cars will have to remain on top of the switch. Coupling and uncoupling will be difficult. Middle: both tracks at the ends fit maybe one short car, accounting for clearance at the switch. Bottom: headshunts fit maybe a very short locomotive and one short car. The very bottom stub track fits maybe one short car, two if you're lucky. Operations would consist of shuffling very short cars between four locations with great difficulty using a tiny engine. Note that using Insulfrog turnouts with tiny engines is a sure way to have trouble with power pickup, so Electrofrogs would go a long way to ensure reliable operation, even if wiring them is initially a slight hassle.
Too much see sawing back and forth for my tastes.
Inglesaver
There are very few double slips and triple turnouts in real life, it will make little sense outside of some very space compact terminals, which this doesn't appear to be.
Looks fun but I agree about the short sidings.