Track Plan V1

[dunnyrail]

Just a few ideas & key elements when you design your layout on the given space of ca. 3 x 5 m

• Provide 2 stations so that 2 trains (one clockwise/ one counterclockwise) don’t have to cross always on the same station
• Use R3 as minimum Radius of 1.200 mm
• Minimize the gradient: 300 mm clearance realized with a R3 circle of 3.700 mm circumference plus the straight sections will give you an approx. track length of 8.000mm for the gradient of 300mm/8.000mm = 0,037 = 3,7% (or 1:27 – like on the Selketalbahn…)
  
• The inner loop will have sufficient track length for the gradient. When you provide in B a similar station like A (with no gradient in the station) , you will interrupt the gradient of the outer loop – this reduces the effective track length and leads to a steeper grade (300mm / 5.800mm = 0,052 = 5,2% or 1:19) – this is a grade rather for a cog rail.
  
• To solve this issue you can re-apply the Harzbahn solution for the old Drängetal-Station or the Station "Goetheweg" : Provide a siding with no gradient where the uphill trans can push back (and “boil steam”), and let the main track keep the gradient constant. This makes train crossing a bit more complicated, but can bring more operational life to your layout.
• http://www.forum.gartenbahn-stammtisch.de/viewtopic.php?t=1603
• Dotted lines indicate a few sidings to be installed later, e.g. gravelworks / logging area etc.

Again - this is just to encourage you to think about some potential options.

View attachment 238168

Goetheweg is a great solution. When I visited KentKeith's line with Stockers and Muns we were running anti clockwise. Inevitably slightly quicker runners than myself cought up with me. I just backed into
A siding Goetheweg Style let them pass then I carried on. Added so
Much more enjoyment to an already enjoyable running session.

 

[JimmyB]

Thanks lots of good advice, but due to cost, and only having weekend spare (if SWMBO allows) I can only take this slowly, so here is my Rev II

View media item 3113

 

[idlemarvel]

That's better. I would try and remove that kink in the inner loop right hand side. I know if you use track planners they have little tolerance so to get things to join up you have do some strange things. In reality the track laying process is more forgiving so try and use the same radius curves and it will probably be okay. Don't have a curve straight curve straight curve section as you appear to have, it will make the trains jerk which at best looks weird and at worse may cause uncoupling.

Perhaps think about making the passing loop a little longer by putting the points as the last curves in the outer loop. So instead of having (from left to right) RH point straight section LH point have LH point longer straight section RH point. You might then need a short straight section between the passing loop points to keep the gap wide enough.