Computer is unnecessary to design a layout

Layout planner John Armstrong didn't use a computer.  All one needs are graph paper, compass, straight edge, pencil, turnout dimensions, and eraser.

Pencil & Paper test

My old boss always asked me, "does it pass the pencil & paper test?"  What he was asking was "is it overall easier in the long run to just use a pencil & paper instead of a computer?"  As an example, think about if you need your car painted:  should you invest a great deal of time to overcome the learning curve to learn to properly paint a car?.....or, should you take the "easy" way out and have an expert do it?

I know that the example doesn't exactly fit, but it's close enough.  For my original railroad design I just used a pencil & graph paper.  I did photocopy turnouts and track sections so that I could actually fit them together full scale to make sure everything fit.  I'm getting ready to do an expansion and I purchased 3rd Planet(TM) and I'm stuggling to learn how to use it.  It's not that it's harder (or easier) to learn than any other track planning software, it's just what two other members in our operating group use for planning.

Some of the advantages of using track planning software:

1.) You can share designs with others and they can help you in the design process - this was a BIG plus for me.

2.) You can make changes easier, and even "run" trains around the virtual layout to find problem areas.

3.) You get a very pretty printout of your layout - you can take the file to a print shop that has a large format printer and have it printed on one large piece of paper.

4.) You can add structure, landscape, etc.. to help visualize your layout and plan more than just the track (benchwork, towns, industries, etc...)

For my friend Scott P. he learned 3rd Planet(tm) and is an expert at track planning.  He has created wonderful layouts for others using the software.  I dare say it would be much more difficult for him to do his work using pencil and paper.

I can't really say which is better - the manual or computer method.  It really depends on if you want to tackle the learning curve, pay for the software, and how many layouts you will be designing.

Rick 

Well, i know the old school.

Well, i know the old school. Have always used graph paper and pencils and it works fine. I was just wanting to have a visual of my design with buildings and extras on it and try to "run' some trains... ( I have done that many times in my head )  lol

Guess I'll just start laying track and see how it goes.

CAD - plusses and minuses

I've been using 3rd Planit for over a decade now.  I've reached the point where it's easier for me to doodle in it as it would be with paper and pencil. However, that won't be the case when you're starting out.  You'll be facing a bit of a steep learning curve (learning cliff?).

I tried the Atlas program years ago and didn't care much for it -- too rudimentary for me. Not that everyone would find it so.

You said  "I was just wanting to have a visual of my design with buildings and extras on it and try to 'run' some trains". It's possible to spend man months on adding buildings and scenery to a track plan so you can admire it in 3D, or even run trains on it.  What I've found over the years is:

• Putting detailed buildings on a layout and working on scenery contours takes a huge amount of time.
• Once you've poured a 100 hous or more into a complete 3D model of your railroad, the time investment will make you reluctant to make changes (especially significant ones) to the track plan because you don't want to throw away all your work. This is generally a bad thing because plans usually need changing several times before they become 'good'.
• Running trains in a track planning program is exciting for about the 10 minutes. After that it becomes rather ho-hum from an artistic / asthetic viewpoint.
• Attempting to duplicate the action in an op session is something I've had NO success with in a cad program. Actually, I believe you'd be better off with a 2D representation of the track plan rather than 3D for this purpose, but I still have my doubts as to it being worthwhile -- how do you simulate multiple crews making decisions about where their trains are going, which switching moves should be made next, etc.  Also, operations planning on a model RR needs to consider the movements of the crews through (sometimes over) crowded aisles, which is something CAD programs ignore.
• 3rd Planit lets you set the 'camera' to a specific height above the track. I find this useful to help look for places where I have tracks passing over each other that are too close vertically.  With the camera at 4" if I see roadbed passing through my forehead while driving a train I know there's a problem.
• I also use the 3D view to simulate the view angles of a multi-deck layout. This does NOT require beautifully detailed 3D scenery, only that the benchwork, track, and fascias be accurate. With the camera set to 67" off the floor (my eyeball height), can I see all the way to the back edge of the lower deck, peering under the bottom of the upper deck fascia.  This is NOT a total substitute for building the layout (or even a cardboard mockup), but it will show you quickly that a lower deck at 40", with an upper deck a 54", a 4" deck thickness and the lower deck being 2' deep ain't gonna be fun for me to operate - perhaps someone 7" shorter than myself would find it ok (assuming they could successfully reach in through the 'slot' between the decks and uncouple or rerail a boxcar on the rearmost lower deck track).
• I find CAD to be most effective in preventing #2 turnouts or yard ladders, keeping me honest when it comes to which curves fit (with easements), and ensuring there is sufficient room to install a maze of turnouts.  I seldom (almost NEVER) build track on a layout exactly as I designed it.  I usually think of better ways to do things once I'm looking at the actual benchwork... (perhaps because by the time the benchwork is built, I've had more time to think about it...). Read this to mean I don't build exactly the way I planned it. But the plans demonstrate to me there will be sufficient space to build what I have in mind.
• I find CAD EXTREMELY useful for telling me how long to cut each benchwork joist and where to position them. Best is putting dimensions on the plan (in their own layers so they can be turned off). This does mean accurate modeling of the benchwork but this can be done in 3D or in 2D mode (I did model the double deck benchwork of my center peninsula in accurate 3D to convince myself I wasn't making nasty mistakes with where the pieces went).
• If a track or benchwork plan is printed at 1/2" or 3/4" to the foot, I use an Architects Rule (yes, they still make these drafting tools), to measure distances in feet and inches directly off the plans. Having one of the older Epson 13" printers that could print 13" x 24" (actually up to 44") sheets of paper is really handy for this -- taping mutliple 8.5x11" sheets together is laborious and never seems to work quite right.

Final words regarding CAD programs -- if you don't know enough about track planning to draw a workable and satisfying plan with paper and pencil, you won't be able to draw one with even the best of CAD programs.

And, if you get sucked into the world of doing a 'perfect' 3D CAD model of your track plan, you'll likely have changed your hobby from model railroading to simulating model railroads (except the simulations aren't terribly useful - in my experience). Assuming you have finite time to devote to hobbies, you're likely to find all (or most of) your time is going to sitting in front of a computer - it can be almost as bad as participating in an online forum (harumpf!). If this is what you like, then no problems mate. But it's not a good way to get a layout built because it's yet another form of analysis paralysis.

If you find it hard to use a cad program, go ahead and use paper and pencil.  DO read Track Planning for Realistic Operation (at least twice) to pickup on some common layout design pratfalls (unless you're an experienced train man already). John Armstrong presents some design methodoly that will avoid the typical problems - waay too sharp turnouts and kinks where curves meet tangent track.

But if you're willing to tackle a steep learning curve, the CAD programs may work for you and with time it's possible to reach the point where you can doodle as fast on the computer as you could with paper and pencil - except you have the assurance that what you've done can be actually be constructed.

Best regards,

Charlie (yet another long post) Comstock

layout design

I tried three times to use the Atlas software and gave it up each time.  Hand drawing is much faster and easier to control.

The biggest snags in hand-drawn track layouts are keeping the radii big enough and allowing enough space(and proper geometry) for turnouts.

The first problem can be avoided by making some cardboard templates (circles) for your minimum radius and checking each radius as you draw it  (include easement while you are at it).

The second problem can be solved by going to Fast Tracks at  http://www.handlaidtrack.com/ and printing their turnout diagrams for your scale.  These will give you the proper dimensions and geometry.  Then you can draw  (or scale on a copier) these at the proper scale for your layout draft and use them to help you get the right shapes where you want them.

Art

As someone who is starting

As someone who is starting out with their own layout I can honestly say listen to Charlie's advice, layout design software is fantastic to use to help design your layout.  But you really need the basic fundamentals of layout design and realistic operations behind you before you put pen to paper or mouse to mouse pad.

I have used 3rd PlanIt and found it has an extremely steep learning curve, I have designed an older simple layout on it and it is fantastic to run a train around it in 3D.  However it is one of those programs that requires you to keep using it all the time to become proficient with it.  I'm currently using "Anyrail" at the moment which is only 2D but very simple to use and has some very good features.  If I was to design another layout again I would get my basic layout elements and design down on paper first till I was 90% satisfied with it then use the CAD/Computer software to produce a final plan.

I spent hours on my first single level shelf layout designing, redesigning, adding, removing, printing, and pouring vast amounts of time over a layout that was "never" going to be any good.  I was shown the switch that turned on the light that has changed my direction, as Charlie has said John Armstrong's book "Track Planning for Realistic Operation" is a must read.  No point designing your super layout when have no idea about the difference between facing point and trailing point turnouts or basic yard design!

And one more thing that is a valuable resource that can be used to help with your design is the vast amount of knowledge located within this forum.  Starting with the forum founder Joe Fugate's DVD series, which include everything from designing, building, scenery, to everything DCC.  And there is also the vast amount of knowledge from fellow model railroaders who are always more than willing to help with advice and ideas, I have taken advantage of this and this has helped immensely with the design phase.

Cheers,

Jason...

All turnouts are not equal

Only if you plan to use FastTracks for the final layout. Turnouts from different manufacturers, or even from one manufacturer's different lines, will not be the same in overall size, diverging leg radius (if any), etc. etc.

If you plan to have areas of even mdoerately tight trackwork, use templates for the specific turnouts you will be installing. This can be as simple as buying one sample of each size you will use and then copy or scan and print.

The FastTracks turnout templates are a little better than nothing, but they won't be accurate for many other makes and models.

XtrkCAD

I've used both XTrkCad, 3rd PlanIT, and Atlas RT and I prefer XTrkCAD over the others. I find it easier to work with than the other two and has libraries for all the major track suppliers (as I think 3rd PlanIT does). I am ready to give 3rd PlanIT another try as I like the 3D renderring, something XTrkCAD can't do. I used to do paper designs but I just find it so much easier to move things around easily and I can also copy designs from file to file. One other aspect of using a CAD program is that you can, in most, add rolling stock to the plan and actually try and operate your plan. I have found this to be most helpful when determining siding or yard lengths, particularly in industrial settings. I can see easily if I have too much yard trackage for a particular industry or not enough, especially if I'm emulating a prototype single job operation. I think pad/paper have their place, and I've usually put my room and walls into the CAD program and printed out the room to sketch (mostly in meetings, but that's another story) the track flow and location of LDEs. My advice would be to download the trials of each of the software packages and then find one that's close to what you are comfortable with and go from there,

Phil

CAD

I also like using XTrakCAD. Its free. It works. It has a few quirks and there are some things I wish it does differently but over all its become a great tool. Did I mention its free?

http://www.xtrkcad.org/Wikka/HomePage
 

I have not found that to be true for me -after- I mastered the techniques of drawing with CAD. I am very comfortable using CAD tools and find that while sitting down with some graph paper is a great way to try out some basic ideas, especially in boring business meetings, I am able to work faster and better with CAD. However.. that is me.. and everyone's mileage in this will be different.

I can't emphasize enough that CAD is only a tool for drawing layouts. It does nothing to help you design good layouts. For that you need time, research, and perhaps experience with other people's layouts through operating sessions and layout visits.

The paradigm of drawing with CAD is completely different then sketching with pen and paper or using a drawing program like illustrator. There is a learning curve. It doesn't start easier.. but it gets easier. Use tutorials and keep an open mind.

Chris

Btw- John Armstrong also used an electric eraser..

We have all doodled

We have all doodled trackplans and making track plans can be a hooby in itself. However, for all of the layouts that I had, I sketched out a concept, then used actual track switches to lay out and try to fit my plan. Hence I would not be caught with being over zealous with the size of my yards and towns, etc. I also used flex track pinned to styrofoam to try various radii and tested cars to see what was goign to be practical.  

I knew my latest layout was goign to be a two foot shelf around a 34 X 12 room, and what region and components (LDE) that I wanted. During construction I had to cut back on two elements being over ambitious with the room that I had. I had a general idea what my yard layout was goign to be, and I used full size switches placed loosely on the layout in various configurations to see what would be the best fit. The main point to all of this is that I did not use any detailed drawings, CAD or hand drawn. Beleive it or not I worked with a sketch that was drawn on the back of a pay stub envelope that I ket for years as a reference. And I refered to this plan many times and played out the scenario in my head to make sure it would be feasible before I started the actual layout.

I am now installing all fast track switches and am using the templates to cut and paste the switches into the existing layout. And as stated before they are not a drop in as they are different in size.    

So what is my point? I am not sure myself, maybe don't get caught in analysis paralysis and just start building at some point? I have attached 2 corner pictures of the result. The layout has kept me happy now for several years.     

And this is all strange considering my background of mechanical drafting and quality and manufacturing management. In my professional life I planned and reviewed to the Nth degree. Maybe I needed an escape!  

Steve

Another vote for AnyRail

Another vote for AnyRail here. I tried and gave up on all the others. Anyrail is very fast to learn, and the best part is that Trainplayer can read in anyrail files, so you can test your layout after you've made it.

XTrkCAD

I've tried most if not all of the options in full or trial version.  I ended up with XTrkCAD because I don't need 3D rendering and hey, its free!

If you go through all of the demos under the help menu first, then start playing with the interface and controls XTrkCAD will make a lot more sense the first time around.  Once you are up to speed with the basics, go through the demos again paying extra attention to any tasks you are having trouble with.  I found this worked well when I was learning to use the application.

Thanks

Thanks to all who gave advice. Great info.

I will try to upgrade my PC skills in Cad hahaha  , but will also rely on the old pencil and paper.

John Armstrong's Track Planning book has been read many times over the years. (The pages are starting to come loose)  As some of you have said, the reason to use the Cad system is to get a feel for how things would look or run. I already have my plan done. Just wanted to fine tune it. I like the idea of placing down paper copies of switches etc. (thanks for the web link) Never seen that web site before. Bookmarked now.. 

When I get some track down , I'll update with pictures. Been 40 years in the making!

Confirming opinions of others.

1) Until you have a firm idea of what your layout will look like and what basic track layouts will be incorporated, pencil and paper works best for initial design. No learning curve, it is fast, and the price is right.

2) When you want to move on to a detailed working plan, or in my case want to verify that everything I dream up will actually fit in the alloted space, only then is it time to consider software. Like others I have tried many CAD programs including CadRail, Xtrackcad, 3rd PlanIt, and Anyrail.

By far the easiest to learn, and the best solution for me was AnyRail. Within an hour I had designed a  yard with ladders at both ends, mastered the control of flex track, and laid out 6 parallel tracks around a room using only library track that was limited to  3 different radius of curves. Although it's not free, I felt the low cost was well worth it for a program that was very intuitive to learn, followed many standard "Windows" practices, and produced accurate track drawings.

Steve Raiford

An example of Anyrail Design...

rwhite here is an example of our top deck design done in Anyrail.  As previously mentioned the advantage of being able to set grid square sizing, layout area, flex track angles and radius's and it's ease of use would have to be it's biggest advantages.

Cheers,

Jason...

Here's another vote for

Here's another vote for xtrakcad...use the tutorials and you should be good to go.

It lets you run ops sessions once you get everything laid out - yes, you can sit and run trains on a 2D version of your layout!!

I use RR-Track V4 and it

I use RR-Track V4 and it seems to be fairly easy to use, although I've never used anything else, so have nothing to compare it with. Their web site is:

http://www.rrtrack.com/

Regards,

Mark

tried TrackLayer?

If you're looking for something better than pencil and paper but not as hard as CAD, try TrackLayer. It's not full-fledged CAD, but more of a "sketcher" for working on track plan ideas.  You basically just draw the track, then you can run trains on it, adjust it to fit your space, play with the operation, etc.

The trouble I always had with drawing plans on paper was getting the curve radii right, trying to fit large curves into my limited space.  TrackLayer has a nice way of making and editing curves, so they stay at a fixed radius as you move them around.  It also has snap features for getting switch angles right.  And it comes with a lot of pre-made track plans you can experiment with or modify.  Also, it imports layouts from AnyRail and other systems so you can create a finished design in that program and then run trains on it to see how it operates before you build.

I hope this is not too blatantly commercial.  I have an interest in this product.  But it's a great system, and the track planning features are not well known.  There is a free demo you can play with.  Very easy to figure out and learn.

Website is

http://www.trainplayer.com

  -- Jim

combine both

Sketch plans on graph paper until you get something you like, then flesh the design out on the computer. The big drawback to paper and pencil is that it's way to easy to cheat on curve radii and turnout sizes. Our fingers get optimistic about what will fit.

I can see how 3D functions could be useful for a multi deck layout.

Byron Henderson has a couple interesting pieces on his website about how the increased availability of CAD programs is bad for the hobby because people can use the programs to draw poorly designed layouts that don't operate well. Intersting thoughts.

...

The bottomline with ANY CAD is taking the time to learn how to use it.  You don't jump straight to doing what YOU want to do, you MUST follow the tutorials first.  Only then, well you know how to use the tools to do what YOU want to do, hence it will be MUCH less frustrating as you go on!

Regardless, I fully support sending every newb down the CTSS path.  Before CTSS, there was the "Cram it all in with pencil and then repeat with track."  One of the greatest examples ever? Malcom Furlow's San Juan!  The original plan contains some areas with some rather TIGHT curves!

The quickest way to learning, is experience, and after making the mistakes once, they become lessons for the next layout.  That's how my experience has panned out!

Great Summation

Thanks Charlie,

That is a great summation of what virtual track design is all about. I learned a few things from reading your reply myself. Personally, I think it all boils down to how much you plan to use it. If you are just designing a 4x8 layout, to pay for and learn to use a CAD program would be nearly foolish. But, if you have a large train room, or are designing for a club, or have multi-layer design ambitions, then all of a sudden the CAD becomes far more useful, and can pay for itself by the time you have designed some 50 to 100 feet of layout shelf space. To design a 25ft. by 38ft. basement layout on paper would be difficult at best, but hopefully before one ever steps up to build such a layout they will have several smaller layouts under their belts.

Personally, I designed my small layout on graph paper. It is it's most accurate depiction. But I also made a gross representation of it on the Atlas free program using only track pieces just so I could use it to find my reverse sections and the true angles of their turnouts. I too never could get the hang of using their flex track in the design software, it just went all over the place! I found the instructions to be poorly written. Having said that, I have future plans to build a train building in the back yard that will give me an area of 18 x 12 feet of completely empty space. Before I build the first stick of benchwork, I will be learning to use 3rd Planit. The expense of that building, and the benchwork and all that track is enough to offset the cost of the software and time spent learning to use it properly. IMHO.

Thanks again for the insightful response.

SCARM

Every time I look through threads like this, I can't believe more people don't mention SCARM. It's free and a lot better than RTS  in my opinion. It's intuitive to use and the flex track tool is one of the best out there. Again, in my opinion anyway.

Michael

Design software

Michael,

Just checked out SCRAM. One question, does it only have metric measurements?

Bernd