|
Someone recently asked me for help designing an interesting and fun layout for him. He said he had 7' x 12' to work with. I started the conversation by sending him a copy of the pages from Gilbert's instruction manual, pointing him to layout number 10 which has three loops, a crossover, and four sidings, and measures 6' x 11'. It's really cool.
Looking at it critically, however, I realized that Gilbert had never built that layout. It has several glaring errors; for example there are four straight tracks on one end but only three on the other end! To fit together properly, it requires four pieces of straight track cut to custom lengths. I drew it out to scale and then confirmed it by laying out actual pieces of track on the floor.
If anybody is interested, I can send you a picture of the drawing. And if you need track to build it, I can sell you that.
Bob Graves
|
It’s pretty basic to cut and customize original track.
I have a real good 8X12 layout I haven’t changed since building 20 years ago.
Happy to share it with your guy.
Enjoy, Rick
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 27, 2025, at 12:48 PM, Robert Graves via groups.io <theupstairstrain@...> wrote:
?Someone recently asked me for help designing an interesting and fun layout for him. He said he had 7' x 12' to work with. I started the conversation by sending him a copy of the pages from Gilbert's instruction manual, pointing him to layout number 10 which has three loops, a crossover, and four sidings, and measures 6' x 11'. It's really cool.
Looking at it critically, however, I realized that Gilbert had never built that layout. It has several glaring errors; for example there are four straight tracks on one end but only three on the other end! To fit together properly, it requires four pieces of straight track cut to custom lengths. I drew it out to scale and then confirmed it by laying out actual pieces of track on the floor.
If anybody is interested, I can send you a picture of the drawing. And if you need track to build it, I can sell you that.
Bob Graves
|
Rick and Bob - share your layouts with us all if you don't mind.? I'm in the process of putting together a layout and can still use some ideas.
thanks, Rich
It’s pretty basic to cut and customize original track.
I have a real good 8X12 layout I haven’t changed since building 20 years ago.
Happy to share it with your guy.
Enjoy, Rick
> On Mar 27, 2025, at 12:48 PM, Robert Graves via <theupstairstrain=[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ?Someone recently asked me for help designing an interesting and fun layout for him. He said he had 7' x 12' to work with. I started the conversation by sending him a copy of the pages from Gilbert's instruction manual, pointing him to layout number 10 which has three loops, a crossover, and four sidings, and measures 6' x 11'. It's really cool.
>
> Looking at it critically, however, I realized that Gilbert had never built that layout. It has several glaring errors; for example there are four straight tracks on one end but only three on the other end! To fit together properly, it requires four pieces of straight track cut to custom lengths. I drew it out to scale and then confirmed it by laying out actual pieces of track on the floor.
>
> If anybody is interested, I can send you a picture of the drawing. And if you need track to build it, I can sell you that.
>
> Bob Graves
>
>
>
>
|
Looking at #10 now. You are correct the right side has three 10" straight tracks leading into 3 standard curves each direction. The left side has the equivalent of four 10" straight, but it uses 2 standard curves and 1 1/ curves in each direction.? Maybe the 1/2 curves keep both sides even.? It has my curiosity now? so I may have to replicate on the floor to see.??
Mike Cronin
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 3:48?PM Robert Graves via <theupstairstrain= [email protected]> wrote: Someone recently asked me for help designing an interesting and fun layout for him. He said he had 7' x 12' to work with. I started the conversation by sending him a copy of the pages from Gilbert's instruction manual, pointing him to layout number 10 which has three loops, a crossover, and four sidings, and measures 6' x 11'. It's really cool.
Looking at it critically, however, I realized that Gilbert had never built that layout. It has several glaring errors; for example there are four straight tracks on one end but only three on the other end! To fit together properly, it requires four pieces of straight track cut to custom lengths. I drew it out to scale and then confirmed it by laying out actual pieces of track on the floor.
If anybody is interested, I can send you a picture of the drawing. And if you need track to build it, I can sell you that.
Bob Graves
|
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
 I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
Instruction manuals are available on americanflyerexpress.com for
several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are
curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2
curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as
well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar
lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
I was looking at the same from the 1956 book. As an experiment I am going to gather some track to see if I the two ends meet or if they don't using the pieces in the diagram, I don't need to put the whole track plan together to see that.
Instruction manuals are available on for
several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are
curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2
curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via
wrote:
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as
well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar
lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
Ok, I fired up the track planning software I use on my Mac - Railmodeller Pro - and tried to recreate this (I'm assuming this is the Gilbert trackplan #9?) and I've attached two PNG files with the results.? The first is just putting in what appears in the original diagram - with the following amendments.? First, I added a 10-inch straight (shown in green) to balance out the right and left hand sides of the outer loop.? Second, I ignored the claim that there were three 1/2 curve tracks (two of which are shown in the original diagram coming out of the switches on the left side of the outer loop).? Obviously one needs to have the equivalent of three sections of 'regular (20" radius)' curve track to make a 90 deg curve - so I dunno what the original author of the track plan was doing - maybe working with an "uncalibrated aluminum track planner" (?).? I think the third 1/2 curve in the original is coming out of the switch at the center bottom of the diagram - and again, it makes no sense geometrically.? I kept the three 1/2 straight sections - shown in yellow (5" long).
So the result is that one can make the outer loop work, but the center is a mess.? So without spending a lot of time messing with it, I created a track plan that is in keeping with the original idea but with everything connecting up.? It does require the use of a hacksaw! (four pieces shown in red) - though one may be able to fudge the two shorter pieces.? Railmodeller Pro has the feature that the tracks 'snap' together - so the resulting geometry is rigid - hence the slight 'waviness' in a couple of the flex track sections I had to use to close the various loops.
- Rich
I was looking at the same from the 1956 book. As an experiment I am going to gather some track to see if I the two ends meet or if they don't using the pieces in the diagram, I don't need to put the whole track plan together to see that.
Instruction manuals are available on for
several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are
curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2
curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via
wrote:
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as
well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar
lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
I meant to note that the four pieces of modified straight track (should you wanna build this thing) are 1.0, 1.2, 3.8 and 8,.4 inches long, according to the software - although I'd put it all together first and then measure the gaps - the two short sections may be fudge-able...
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 9:47?AM Richard Sextro via <rgsextro= [email protected]> wrote: Ok, I fired up the track planning software I use on my Mac - Railmodeller Pro - and tried to recreate this (I'm assuming this is the Gilbert trackplan #9?) and I've attached two PNG files with the results.? The first is just putting in what appears in the original diagram - with the following amendments.? First, I added a 10-inch straight (shown in green) to balance out the right and left hand sides of the outer loop.? Second, I ignored the claim that there were three 1/2 curve tracks (two of which are shown in the original diagram coming out of the switches on the left side of the outer loop).? Obviously one needs to have the equivalent of three sections of 'regular (20" radius)' curve track to make a 90 deg curve - so I dunno what the original author of the track plan was doing - maybe working with an "uncalibrated aluminum track planner" (?).? I think the third 1/2 curve in the original is coming out of the switch at the center bottom of the diagram - and again, it makes no sense geometrically.? I kept the three 1/2 straight sections - shown in yellow (5" long).
So the result is that one can make the outer loop work, but the center is a mess.? So without spending a lot of time messing with it, I created a track plan that is in keeping with the original idea but with everything connecting up.? It does require the use of a hacksaw! (four pieces shown in red) - though one may be able to fudge the two shorter pieces.? Railmodeller Pro has the feature that the tracks 'snap' together - so the resulting geometry is rigid - hence the slight 'waviness' in a couple of the flex track sections I had to use to close the various loops.
- Rich
I was looking at the same from the 1956 book. As an experiment I am going to gather some track to see if I the two ends meet or if they don't using the pieces in the diagram, I don't need to put the whole track plan together to see that.
Instruction manuals are available on for
several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are
curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2
curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via
wrote:
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as
well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar
lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
Bob,
I would like to see the corrected track plan.
Thanks,
Michael
|
In My experience building many AF track layouts, this is very "fudge-able".? ?i would start by trying to eliminate all the short sections, and even try to fudge the 4" into a half straight, and the 8" into a 10".? ? it might not be exactly parallel and square, but that looks more realistic anyways.? or use a dremel.? ?track is no longer worth anything at train shows.? ?cut it up and make your joints nice and tight.??
?
And, to improve upon Gilbert's less than optimal design i would :
- slide that bottom switch to the left by two pieces of straight to eliminate the double S curve, which would make the trains look much nicer going through it
- Extend all of the sidings to as long as i can get them to support more cars
- add another pair of switches by replacing the last curves before the vertical straight section on the left side of the layout to create two seperate loops so two trains could operate simultaneously.? the whole layout would shift to the right a bit, but still be within the 11' grid.? ? ?
?
i had a 6' x 10' table for years that i built a number of different layouts on, all with AF sectional track.? ? it was a very good compromise on size.? ?small enough to fit into any room, but large enough to support two loops, various over/under layouts, and lots of buildings and accessories.? ?
?
?7 x 11 opens up significantly more possibilities, particularly enabling the addition of the switching yard.
|
I tried to put #10 together in AnyRail 7.? It was close as shown in the diagram, but not quite.? I agree that there was probably some "Fudging" to get the tracks to connect.
If they screwed (#4 screws) down the 90° crossing and the switches and used the 693 track locks then the rails would never come apart; the only problem for the trains would come if when "fudging" two connected track sections formed a kink.
Track Plans for model trains by Linn Westcott from 1956 has 70 track plans for S Gauge both small and large, even point to point shelf type.? As a matter of fact on the cover is an American Flyer Layout with a teenager running trains and has five 720/26760 switches.? There is an index in the back of the book giving the area required and notes for cutting rails if necessary.
I am recreating all of the plans that will fit my 6' x 10' (four 2-1/2' x 6' resin tables) area in AnyRail 7.
Mike Cronin
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 2:22?PM Larry Shughart via <larryshughart= [email protected]> wrote: In My experience building many AF track layouts, this is very "fudge-able".? ?i would start by trying to eliminate all the short sections, and even try to fudge the 4" into a half straight, and the 8" into a 10".? ? it might not be exactly parallel and square, but that looks more realistic anyways.? or use a dremel.? ?track is no longer worth anything at train shows.? ?cut it up and make your joints nice and tight.??
?
And, to improve upon Gilbert's less than optimal design i would :
- slide that bottom switch to the left by two pieces of straight to eliminate the double S curve, which would make the trains look much nicer going through it
- Extend all of the sidings to as long as i can get them to support more cars
- add another pair of switches by replacing the last curves before the vertical straight section on the left side of the layout to create two seperate loops so two trains could operate simultaneously.? the whole layout would shift to the right a bit, but still be within the 11' grid.? ? ?
?
i had a 6' x 10' table for years that i built a number of different layouts on, all with AF sectional track.? ? it was a very good compromise on size.? ?small enough to fit into any room, but large enough to support two loops, various over/under layouts, and lots of buildings and accessories.? ?
?
?7 x 11 opens up significantly more possibilities, particularly enabling the addition of the switching yard.
|
Since we are talking about layouts - I've attached my current layout plans.? The chair of the domicile space assignment committee has signed off on my using a former bedroom for this endeavor (still not big enough for the dream layout, but since there are very few basements in California, it is what it is...!).?? The main rectangle is ~11.5 x ~8'.? I've crammed a lot of sidings into this - hopefully there will be enough room for accessories.? Transformers, etc. will be next to the yard on the left side of the drawing.? I have some preliminary ideas for having a "below grade" storage yard along the left side of the layout (see attached) - the yellow trackage would connect to the initial trackage, with some modifications to accommodate the gradient up to grade level.? My bench work is designed around this option.
The green loop is a folded figure eight, as you can see.? I've finished the bench work, which uses 2x4 legs, 1x4 horizontal supports, and the top is 1.5" thick rigid foam board*.? I also plan to use the foam board to create the grades and the mountain in the corner.? I have finished cleaning about 15 RH and 15 LH switches so I'm about to dive into creating the actual trackage.? One issue is that the grade on the cross-over track (the lighter green) is about 3.5%, based on a clearance height of 4.25" - hopefully that will be ok.?
- Rich
*I'd be happy to share my benchwork plans - done in Sketchup - for anyone interested.? As a hobby woodworker, I use Sketchup all the time, for anything involving more than one piece of wood...? So I can create a pdf of the plans.
I tried to put #10 together in AnyRail 7.? It was close as shown in the diagram, but not quite.? I agree that there was probably some "Fudging" to get the tracks to connect.
If they screwed (#4 screws) down the 90° crossing and the switches and used the 693 track locks then the rails would never come apart; the only problem for the trains would come if when "fudging" two connected track sections formed a kink.
Track Plans for model trains by Linn Westcott from 1956 has 70 track plans for S Gauge both small and large, even point to point shelf type.? As a matter of fact on the cover is an American Flyer Layout with a teenager running trains and has five 720/26760 switches.? There is an index in the back of the book giving the area required and notes for cutting rails if necessary.
I am recreating all of the plans that will fit my 6' x 10' (four 2-1/2' x 6' resin tables) area in AnyRail 7.
Mike Cronin
On Sun, Mar 30, 2025 at 2:22?PM Larry Shughart via <larryshughart= [email protected]> wrote: In My experience building many AF track layouts, this is very "fudge-able".? ?i would start by trying to eliminate all the short sections, and even try to fudge the 4" into a half straight, and the 8" into a 10".? ? it might not be exactly parallel and square, but that looks more realistic anyways.? or use a dremel.? ?track is no longer worth anything at train shows.? ?cut it up and make your joints nice and tight.??
?
And, to improve upon Gilbert's less than optimal design i would :
- slide that bottom switch to the left by two pieces of straight to eliminate the double S curve, which would make the trains look much nicer going through it
- Extend all of the sidings to as long as i can get them to support more cars
- add another pair of switches by replacing the last curves before the vertical straight section on the left side of the layout to create two seperate loops so two trains could operate simultaneously.? the whole layout would shift to the right a bit, but still be within the 11' grid.? ? ?
?
i had a 6' x 10' table for years that i built a number of different layouts on, all with AF sectional track.? ? it was a very good compromise on size.? ?small enough to fit into any room, but large enough to support two loops, various over/under layouts, and lots of buildings and accessories.? ?
?
?7 x 11 opens up significantly more possibilities, particularly enabling the addition of the switching yard.
|
< I fired up the track planning software I use on my Mac - Railmodeller Pro > Richard, do you know the centerline radius that Railmodeler Pro uses?? You refer to the radius being 20” but I believe the centerline radius for original AC Gilbert American Flyer track in more like 19.125”.? So I’m wondering if that difference could affect your laying out of the track plan? I don’t know if pdf files show up on this io group.? I could send a jpg if that would work better… Tom Stoltz in Maine
|
Tom - an interesting question.? I was using "20 inches" as shorthand - mainly to distinguish from the larger "27-in" radius curve track (which I also have in the layout plans).? So to answer your question, I made a half circle of the "20-inch" radius track in the software and then lined it up with the ruler, as shown in the attached.? Since it won't let me line up the centerline at zero, its offset by 2 inches, hence the centerline at the other end of the half-circle is on 40 - so viola, RailModeller uses a centerline radius of 19"!??
I don't think it will affect my layout construction, but thanks for asking.? I should note that the software references the Lionel version of the S-gauge track - since all the track I have is Gilbert (and I guess Gargraves for the 27" radius curves), I am presuming that the Lionel and ACG versions of the curves are the same, or close enough for gummint work...
- Rich
< I fired up the track planning software I use on my Mac - Railmodeller Pro > Richard, do you know the centerline radius that Railmodeler Pro uses?? You refer to the radius being 20” but I believe the centerline radius for original AC Gilbert American Flyer track in more like 19.125”.? So I’m wondering if that difference could affect your laying out of the track plan? I don’t know if pdf files show up on this io group.? I could send a jpg if that would work better… Tom Stoltz in Maine
|
That's correct. The three half curves is one of the many problems with that layout design.
The correct drawing is attached. I should've included it in the original message; my brain is still stuck on the old days when you couldn't attach anything to a group message.
You all can save the time of laying it out on the floor because I've already done that. I did that to verify that my scale drawing was accurate.?
In addition, I drew a little bit on my 10th grade geometry class; the old 30° angle trick. That's where the 2-inch piece on each end of the layout, and the 7-inch piece in the middle, come from. If you don't do the geometry, you might be able to fudge your floor layout and track planning software enough to think you don't need it.
And you'll notice a 6-inch piece of straight track off the switch labeled 4-L. When you put a reverse curve on the red branch of a switch, it ends up one inch short of the track on the green branch. If your track planning software isn't really accurate, it may not pick up on that.
And you'll notice that I made the layout a little bit longer so each siding can hold a good size train, and each loop can hold a good size train while another train is running on a different loop.
Bob Graves
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mar 29, 2025, at 5:48?PM, Dale Smith via groups.io <dfsmith26@...> wrote:
?
Instruction manuals are available on americanflyerexpress.com for
several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
<rOh0UuhHdgnTDRu3.png>
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are
curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2
curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via
groups.io wrote:
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as
well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar
lay out about that size myself.
?
Thanks for any input.
?
Tom Higgins?
|
Robert:
?
I love the throwback track design layout, template and graph paper.
?
Thank you,
?
David
?
?
David A. Avedesian, PE, RPA
Newport Associates
5 Baughman Court
Silver Spring, MD 20906
301-929-9000 home
301-225-1036 work
301-938-1811 cell
david.avedesian@...
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
On Behalf Of Robert Graves via groups.io
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 3:37 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [S-Trains] Gilbert track plan
?
That's correct. The three half curves is one of the many problems with that layout design.
The correct drawing is attached. I should've included it in the original message; my brain is still stuck on the old days when you couldn't attach anything to a group message.
You all can save the time of laying it out on the floor because I've already done that. I did that to verify that my scale drawing was accurate.?
In addition, I drew a little bit on my 10th grade geometry class; the old 30° angle trick. That's where the 2-inch piece on each end of the layout, and the 7-inch piece in the middle, come from. If you don't do the geometry, you might be
able to fudge your floor layout and track planning software enough to think you don't need it.
And you'll notice a 6-inch piece of straight track off the switch labeled 4-L. When you put a reverse curve on the red branch of a switch, it ends up one inch short of the track on the green branch. If your track planning software isn't
really accurate, it may not pick up on that.
And you'll notice that I made the layout a little bit longer so each siding can hold a good size train, and each loop can hold a good size train while another train is running on a different loop.
On Mar 29, 2025, at 5:48?PM, Dale Smith via groups.io <dfsmith26@...> wrote:
?
Instruction manuals are available on americanflyerexpress.com for several different years.?? This is from the 1949 manual.
?
The drawing makes it look like those switches on the left are curves of different radii.? In any case, I would think that 2 1/2 curved sections would not give you a 90 degree bend as shown.?
Dale Smith
On 3/28/2025 9:44 AM, Tom Higgins via groups.io wrote:
I too would like to see that 7 x 12 (or 6 x 11) layout as well if given the opportunity.? I was thinking about a similar lay out about that size myself.
|
From my understanding of this plan, it appears that only one train can run continuously.? For a new 7x12, I think 2 train running is preferable.? Also, if the builder can afford K-line S gauge 0-54 from Ebay, one circuit of this would make for easier running of the 4-8-4.
|
If you're operating on AC or DC, that's correct for most people, unless you're gutsy and want to play chicken where?the three loops share track at the end.
Sophisticated layout designers, however, can use semaphores and/or 2-train operation of the switches in conjunction with #709 lockout eliminators to control the flow of trains through the common area.
If you're running digital control (Legacy, TMCC, or DCC), you can run three or more trains at a time as long as you have operators who don't fall asleep at the controls.
Bob Graves
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 1, 2025, at 10:30?PM, John Hutnick via groups.io <johnhutnick@...> wrote:
? From my understanding of this plan, it appears that only one train can run continuously.? For a new 7x12, I think 2 train running is preferable.? Also, if the builder can afford K-line S gauge 0-54 from Ebay, one circuit of this would make for easier running of the 4-8-4.
|
rick gough
Bobby Abrams
