After due consideration, I selected Atlas track for my next layout. However, I was not sure about the turnouts, or track switches, if you will. I did an initial layout design using RC switches and found that I could get by with just a few of the many configurations RCS offers.

After looking more closely at both RCS and Atlas at the LHS, I decided that Atlas turnouts definitely are worth considering. Not only will it make it easier to connect to the rest of the track, but the looks, both rails and ties, will be a perfect match, obviously. I definitely like the solid Atlas rails better, but realize that RCS has an excellent reputation and definitely a wider selection.

Anyway, I redid the layout using Atlas turnouts and found that they take more room to accomplish a somewhat equivalent arrangement. In most cases the difference is not critical, but it does make a difference for the yards and spurs as the Atlas turnouts themselves require more room; leaving less for the actual yard space.

I will be using Ø108” and Ø99” curves, with a few Ø90”. For the layout using RCS, I got by with #4 and #6 turnouts and one #6 curved turnout. For the layout using Atlas, I used #7.5, #5, and #5-short turnouts, together with Ø72 cut-turnouts and one Ø72-Ø54 curved turnout.

As you can see by the examples below, the Atlas turnout yards require more room to provide the same amount of track space and approximately similar center-to-center track spacing; that is, except for the Ø072-cut, which require about the same length (horizontally in the image) but higher since the track c-c spacing is greater. Each of the individual yard-tracks is 120” long except for a few short pieces and ending curves.

Is there a way to arrange the Atlas turnouts so they will not take up so much room? What have you done for your yards when using Atlas turnouts?



Thanks for you rhelp.

Alex

Well the atlas O and RCS #4 look pretty much the same using the same amount of space but..

What you need to worry about is the 4" spacing at the curve part of the turnout. Depending on the types of locos/ long freight/Passenger cars you are using, esp ones with a large swing[like an articulated steam or e8], will those locos/ cars clear the end of the sidings that may have a train on?

Go with Ross. The switch machines are more robust.

Alex:
You may want to look at the O54 switch for yard developement. It can be modified to an O54 short which brings the track spacing much closer. From AM Hobbies website. The straight piece at the top of this switch can be removed.


All these switches are O54 short.

Alex....after much planning and consideration I went with the Atlas O54 turnouts for the yards for the obvious reasons...spacing, etc. I removed the extra short track attached which allowed very close spacing. Also, I found that because the curve is short, even those locomotives which require 072 are able to navigate the curved part of the switch since the straight yard track quite quickly. Even if you don't want to consider 054 switches for your yards, then you can cut down broader radius switches...not a lot of fun though!!

Alan

I will definitely consider your recommendations for switches and will buy a couple of each to try; I can always use them somewhere anyway. At any rate, I probably will run the yards more prototypically and keep the really large engines off of those areas.

The issue of track spacing is legit, and we looked at this a few months ago. Essentially, I am maintaining 4-1/2” spacing between the double main tracks, and I believe that with Ø108” and Ø99” curves the spacing should be OK. To test this, I bought several Ø99” and Ø90” and tried my larger engines, and they worked well. However, I have not yet tried the MTH DDA40X (birthday present coming up) or the UP #80 Coal Turbine (Santa Claus) locomotives. For these, I will likely need the Ø108” and Ø99”.

Using RR-Track, I tried some crossovers using Atlas #5 and RCS #4, 11°, and #6 to see how they look. In each case the track spacing is about 4-1/2”, for which I had to add a short section of straight track between the RC switches. I added Ø108” and Ø99” curve sections next to the turnouts to get an idea of how their curvature or divergent angles compare with the section curves.



As before, I will appreciate your comments.

Thanks!

Alex

I believe over the next year there will be a lot of updating to the Atlas switch products.

Alex,

In planning my layout I came to similar conclusions. I went with Atlas track for the bulk of the layout, but then switched to Ross switches for the my yards using #4 switches. The #4's allow possibly 1 to 2 more cars compared to the Atlas switches. Since my yards are small, every bit counts. I need to play with the Atlas 054 switches to see how they look.

Jim - Could you elaborate more on the Atlas switches? I didn't see anything mentioned on the Atlas site/forum.

I went with Atlas 054 switches for yard sidings because it was the largest curve with Atlas's small 10" length. That way I had a decent curve while still having a switch that wouldn't take up much room.

BTW, can you run a engine through with a min. curve higher than 054 if it's a siding with a partial curve? I always wondered for when I build a larger layout.

If you look through the Atlas-O forum, there has been a lot of mention of new controllers for the switches. I believe there are a couple other things, but that hasn't been talked in public yet.........Stay tuned!

I would suggest sticking with numbered switches (#4, #5, Ross 11 degree, etc.) for yard trackage. Stay away from those with curved diverging routes such as O72, O54, etc. The reduced "S" curve effect with the numbered switches is worth any extra real estate they might need. It doesn't make sense to save a small amount of space at the cost of operating reliability.

Jim

Jim makes a very good point. If your yard has tracks within which you are going to push long trains, then you could have derailments with "S" curves. In my case, the yard tracks are over twenty feet long each and the yard is double ended so I can pull trains into the sidings. The current freight yard that is being built will have room for nearly two hundred 40 to 50 foot cars.

Alan

That combination of the #4's (or similar numbered switches) for the yard, and others for the main crossovers make a lot of sense and is not all that difficult to do. I'll start on that layout version and see what it looks like.


Thanks!

Alex