Secondary alignment not perpendicular and a different size?

Use a double track template for tracks that are not parallel can't always give the required result depending on the accuracy you are looking for. The secondary alignment can't always solve it as well. Only features that are beyond the secondary alignment are calculated according the secondary alignment.

So you often have to use 2 corridors that must fit together, one adjusting to the other with a point control.
It is often that you can split the design: one corridor for subballast and one corridor for ballast (and rails if done through the corridor). It does match what is being done for construction in the field. Until a defined point, offset between tracks, subballast is "common" to one track, but ballast is according to each track except in turnouts where there are long sleepers.

Use a double track template for tracks that are not parallel can't always give the required result depending on the accuracy you are looking for. The secondary alignment can't always solve it as well. Only features that are beyond the secondary alignment are calculated according the secondary alignment.

So you often have to use 2 corridors that must fit together, one adjusting to the other with a point control.
It is often that you can split the design: one corridor for subballast and one corridor for ballast (and rails if done through the corridor). It does match what is being done for construction in the field. Until a defined point, offset between tracks, subballast is "common" to one track, but ballast is according to each track except in turnouts where there are long sleepers.