New Layout - Looking for feedback

The only suggestion at first glance is too ensure you allow access to the inside of the tunnels in the case of a derailment by either being able to remove the mountains from out front or get access from underneath the layout in the corners for both your arms and head.

Thanks - I was planning to leave the mountains open from underneath for access. It will be tight but I think it will work if needed.

Aralai

I am building an HO layout - my first in over 30 years!!! Here is a draft of the layout. It consists of a low track at bench level which is a point to point that is hidden under two mountains in the top left and right corners, and a high track that hugs the sides of the mountains and has a high bridge duckunder. Any feedback or comments are appreciated. It is planned to be 1970's Quebec outside of Quebec City.

 

 Figure is hard to grasp, and may lack a lot of sidings and spurs, but if I take it at apparent face value (and if I don't misunderstand your figure and description totally), your only possible operations for this layout seems to be to let one train circle endlessly around and around an elevated loop, while the other train leaves the end of the line, run down a single line to the endpoint, which may or may not have a single ended siding next to the mainline, and then backs up again back down the same line to get back to the place it started from.

  Mmm - guess it says "town" in one corner. So you might have a depot on the mainline where the go-forth-and-back-up-again line can stop to pick up and drop off passengers. 

Is this layout intended as a fully automated display layout where your main focus is on building the landscape and structures, rather than on running trains?

  Stein

I hope to do both - train operation and landscape and building. Ideally I am looking for a balance between allowing a continuous loop and train operation switching. I'm not unhappy with the elevated loop, but the low track as you point out does not allow for much in the way of operation. Any ideas on how to improve that? I have space at the right that could be used for sidings or spurs perhaps - I could expand that area to approx 30-40 sq ft - moving the control bench elsewhere. This is the kind of feedback I need. It's easy to change on paper - not so easy once I start.

 Aralai,

I hope you don´t mind me voicing bluntly my concern over your layout. IMHO, your track plan is just too simple and unrealistic to give you some kind of a satisfaction operating it once you are getting close to finishing it. Building it will be fun and you will learn a lot while doing it. Your layout is doomed to be torn down, because you will get bored after a very short time.

Before you start, do a lot of reading. Kalmbach offers a lot of beginner´s books, that will help you to get the right idea. There are many web sites offering good advice and finally, don´t hesitate to post your questions here - the community will be glad to help you. I have seen that steinjr already gave you an answer - he is a wizard when it comes to trackplanning and a fountain of information. You can´t make a mistake learning from him... 

From your track plan idea I see that you have plenty of room available.

Here is just an idea, what can be done. The HOG is a well designed beginner´s layout, developed by Scott Perry (IIRC). It already combines quite a lot of what you would like to see in your layout.

Sir Madog

I have seen that steinjr already gave you an answer - he is a wizard when it comes to trackplanning and a fountain of information. You can´t make a mistake learning from him... 

 While I of course appreciate that people speaks well about me, I do not want anyone to think that I think of myself as a wizard track planner, let alone a wizard layout designer.

 People like Byron Henderson (and Lance Mindheim and quite a few others) are the true master layout designers who turns out layout plans that both works functionally, and at the same time are pieces of art that also conveys the look and feel of the era and location modeled. 

 I am but an apprentice track planner who can draw up a reasonably *functional* track plan for small scenes and layouts, and can do (and present) research reasonably fast. But I do not have the artistic flair of those guys when it comes to creating truly *great* looking layout and scenery plans.

 But enough about that.

   I totally agree with Ulrich that a Heart of Georgia style layout is (IMO) a pretty good starting point for a layout plan for someone wanting a H0 scale layout with both continuous run, possibilities for creating cool looking scenes where the track passes just once through each scene (instead of first passing a the same spot twice, first going left on the foreground, then going right in the background), and with plenty of switching action.

 That is - if a duckunder or liftout to get into the core operating pit is not a big problem e.g. for medical reasons.

 Industries and scenery can of course be changed to something else, if you want to give the layout a Quebec flavor instead of a Georgia flavor. A backdrop can be mounted along the outside edge of the layout (it is operated from inside the pit), so mountain scenery is not out of the picture.

 In another debate way back, I tried to illustrate how an around-the-operator type layout could add e.g. a mountain scene even on fairly narrow benchwork. Now, where did I put that sketch - ah - found it. 

 Just an illustration of the concept of just modeling the side of the object which faces the pit, not a serious fully fledged track plan. And it would be dead easy to add a little access door right into the core of the mountain from the fascia on the outside of the pit, of it is not up against a wall. You can also make the layout low enough that you can operate it from an office chair on wheels, while any viewers can look over the top of the backdrop into your scene to admire your work.

 There are many other possibilities here. You don't have to do an around-the-operator style plan. But it is a good starting point for thinking about your layout as going from somewhere to somewhere, through one or more modeled scenes.

 Anyways - good luck with your design!

 Grin,
 Stein

You know what?  It is very difficult to provide comments on a plan unless one is aware  of the planner's objectives and details on the available space.  So, I'm not going to try to comment.

Mark

 Great comments! Thanks! I agree that the layout as is would get boring fast. I guess I am having trouble noving my mindset from a loop to a point-to-point layout that actually allows more complicated train operation - which is definitely one of my bigger objectives. From your feedback, the biggest issues seems to be sidings, spurs and crossovers to allow a realistic operation. I will go back to the drawing board today and see what I can come up with. This is one of the fun parts - planning...Any specifics on components that allow for realistic operation? Ex: single line siding, passing track, etc..

Aralai

 Great comments! Thanks! I agree that the layout as is would get boring fast. I guess I am having trouble noving my mindset from a loop to a point-to-point layout that actually allows more complicated train operation - which is definitely one of my bigger objectives. From your feedback, the biggest issues seems to be sidings, spurs and crossovers to allow a realistic operation. I will go back to the drawing board today and see what I can come up with. This is one of the fun parts - planning...Any specifics on components that allow for realistic operation? Ex: single line siding, passing track, etc..

Here is my standard answer to the question "what should I model" (copied and pasted from a previous reply - some details may not be applicable to your situation :-)

steinjr

 FWIW, here is my approach to this.

You need to ask yourself three questions, and the first two questions should not be skipped:

1) Why do I want to build a model railroad ?

 A surprisingly large number of people fail to consider why they want a layout, or just go "because it is cool, duh!" and leave it at that.

 Don't skip this step.

 No one but you can define why you want  a layout and what you expect/hope to get from your layout.  

Think about what you hope to get from your layout, and write it down. 

 For three reasons:

  a) there is no "one size fits all" when it comes to how to design two layouts for two widely different purposes.

 A layout designed to support you playing dispatcher at a CTC will often be quite different from a layout built mainly to give you a place to show off and take pictures of your detailed model trains, or a layout which can run in continuous display with various animated effects to entertain young grandchildren, or a layout built to allow you to do a lot of yard switching,

  Some people like to build, and tear down their layout and start over again pretty much right away after they finish building their railroad. Some people feel that the building part is a necessary evil they have to go through to get to the fun part of running trains, and want to keep it as simple as possible.

b) if you can't explain even to yourself why you want a layout, it may not be the smartest thing to commit to spending quite a bit of money and quite a bit of time on building a layout until you have figured out why you want a layout, and

c) Once in a while when you are working on your model railroad you can do a reality check - are you getting what you wanted from what you are doing? If not, it is probably a good time to change either your goal or your approach :-)

 

2) What would I like to model ?

 Two subphases:

  a) Identify a theme, era and location that inspires you

  b) Find scenes that inspire you 

 Different people like different things. Tastes are different. No one but you can define what you want on your layout.

 But if you start out with era, location and theme, you are well on your way.

 An 1890s narrow gauge logging line in the west is pretty different in character compared to switching in Brooklyn in 1942, which is pretty different to having Budd RDCs carrying passengers to a remote settlement in the arctic north of Canada, which is pretty different from a helper base in West Virginia in the 1950s, which is pretty different from a modern 110 car coal unit trains departing from the Powder River basin in a steady stream of traffic, which is pretty different from a Harry Potter layout, which is pretty different from a Thomas The Tank train layout and so on and so forth.

 Once you have a theme, an era and a place in mind, it is time to go look for "scenes" from that time and place that fits your desired theme.

 Tony Koester came up with a smart layout design concept in an early issue of Model Railroad Planning (an annual from the same people who publish Model Railroader Magazine): the Layout Design Element (LDE).

 An LDE is a small model railroad scene that is based on modelling a smallish part of a real railroad somewhere and sometime. Inspired e.g. by a photo that grabbed your attention or a place you have lived, or visited or read about or whatever.

 By breaking layout design into first designing a small number of scenes you want to model, and then afterwards figuring out how to string your scenes together in the space you have available, the design job gets less overwhelming.

 By "small" I mean something on the order of 3 or fewer LDEs for a H0 scale bedroom sized (10x12 foot) layout, and typically fewer than 10 LDEs for a H0 scale basement size layout, even though you obviously can squeeze in more scenes by making each scene smaller, running shorter trains, having more viewblocks that prevent visual interference between scenes etc.

 To find LDE candidates, you look at pictures - both pictures of your prototype railroad/area/era, and pictures of other layouts that inspire you.

  If you have a location and a theme in mind, it will be easier to figure out what kind of LDEs to look for and where to look.

 Let's work some more on theme and selecting some scenes you would want to include on your layout:

 Some things to think about:
    Location(s):
     - Urban, small town or rural area?
     - Farming communities or industries ?
     - Mountains/Hills? Forests? Riverfront ?
     - mainline or branch line ?
     - RR junction, "on the line" or "end of line" ? 

    Traffic/Operations:
    - Express streamlined "named" passenger trains stopping at the Union Station ?
    - Long through freight trains passing through, possibly dropping off blocks for a local switcher ?
    - Local switching - one car at a time for various small local dealers ?
    - Big local industries needing lots of in plant switching ?
    - Lucius Beebe's "Mixed Train Daily" serving sleeping branch line ?

 Have you had a quick google for sources about "your" railroad to see if you can spot interesting themes or locations ?

 If you start from the wikipedia entry on e.g the L&N, you find links to various historical societies and suchlike:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville_&_Nashville_Railroad

 One of those lead on the archieve of the L&N historical society: http://www.lnrr.org/archive/

 System maps, junctions, rosters, photos of people, places, structures and junctions.

 

3) How do I fit what I want into the space I have ?

 This is where advice from more experienced layout designers can help you see solutions you maybe hasn't thought of yourself. There are quite a few tricks and tips on fitting in layouts in rooms in various ways.

 But the time to worry about the how to model (and to make the decisions on what comprimises you need to make to make things fit the space) is after finding out why you want a layout and what you want to model.

 Think a bit about the why and what, write it down and go through it a few more times on your own.

 For some more questions you might want to ask yourself about the why and what, have a look at these web pages which contain more questions you might want to ask yourself in order to narrow down some more what you want:

Byron Henderson's checklist for potensial customers: http://home.earthlink.net/~mrsvc/id13.html

Layout Design SIG primer: http://macrodyn.com/ldsig/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Primer

 

Good luck with your design!

Smile,
Stein

In addition to what stein posted, two books would be good to read through to assist in your planning journey.  My preferred reading order would be:

Track Planning for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong

Realistic Model Railroad Operation by Tony Koester

Since you are interested in Quebec City, it would be good to do some research on the railroads that run/ ran in that area.  To see modern trackage, I've found the aerial maps at Bing and Google to be good search tools.  Just zoom in on Quebec City and scroll around the tracks to find interesting scenes.  Even abandoned railroad grades can still be found and traced - some going back to the 1920s and 30s and maybe older.  This can give you some town names to start your research with.

 Thanks again for your feedback! It is very helpful. I'll make a point of answering the questions steinjr posted so I know myself exactly what I want. Of the top of my head, I see the layout as an ongoing project where I will continually either improve details or tear down and rebuild in some cases, although that would be scenery more than tracks. Once I have the tracks in place, I intend to leave them so I want to get them right. I am familiar with Quebec, having grown up in Montreal in the 1970's, hence my interest in modeling 1970's Quebec. I also have exisiting locos and rolling stock as well as scenery from that location/era. Last time I built a layout was 30 years ago, starting with a 4 x 8 sheet which progressed to three 4 x 8 sheets, and the layout was based on Charny, St.Nicolas, QC area on the south shore across the St.Lawrence river from Quebec City. Charny is/was a big CN town, and has a great railway yard (Joffre Yard) with the only extant full-circle type roundhouse in Canada built in 1880. While part of me wants to recreate that area, I realize that the scale would make it difficult to reproduce properly, however I'd like to incorporate elements - the LDE's you talk about, so I might have an LDE that represents a part of the Joffre Yard, and other LDE's from areas around Charny. I'd love to tackle two projects - building the Joffre Roundhouse and the Quebec Railway Bridge. I know they would be big projects, but they would be awesome elements. I guess a lot of modelers DO take real places and adapt them to their layout due to scale. Just taking a google map of the area and trying to reproduce exactly is not going to work, but grabbing 3 or 4 LDE's and incorporating them might work. So right now my big question is: Do I attempt to reproduce some real elements or just create my layout from my imagination? My preference is leaning to recreating some real elements - the roundhouse, bridge and perhaps a key industrial area.

odave

In addition to what stein posted, two books would be good to read through to assist in your planning journey.  My preferred reading order would be:

Track Planning for Realistic Operation by John Armstrong

Realistic Model Railroad Operation by Tony Koester

Since you are interested in Quebec City, it would be good to do some research on the railroads that run/ ran in that area.  To see modern trackage, I've found the aerial maps at Bing and Google to be good search tools.  Just zoom in on Quebec City and scroll around the tracks to find interesting scenes.  Even abandoned railroad grades can still be found and traced - some going back to the 1920s and 30s and maybe older.  This can give you some town names to start your research with.

Got em both today! Thanks. Found an amazing Model Railway Store - I have a feeling I am going to be there a lot. Good bunch there that seem like they know a lot about Model Railroading.

 OK - redid the layout. Not sure that the length of the sidings in the yard are long enough - I may have to move the yard. The track that runs along the top is hidden as it inclines from the top right to top left. Again - comments are welcomed. Still fine-tuning things...

ETA: Yeah don't pay too much attention to the detail of the tracks in the yard. I need to fix them to allow assembly of trains.

No.  The latest version is a head-knocking access nightmare. You'll hate it.  It reminds me of those carnival amusement games where you score points by walloping fake gophers that pop out of holes in a table.  Do you have those up north? 

It sounds like you are very much interested in learning more and more about theme,operation, and design.  That is an enjoyable process in itself that you'll likely continue to do.  The last thing you want to do is to build something permanent now, only to find yourself six months later much more knowledgeable but stuck with something unsuitable and encased in foam or hydrocal.

Your space suits itself to a design like the HOG, so your final benchwork will likely be very similar to it.  You said you want to get it right first off.  That's tough to do, really. You could start by building some simple table benchwork like the HOG and put a yard LDE in the top side and some spurs along the other sides, hook up two wires and start running trains.  Its easy to rearrange and add/delete track, spurs, sidings, and even yards when the track is not affixed to the benchwork.  Three months later, after you've accumulated more knowledge and experience, you'll be in a better position to crystalize your theme, plan, and permanent design. 

You may think a simple doughnut plan looks boring on paper, but check out pictures of stein's layout (linked somewhere in this forum) and you may be more inspired. 

Just my opinion.

Doug

Fair comments. Yes we have those gopher games :) Let me try a HOG type layout... It's fun to keep designing.

Aralai

Fair comments. Yes we have those gopher games :) Let me try a HOG type layout... It's fun to keep designing.

... indeed it is! Take your time to do it - don´t rush yourself. After all you will be investing quite a bit of money and time in your layout.

Here is another example of a small donut-shaped layout. It is steinjr´s layout (hope you don´t mind me posting this here, stein) - earlier version, though .

Just as food for thought... 

Doughless

You may think a simple doughnut plan looks boring on paper, but check out pictures of stein's layout (linked somewhere in this forum) and you may be more inspired. 

 Some pictures from how some scenes-in-progress looked before tear-down:
 

Municipal Barge Terminal (was on the lower wall before):

3 pictures from the 5x2 foot milling district scene (along right hand wall, from chimney towards door):

A view down along the elevator for the mill (by the chimney base in upper right hand corner):

The modeled corner of my yard (three tracks), with warehouse district buildings in the background:

Some more warehouse district buildings:

  I am currently rebuilding my layout. I decided I so hated the access problems of working under and at the rear of my layout with wiring and scenery that I tore down the entire layout to start over rebuilding it as sections that can be taken out to work on each section individually.

 Since I am rebuilding anyways, I have played around a bit with the plan, to try to bring tracks closer to the layout edge, fewer tracks parallel to the layout edge and to give me a bigger yard (which can be used as visible staging).

 Still not so sure about that left end along the top wall ...

 Current plan (version 55):

 Anyways - not trying to force anyone to do their layouts in the same style - just trying to illustrate some of the things which is possible for this style of layout, even in a fairly small room of 6.5 x 11.5 foot - about 74 square feet - actually a little less when you deduct the chimney base.

 You have a bit more space available - judged from your figure at least 90-100 square feet vs my 74 square feet, maybe more - depending on how your room looks.

 Grin,
 Stein

And here is a couple of examples of what a great modeler (in this case forum poster Dr Wayne) can do with an around-the-wall style layout in a bigger room, with a combination of city, industry, small town and countryside modelling (even based in Canada :-)

Photo tour of his layout: http://www.the-gauge.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=1107

 Grin,
 Stein

These posts are very helpful for me, and as a visual person, the photos help even more.

Questions for steinjr - I don't see any way for you to turn your trains to face the other direction - do you just run different ones different ways? Also, your loop that passes the door - how did you handle it? How high is your layout? It seems deceptively simple, but maybe that's part of my problem right now when designing - making it too complex.

Aralai

Questions for steinjr - I don't see any way for you to turn your trains to face the other direction - do you just run different ones different ways?

 

 I run diesel hood road switchers (like RS3s or GP7s) or small diesel switchers like this little GE 70-tonner:

 Diesel hood engines can run both ways.

 Either just backing the entire train with the engine pushing the cars in front of it (short trains only on my layout, but would also have worked for modern passenger push-pull traffic - with a control cab built into the rearmost car of the train).

  Or uncoupling the engine, then running it around the train body (using a double ended siding) and then coupling the engine to the other end of the train, before heading back, with the engine now running "backwards" pulling the cars behind it.

 Another solution would have been to run with one engine at either end of the train - with the one at the tail end leading the train heading back.

 If I had been running diesel carbody engines (like an F7), where engineer visibility is good only out one end of the engine (the cab end), I would have coupled two engines together tail to tail (so there is one cab at either end of the two engine combo), and run those two engines around the body of the train as a unit.

 For steam engines, if I had run them, I would either have used a roundtable to turn the engine, used a short turning wye to turn the engine, or just have run the steam engine backwards around the train body, coupled it to the other end and backed the engine down the other way, pulling the cars.

 Like with the prototype railroads, there are a lot of ways to do this on the model railroad as well.

 The Milwaukee Road  had a passenger station in downtown Minneapolis, and no way to turn its engines there. They turned at their yard in southern Minneapolis and backed up their entire passenger trains for 30 blocks to get into the station, with the conductor presumably at the tail end of the train, with some way (flag, whistle, lantern or something else) to be able to tell the engineer "stop" if something got in their way.

Aralai

Also, your loop that passes the door - how did you handle it?

 A liftout section. Looks like this:

 Not very pretty - I am not planning to use it in normal operations, just when I feel like running trains around and around (for display running for kids or to break in an engine). 

 Made from a plank, with two L-shaped aluminum profiles fasted to the plant one Woodland Scenics road bed section apart, and tracks laid on top of that. Aligns with sections on both sides with holes drilled down into the sections on both sides and dowels fastend to the underside of the liftout section.

  Cross section across the liftout:

Aralai

How high is your layout?

The tracks are at 52" off the floor, so I can fit some storage and a workbench under the layout.

Aralai

It seems deceptively simple, but maybe that's part of my problem right now when designing - making it too complex.

 Could be - how to create the desired effect on your layout really depends on what the desired effect is - e.g going out and back during the same session, or always going east to west during a session.

  For an over-the-road type of layout - where trains e.g. come onto the layout from east staging, pass through the modelled layout and disappears off the layout into west staging, scheduled to repeat its movement next operating session (instead of going out and coming back the same session), it would also have been possible to back the entire trainback from west staging across the layout into east staging between operating sessions.

Smile,
Stein

Excellent. Thanks. Sorry for all the newbie questions - it's been a long time...

What is the max gradient recommended? I've seen anything from 2% to 4%.

 Anything not exceeding 3 % is comfortable and looks ok, but is way above what the prototype does...

Aralai

Excellent. Thanks. Sorry for all the newbie questions - it's been a long time...

 

 Trying to answer questions from someone who can formulate clear and thoughtful questions and understands the answers is a joy.

 It makes for a very refreshing change of pace from trying to communicate with some impatient and semi-illiterate 12 year old who dash off some poorly thought out question with hopeless spelling and punctuation, and just wants someone to "give him the answer", rather than the kid making any serious effort on his own part to learn how to do things for himself :-)

 Just continue to ask questions. Nobody minds intelligent questions. 

Aralai

 What is the max gradient recommended? I've seen anything from 2% to 4%.

 

 That's what I have seen too - max 4%, preferably less. Around 2 is not bad.

 The Armstrong book has a chart saying something about pulling power/train length for various gradients.

 You can always do a field test - take a long plank, raise one end to get the desired gradient, and try to run an engine  pulling the desired number of cars up a piece of flextrack laid on top of that that plank.

 But somewhere in the range 2-4% sounds sensible based on what I have read. My own layout is flat, so I haven't tested (other than with the plank test - and I can't remember what I found out).

 Smile,
 Stein

Just a couple of comments to add to what stein posted 

* turning/reversing loops take up a lot of space, so you may want to consider if turning/reversing a train or locomotive is necessary for what you want to accomplish with this layout. 

In my case (10'x18' available), I didn't even want to give up the space for a small wye, so I decided that any locomotive turning would be done outside of an ops session by hand or with some sort of lifting device. 

* make sure to reserve space for structure models, roads, etc when laying out your track.

* In an earlier post you commented about the length of yard tracks.  I know that design has been scratched, but you should consider putting your yard body tracks on the long sides of your space, or around corners where the curve radii can be larger.  Coupling/uncoupling on tight radius curves in a curved yard can be difficult. 

And don't overlook putting the body tracks at an angle.  Here's the current revision of my trackplan, the small yard is on the bottom.  The yard is somewhat contorted and does not have a very prototypical look, but it can perform all the functions it needs to.  In this instance, the function of the yard was more important to me than it looking prototypical.

Thanks O'Dave. I like the siding you have on the bottom. It's nice and long. Back to my drawing board tonight to try to incorporate some of the ideas. I think a Wye might be the answer for me to turn engines. I like the one in Dr. Wayne's layout. My passenger train is a 3 car Budd so no issues with turning, but I like the idea of being able to do it. My last hurdle is deciding if I will have a duckunder or lift out to make a continuous loop or not. I like the idea of a hidden part for staging that could also be used as the continuous connection, but I have the door to deal with, so not sure how I might do that. I could do a kind of L shape with a hole in the middle - but then I'd have to duckunder to get into the layout - not a big problem as I plan to have the layout fairly high. Maybe a doughnut layout with one leg - I guess that's more like a 'P' :) and then hide the loop at the back (top of the P). That way it appears point-to-point, but can run continuous. I'm getting less fussy about the visible crossover.

ETA: It looks like that is what you have done O'Dave with both sides being hidden/staging. Any photos of your layout?

Sorry, no photos, as the benchwork isn't even built yet . All the "operations" I've done has been in my 3rdPlanit 3D model.  I am currently working on lighting and backdrops, with benchwork and track coming in August (hopefully).

Yes, I plan to use the hidden end curves for staging & holding trains to simulate mainline running - when I operate both sides of the layout together.  When operating either side individually, I can use the opposite side as staging.

In an earlier revision I did have two dedicated staging yards in a deck underneath the main deck, accessed by a no-lix, but when I started looking at the benchwork requirements I realized that a couple of my givens would be violated.  So the lower-deck staging had to go. 

I will be using a "roll under" approach to my donut, as my layout will be at 50" and I have a chair with casters.  I think it will be fine for me.

steinjr

The tracks are at 52" off the floor, so I can fit some storage and a workbench under the layout.

 

Hello, Stein -

I think it is very brave of you to let the world see the "underbelly" of your layout. You are showing us that a train room does not have to be a surgically clean and perfect place. We all have to live in the "real world", and when concentrating on the trains, the other distractions do not matter.

- Gerhard

odave: 

In my case (10'x18' available), I didn't even want to give up the space for a small wye, so I decided that any locomotive turning would be done outside of an ops session by hand or with some sort of lifting device. 

OMG! You can actually do that?  I didn't think that was possible without being sent to operations purgatory. 

Original poster Aralai:  Sounds like you have a sense of humor and a willingness to listen to input.

Doughless

Original poster Aralai:  Sounds like you have a sense of humor and a willingness to listen to input.

Yeah - been around the block enough times, and happy to listen to others. When I was younger I thought I knew everything - I hadn't learned yet that I didn't :) I did not get a chance to re-do my layout today - had to build a storage loft in my garage. I know it does not sound related, but it's all part of the plan to get the basement room cleared out for the layout!