Given: A train layout is never finished.
Ceteris Paribus (all things being equal): If you had the opportunity to rebuild your layout, what would you change? Examples:....number of main lines.....themes......era......scenery....etc.
I, for one, would like to replace (heresy, you say!) my traditional sized accessories such as the crossing gates and signals with the smaller main-line ones. While it is stepping out of the "Classic Toy Train" look, it would give, at least to me, a more scenic appearance and better compliment my postwar consists. The emphasis, I think, would return to the trains themselves whereas now I often become distracted with watching the gates and signals do their thing. (But, I guess, that isn't really a bad thing).
Just some thoughts. I'd like to hear yours. As always, many thanks.
Should have painted my plywood a medium shade of sienna rather my favorite shade of green (and I actually knew better but did it anyway).
We have to go back about 7 years for my fork-in-the-road decision. Prior to that, I had developed a 17'x13' track plan for an O-gauge empire, based on the former PRR Port Road line from Perryville to Steelton, with the centerpiece being the bridges at Safe Harbor dam. I had spent a couple of years researching this project, and at least 3 months on the layout plan.
I had spoke with an MTH rep at a YORK show, about the probablity of them producing an E-44 electric (which were the workhorses on the electrified section of the line). He advised me that MTH had no plans of tooling up to make an E-44.
Then, my new bride convinced me that my Christmas layout (which occupied the dining room from Dec-Feb) was an nice as any other layout she had seen in my CTT library (above the throne), so why not develope a track plan incorporating it. She was right (of course, and we got published in Jan '08).
Oh, but what might have been...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eclectio/276687114/
...and of course, MTH did produce an E-44.
Decide on a plan before proceeding. Lately, I have been collecting Marx trains and accessories while having a layout full of MTH, Lionel etc..I should have explored tinplate more, but I always made the assumption that it was out of my price range..so now I have two completely different directions I am pursuing. In this economic climate I think at some point I will have to either fish or cut bait..On the other hand, it just goes to show how critical assumptions based on a lack of information can skew things. On the other hand I was thinking of going further into my semi-scale with command control..then here I found out that a basic system was suddenly dropped like a rock by Lionel and I can't imagine being able to afford to start from scratch every ten years..the old betamax versus VHS sort of thing...now they are both obsolete..
Si in hindsight being 20\20, I wish I had invested in tinplate..
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
I would have 'mirror imaged' mine so the mountain/tunnel would show to a better advantage. Also, I would have put in more yard/switching area.
As it is, I'll have to add on to get the yard area I want. Not a bad thing.
wyomingscout
For me there is no retrospect. This is my first three rail layout. It will be a carpet layout on a table. There is no track plan because the tubular track routes will be in a constant state of flux. To me permanence in a toy train layout would be deadly dull. As of now my intention is to try and capture the spirit of the great Lionel display layouts of the fifties without copying any of them directly. I intend to feature classic action accessories and hope to develop a system of automated running using conventional control and relays.
Pete
"You can’t study the darkness by flooding it with light." - Edward Abbey -
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month