Opinions requested, I'm thinking of reworking my layout (again!)

[vsmith]

I think I finally have an solution for the layout....

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudyDOWNSIZE6A%20Model.pdf

This gives me a small yard at the left side, a car storage yard at the right side, a small Inglenook puzzle yard midway, and the ability for continous run if all I want to do is watch TV . Hmmm... should be enough to keep me occupied for a while...cant say the final version will be identical as I tend to modify things on the fly during constructuion, but I feel pretty good about this direction.

Many Thanks to all who offered their advice, I really do value what other have to say. I will try to post updated photos on the "saga" thread as soon as I make the revisions with the leftover A/C switches I still have. Vic.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by iandor

Vic can you send me your email address and i will send you photos of my entire layout. I have 130 m (400') and it is right through my garden and all very unobtrusive. I have made the track fit the yard not the other way round and if you remember I dont have a yard only a series of courtyards.

On another front, I was engaged to be married for a long time and it didn't work out because of religeon. However I have been married twice, both in excess of twenty years and I am convinced that if you are not at least a bit assertive, women will not respect you and eventaually they will give you the flick in favour of someone who is.

So Don't be scared, tell her you are going to do it and do it and accept the consequenses, they may be bbetter than you think.


Regards


Big Daddy or your mate Ian

Ian, thanks for the advice but even though I poke fun at my wifes temper towards my trains, she's actually been really good about it, she was a lot more vocal about my mountain biking, but that was mostly because I'd be gone for 6 hours and come back all scrapped up, bruised, and covered in mud [:0]

The descision to shrink the layout was mine alone, it simply wasnt working out the way I hoped it would. The desicion to abandon the outdoor line was out of practicality, we both really want to build a studio space in the backyard and the only place where it really is practical is right where I planned on laying tracks. The prospect of planning building and planting a layout then demolishing it in a couple of years just didnt sound very appealing.

So I switched to the interior layout. Given that my all-time favorite model RR website is still Carl Arendt's MicroLayout's site, www.carendt.com , I actaully have been having a whole lot of fun (and some frustration) planning such a tight indoor layout that most would consider too small for a usable layout, but that too me is the challenge.

I still haven't given up on the outside layout, in the latest studio plan I have designated an area for a large planter that should be just right for a small outdoor layout. I want to do it as a rock garden theme with track running thru it. We'll see how that goes. Maybe some news this summer. I have learned to never say never, but patience is a definite virtue.![;)]

[Anonymous]

Vic can you send me your email address and i will send you photos of my entire layout. I have 130 m (400') and it is right through my garden and all very unobtrusive. I have made the track fit the yard not the other way round and if you remember I dont have a yard only a series of courtyards.

On another front, I was engaged to be married for a long time and it didn't work out because of religeon. However I have been married twice, both in excess of twenty years and I am convinced that if you are not at least a bit assertive, women will not respect you and eventaually they will give you the flick in favour of someone who is.

So Don't be scared, tell her you are going to do it and do it and accept the consequenses, they may be bbetter than you think.


Regards


Big Daddy or your mate Ian

[Anonymous]

Vic I missed the post, maybe add walls around the post and a hip roof on it and call it a switching tower[:D]

[vsmith]

Matt

Yeah I thought of that but I cant really pull it forward without shrinking it even more, if you look at the plan right in the middle of the sheet next to the switch going to the new yard you'll see a square with an X thru it , thats a 4x4 post holding up the storage loft above. pulling the loop forward I would also loose the passing siding at the front of the layout unless I shifted the loop tom the right so it passed in front of the post. What I might do instead is consider moving the switch to the rear of the layout loop, that way the operation would be essentially a point to point with a loop in the center. This is what I originally had at 8x20, with a small yard on each end and a large loop in the center. This is called an "X" layout, the train leaves the left side yard, travels along the back of the loop, turns onto the loop, continous around to the back again onto the rear, then switches onto the line to the right side yard. Its a way of elongating a point to point type layout while maintaining the ability to continous run.

Jack

I'm aware of the reverse loop condition. If I actually built this layout I would isolate the front yard from the rest of the layout and use a reversable pole switch for the track section between the two, or remove the track section and when the removeable sections are down just use it as two small indepandant layouts. When its all together, it would operate as an X layout design as described above.


Larry,

One of the things I did when downsizing was to consider switching to On30, I like Gn15 but the supply of stuff is still really limited. The trouble is that the space requirements for the HO track were almost identical for LGB G gauge track so to me there was no real net gain, plus I like the heft and feel of LS, add to that that I've already accumulated close to 20 engines and a mess of rolling stock...well I think I've thrown in my lot with LS and will stick to it.

So far I'm looking to try adding the yard to my current layout and see how i like it.

[Anonymous]

Vic, have you considered building your large scale layout with trains that are not so large?
Maybe it would be to your advantage to look at Gn15 given your small space. This scale/gauge combination uses inexpensive readily available HO mechanisms and HO track (if you bury the ties in ballast) and switches. Bachmann's line of On30 four wheel dump cars look great behind a Gn15 loco.

In your situation I would stop agonizing over trying to squeeze trditional G scale into such a cramped space and expand my options by thinking smaller.

We've "talked" in the past so I know that you like this sort of railroading....give it some thought....draw up a track plan or two....see what might fit into your space.

Good luck......OLD DAD

[Rastun]

Hey Vic,

The one with the removables, has always looked just a touch strange to me. Tonight while looking at it with the new yard attachment I think I figured out what has bothered me about it. As I look at it with a couple switch throws and some backing up and going forward you could actually reverse the direction that your trains went around the loop section. All and all that's a great thing the only problem with it as Ian could probably point out that, as you reverse direction on a loop without a insulated section you end up with a set of points that shorts out because it gets fed from both lines on both rails. I maybe wrong, it sure wouldn't be the first time, but you may want to look at the layout electrically too. The other one I look at and I think I agree with Matt that it would be better with the loop close to an end. For me it would be the fact that I would pull out of one yard going forward, go around the loop, then have to back out the other section. Now there is the thought of intentionally installing reversing loops and wiring the system for it so you can turn the trains around while operating them. Model Railroader put out a small book on model railroad wiring amazon link is http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0890243492/ref=sib_fs_top/103-2479391-4648627?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S007&checkSum=aFelDht%2Bfhal1UsHMnrgfXkj7v6yneEwT8czyq51QK4%3D#reader-page It is good at covering the basics of wiring and about reversing loops and such, I was looking for it earlier for the subject on the board about reversing loops but here works just as well. Hope that was helpful and not totally off.

Take care,

Jack

[Anonymous]

Vic, I like it better than the removables... however have you thought of moving the loop forward on the layout table and having the yard connect to the engine service area with out the loop being part of it. This way you could have two blocks and be running one continous and shuttling back in forth from the yard to
the engine service area swiching out car etc. at the same time.

[vsmith]

Ian, being indoors in a very small area for G you'll find yourself constantly working and reworking the layout to get the most optimal layout for the given space. Too little to do and you'll bore quickly with it, not thinking thru its operation and you'll find hopeless impasses that will burn you out. Its always a good idea when builing indoors not to rush it. Once the track is down, let yourself use it as is for a while to find the kinks and bugs and allow yourself to iron out the problems before you've ballasted the track and built half the scenery. I found several limitations and new possibilities to my original revision of my indoor layout that I want to investigate before I commit 100% to a track plan, hence the revision studies.



OK I think one of the primary things that bugs me about my current layout is that it has no real purpose other than running in loops with some switching, it has NO YARD and I think that is one of the thinks that kept tugging at me. So, last night while fiddling around with the Point-to-Point Reduex plan, I added a yard at the remaining area of benchwork on the right side, resulting in this...

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudypoint2point8x10%20Model_redeux_2.pdf

I occured to me that if I did the same thing on my current layout, it would give me a another end point destination, esentially a point to point with a loop in the middle, this is the rough mock up plan...

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudy%20DOWNSIZE6%20Model_yard%20option.pdf

I think I might try this first to see if it quenches my need for a more operational based layout. The yard would allow me to keep almost all of my rolling stock on the layout , and help allow for multi train operations.

Whatta ya think?

[Anonymous]

Vic you lost me a long ago on this whole matter and that isn't easy.

Regards


ian

[Anonymous]

I say go with it for continueous running? Vic, what opinions do you have of Adobe Acrobat, I've been thinking of getting it?

[Anonymous]

Hi Vic,
If you don't like it after you've built it, take it down & do something else. The only thing you have to loose is time, but you'll enjoy building it anyway!
Cheers,
Kim
[tup]

[bman36]

Vic,
Are you sure you can't go outdoors??? How fast can you lay track??? If she comes home and it's all down ....it's too late! Hee hee hee. Like your new design. Yes it definately lacks scenery. If "working the line" is your primary goal then this is better. My preference is for the old layout in terms of being able to "cut it up" with scenery. The new one seems to have more to do....hmmmmmmmm? Decisions decisions. Later eh...Brian.

[Rastun]

Vic,

I must say I've been impressed with your ingenuity of running these large trains in a small area, and I like the looks of both layouts. Personally I think I would stay with the first one for some of the reasons mentioned already of not having to install the movable sections, and though the second one would be more interesting in an operating sense, I really think the first one would have a better visual appeal. None the less it's your railroad and you should choose which ever plan you think would give you more enjoyment in both building and operating.

Take care,

Jack

[Anonymous]

Vic, I like it! question is do you have the room to store the sections? At what elevation is the layout? the duck under is the only part I don't care for, but if you had one of those mechanics chairswith wheels you could sit down bend over a bit and roll under, beats the hell out of crawling.

Good luck on the second morgage for the switches![:D]

[vsmith]

I should have added that I could leave the portable sections up for quite a while. The only time I would need to de-mount it is when i park one of the cars inside the garage, usually when we travel, and dont look like we'll be doing much soon.

[Tom The Brat]

If it ain't broke, fix it till it is!

[Anonymous]

Viv,

Right now you can go out and flick a switch on and run a train round a continious loop.

For the new one you will have to set up the portable sections, join up the tracks, attach the wires, make sure the tracks line up just right ( as the track joins are very close to turnouts).

You will get a better run, but be honest with yourself about how often you will be bothered doing all this extra work just so you can run a train. You may find that although it may be better, you end up using it less not more. These are questions that only you can answer.

Glen Anthony.

[Anonymous]

If it's not broke don't fix it. ben

[vsmith]

Hello all, I would like to request opinions pro and con on yet another revision to my Borracho Springs RR layout.

This is the track plan as currently constructed...

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudyDOWNSIZE6%20Model.pdf

Its a rather simplistic loop with a lot of sidings, kind of like a Lionel layout. However a while ago I posted an image of a point to point layout that I had done when deciding to downsize the layout. One forum member (SandyR) after looking at both layouts made a comment "you could always build them both". Well that stuck in my mind and the layout has stuck in my mind and I kept thinking could I build both? How could I do it and make it work well enough to keep me interested and at the same time stay in more or less the same confines of my ratty garage corner. I 've been tinkering with the plan and came up with this...

http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/vsmith/GarageStudy_point2point_8x10Model_reduex.pdf

This version takes up just about the same area, but is decidely more urban in nature. the dash lines are for potential portable track sections that would allow me continuous running with out permanently blocking the garage parking stall. This layout has 20 (!) switches a mess of sidings.

I decided to rework this layout to see if I could indeed make it work. I loose most of the scenery (no mountain or tunnels) but I think its a much more interesting layout from a users point of view. and If I build the portable duckunder sections I can still run continous plus I could run longer trains, something I cannot do now. Right now the existing track is not ballasted down so if I make any changes nows the time to.


So please review and give me your honest opinions, and please Keep it clean[:p][:D][;)][:o)]