Hi all,
My wife bought me an HO starter set and extra track for Christmas after hearing me talk for years of how "one day I'll build model trains again like I did when I was a kid." So a few days of planning, research, building and reading I feel like I'm ready to really start.
My first table is an 8x5 area with one of the short edges against a wall as a peninsula in my basement. I plan to build the "The Tyler Mountain & Beaver Creek RR" contained in the MR "Practical Guid to HO Model Railroading" book. However, I have two changes in mind that I would appreciate comments on:
1) Since that layout was for a 48 table I have an extra foot to work with, and added approximately 1 9" sectional piece to each short edge for the main oval. My plan is to build the large outside oval first, then add the interior and grade sections later as suggested in the book.
2) Instead of the given time period, I plan to use the track layout to represent an Iron Ore transport operation in Normandy, France in the Steam era (approximately WW2 on the timeline). Instead of Beaver Creek I'm going to make a small town based on Bayeux, and the Tyler Mountain logging area will be the Irone Ore mine operation, with the Tyler Station area substituted for an Iron smelting/processing setup all in the Normandy mountain/mining areas.
Has anyone built this layout plan before or is familiar with it? I've done a temporary layout on my table tonight to check lengths, and had to make some on-the-fly modifications to the in-book plan for my table and track available.
I would also appreciate any comments on my planned changes to the layout/or anything in general.
All of your modifications sound okay. Although I'm a bit concerned about your "Iron Smelting" operations. Exactly how big were you planning on going with it? Because a smelter (depending on type) + support facilities can take up considerable room.
During WWII, steel was in short supply. So often outdated techniques that were sidelined were brought back online for use. (IE: Beehive kilns/Smelters) This would save you considerable space.
You might want to consider joining the "Steel" group at yahoo. They would be able to help you out with more related layout tips.
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
Thanks for the input about the smelting. I did a little preliminary research on the specifics of the iron smelting, but what I'm planning to do is model the drop-off points from the rail to a truck-transport or whatever the correct method of unloading is, and then start the support facilities and leave the majority represented "off board". I do it all the time in wargaming so it won't bother me to think of the rest of the smelting operation as off in yonder direction somewhere :)
I'll join the "Steel" group as soon as possible, thanks again.
One thing you'll have to watch is that you can reach everything without crushing the foreground scenery. That's an awful wide table.
You know, with the room that table takes, plus the room to walk around it, thats a lot of space. Have you concidered a shelf layout in the same area. It's a more efficient use of space and you're layout would actually be a bit larger while occupying no more square footage.
Thanks for the input, I'm not concerned with the 5' table because of the walkaround on both sides. Since the outside of the oval track portion is near the edges of the layout, and the mountains are about 1/3 of the layout, I think I'll be ok.
A shelf layout? I'll admit, from what I've read about it I thought they were primarily used for narrow operational layouts and not oval runs... I'd definitely be concerned about the width of the table if I butted it up against the wall on a long edge.
Just finished the temporary track layout, and it all runs! Yay for a first try at flex-track laying with sectional. Something struck me when I was admiring the train run around the bare layout: adding the 9" sections in the curves has led to a slightly strange train movement... It's basically 3 18" curves then a straight track then curves again. It appears kind of 'stilted' in the turns and I wonder if everyone usually avoids doing this?
Xcalibur wrote: Thanks for the input, I'm not concerned with the 5' table because of the walkaround on both sides. Since the outside of the oval track portion is near the edges of the layout, and the mountains are about 1/3 of the layout, I think I'll be ok.A shelf layout? I'll admit, from what I've read about it I thought they were primarily used for narrow operational layouts and not oval runs... I'd definitely be concerned about the width of the table if I butted it up against the wall on a long edge.Just finished the temporary track layout, and it all runs! Yay for a first try at flex-track laying with sectional. Something struck me when I was admiring the train run around the bare layout: adding the 9" sections in the curves has led to a slightly strange train movement... It's basically 3 18" curves then a straight track then curves again. It appears kind of 'stilted' in the turns and I wonder if everyone usually avoids doing this?
You've just taken the first step from "building Model Trains" to becomeing a "Model Railroader".
I think, VERY generally speaking, we all try to avoid abrupt "transitions". Be that a transition from straight to curve, curve to straight, flat grade to sloped grade, sloped back to flat grades, etc. Our trains just look better moving smoothly. What you're seeing is magnified by having that 9 inch straight section, you see the "transition" twice, in rapid succesion.
If you have the space (I am not familiar with the plan you're using), use 22 inch sectional, or Flex-Track to make a wider radius, continuous curve from beginning to end.
If you don't have enough space to re-radius entire curve, try removing the 9 inch straight and one 18 inch radius piece on either side of it, then replace that approx. 27 inch length of track with flex that broadens radius as it goes to the mid-point and then returns to a sharper radius to meet the other side (Imagine two eased curves who's tangent tracks have a zero length).
RetGM wrote:retired GM, 1:1 scale, WM modeler in HO
Any chance I can get a ride up in the Cab of the WM scenic excursion. What happens if I ask real nice?