Ok.. I am new at this but I have enough space to make an 11'x11' N scale layout and I want to do a wrap around. The only problem is I don't know how deep to make the table. I was thinking 2' which would give me enough room to lay plenty of track and scenery but I was wondering if anyone else had done this and what your thoughts are. Also.. I am not a big fan of the "rail yard" busyness.. I like to keep it plain but nice.
Oh yeah.. Is there an advantage to using Code 55 track over code 80 or 80 over 55?
Welcome to the forum. You will get a lot of answers. What you want to do is the real question. Like you, I did not want a rail yard when I started, though now I have added one. I wanted a logging mountain, a farming scene, a huge bridge over a ceiling to floor canyon and a huge mountain with a gold mine. I wanted a loop of track wandering through all this.
With those wants in mind, I could look at magazines until I found some pictures that inspired me. I then made some sketches on graph paper and finaly I laid out the track on the floor in blue masking tape. When I had what I wanted, I started the bench work. I used open grid so when I changed my mind, and I did, I could adapt.
The first question is then, what do you want?
I really like the look of a train traveling through open fields or forest... maybe coming to A town along the way but not very busy. I want a bridge or two, could be over another part of the track or over a river...
Your area would be well suited to what you're describing. The trick to making a fine looking rural / small town layout is to not try to cram too much into the area....give it some breathing room. From what you describe, it sounds like you're already thinking like that, and a 24" shelf depth is a great width.
As for the code 80 / 55 debate, code 80 willl allow you to run anything as far as equipment, but some feel the track itself looks disproportionately oversize and so that is what sparked code 55. Code 55 has much more acceptable looks, but older equipment and newer Micro Trains equipment (shame on you MT) have oversize flanges on the wheels, often referred to as "pizza cutters", that often hit the ties or the spike heads on this finer code of rail, making them not play nice. Cars can easily have the wheelsets swapped out for low profile ones, but loco's are a different animal. Peco company has tried to split the differencee but having code 80 rail that is buried further in the ties so that it looks like code 55 but operates like code 80. It works well, but it has European tie spacing (ties further apart), so it's still a little off in the looks department. If you're buying pretty much all new equipment then this will all not mean much to you since virtually everyone (save Micro Trains) has made nothing but RP-25 compliant wheels (otherwise known as Low Profile) for some years now. Micro Trains used to include Low Profiles in their car cases, but they stopped doing that about a year ago, forcing you to buy Lo-Pro's if you buy their cars (really nice, but pricey, cars).
Thats the cliff notes version of the rail code debate. There's more to it of course, but thats the basic gist.
Might I also suggest a little reading? Space Mouses Beginners Guide is excellent, and no model railroader worth his salt (IMHO) should be without John Armstrong's Track Planning For Realistic Operation.
This is a good picture of what I like... its simple and looks nice: http://www.america-n.de/Module/EC/EC2.jpg
I might do a double mainline but I am not sure
Thanks for the links you posted.. it is helpful
A very important aspect to this will be its visual appeal, and as stated above, try not to cram track miles into any one scene. A yard, sure, but unless you are in a heavy industrial area, keep your tracks separated on the bench unless you are using double-tracked mains.
Equally important to the long-term use and enjoyment of your layout is ease of access for maintenance and for correcting short-term and critical problems, such as derailments or for decoupling cars where you'd like to do it for prototypical switching and spotting cars at loading docks. The photo you show looks great, uncomplicated, and there should be minimal need for reaching in among all those trees on well-laid track. Add a turnout, though, and your chances of having to reach into that scene go up about 10 times.
Layouts that just run around you, with little variety, will quickly get old. They sound marvellous when you have nothing, but later on it will begin to pale. So, do add a servicing area if you can, do provide at least some staging to keep clutter off your tracks, a yard is hard to beat for interest and fun (only has to be three tracks, plus a caboose and servicing area), and you absolutely must have a couple of spurs or sidings for industry and for meets when two trains need to get by each other. Each turnout adds variety and fun, but it also requires maintenance and rerailing cars and engines when you have forgotten to line the route properly.
Variety
Fun
Ease of maintenance and reaching stuff without knocking them over and damaging them.
-Crandell
Modeling the N&W freelanced at the height of their steam era in HO.
Daniel G.
I just posted this to another subject, but it may be helpful to you as well.
What I do for layout design (have done so far) is define my area and benchwork first. Next I decide on a theme. (Mainline running, with a branch line(?) or other special interests.) Then I put in a mainline. I am fond of twice around the room types divided by scenery and grades.
(A 24 inch wide shelf will allow you to do this in N scale without crowding.)
Since I have gotten into operations, I also have a staging area of some sort, whether it is a lay-over for entire trains, or a yard that simulates an interchange yard. One track in staging is a through track for continuous running. If I put cars on it, the layout becomes point to point for operations.
Next I try and determine how many small towns I can have, and possibility one city with a yard and loco facilities, without them crowding one another. Usually small yards and facilities unless I have the room for larger ones. I will try to fit in a way-side industry or two just for variation as long as it won't crowd things.
Then I go looking at plans for modular railroads. I look for ones that would make good towns or cities because their track plans are usually fairly compact, and most of the way they will be switched is already determined with a good track plan themselves.
Because I freelance, I don't worry about town and city names etc., but if you want to model a specific prototype, you can name the towns as the railroad you are modeling would, and build or plan you scenery to suite the area you want to model. Also, some of the industries that may be recognizable in a town you choose to name from a real one may have to be built or otherwise implied to achieve the "feeling" of the real town.
When building starts, I try and get all of the benchwork built first. Then plan where the towns will go and install the mainline to get some trains running. Then I work on one of the yards so I can store stuff when not running. Then I plug along on the other track work and scenery design and continue from there.
Hope this helps.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.