This is my first run at an HO layout design, a mining layout with some industries on second level. Design restrictions are: 1) room is 15X32 2) stairs on left 3) Window at top of stairs on left side will have an AC/Heat unit in window restricting that end of the room from elevations 27" to 57" 4) 4ft knee wall on north side (top) - 4ft knee wall on south side (bottom). See X-section view for AC unit heights. All measurements are from floor level.
Fisrt level 28", second level 56" ( I am 6'1" tall ) The widest part of the layout where the river is will be 6 ft with an open access isle along the wall. Longest cars will be 86' (restricted to mainlines on upper and lower. Branch lines minimum curves are 24". All mainline curves are minimum of 28", switches are #6. Steepest grade is 3% Helixes are 2 and 2.33%.
I am shooting for a good mix of mainline running and coalmine action. (I have 134 hoppers) Motive power is mostly steams (4-6-2, 2-8-2, 4-8-2, and 2-10-4's) Diesels will be SW's, GP's and SD's.
Track elevations are listed on plans, separation between levels on North side will be 24" clear (accounting for 4" benchwork on upper level).
Opinions welcome
Hope these are readable.
RF&PRR
RF&Prr Hope these are readable.
Actually, they are pretty hard to read. The thin lines on the black background don't show up well.
28 inches is very low. When you go down another few inches for sub-roadbed and benchwork, you're going to be crawling around under this thing trying to wire and install switch machines with less than 2 feet of clearance.
Rather than going over (or under?) the stairs in the lower left corner, consider a lift-off bridge or a swing gate. It would be much more accessible, and it could be an interesting scenic and operational feature.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Unfortunately, they are not.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Thanks, the new versions are more legible. My first concern would be the elevations you have chosen and the depth of the lower deck, which seems too low and much too deep for comfortable construction, access, viewing, maintenance, and operation. Less separation beetween decks would probably be a decent trade-off to bring the busy lower deck to a more reasonable height.
There seems to be a temendous amount of complexity, but I don't get the feeling of a railroad going from one point to another ...there seems to be a lot of criss-cossing. Is the helix to the upper deck above one of the mines on the lower deck? Or do the same mines appear on both images?
I may just not be seeing it, but there seems to be no provision for secluded staging, which gives the idea of connection to the rest of the world. With this much space, that would certainly be a possibility.
You seem to have a lot of yard for a relatively small number of on-line industries. What is your thought regarding an operations scheme?
Seems like there might be better opportunities in the space for easier access, more separation of scenes, and a better balance of staging, visible yards, and on-line industries. Best of luck.
ByronModel RR Blog Layout Design Gallery
Thanks Byron,
As this is my first design, I knew the bullets were coming, but that's ok. The mines are shown on both views for reference only and they will be on top of both hidden helixes. On that side of the layout I was hoping to incoporate a large difference in elevation, so I could have high trestles crossing other tracks, waterfalls, river with rapids, etc.
Goals:
1) To have tall trestles and a mountainous terrain on one side with one or two tracks weaving though the hills and under the trestles / bridges.
2) a run of double track main that loops the room ( so I can have one train looping while I run another switching / servicing buisnesses.
3) A large yard (rolling stock= Box cars-107, hoppers- 134, tank cars-16, flats-23 and two 8 car passenger trains that will only run on occasion.
4) I don't really want a staging yard / area, but that might have to be an option I include.
5) I desire an around the room / shelf type layout bearing as much room in the middle as possible so I don't feel cramped while operating.
I am limited in elevation (along the wall where the stairs come in) because of the AC in window on the left, which kills the loop around the room idea. It takes up from 28" to 57" (the ideal heights). In the plan the double main leaving the yard on the North and turning South along that wall drops to 25" so it's just under the AC unit. The upper loop from the moutains to the buisnesses is a single track that is 2" above the AC unit, hence the need for using helixes.
Like I said this is my first stab at a layout design.
Thanks,
MisterBeasley28 inches is very low. When you go down another few inches for sub-roadbed and benchwork, you're going to be crawling around under this thing trying to wire and install switch machines with less than 2 feet of clearance.
Crawling would not be a good option; however, lying on one's back to do the overhead work that is not far above you might actually be easier and more comfortable than working under a higher table.
Dante
RF&Prr Like I said this is my first stab at a layout design.
In my opinion, I think a lot of folks move to CAD a little too early in the process. I personally think it's a lot easier to come up with a satisfying design based on sound principles like access, traffic flow, prototype inspiration, concept, vision, and theme. With some of those ideas in mind, I think it can guide the detailed design process when you return to CAD.
If you have not had a chance to do so, a careful study of John Armstrong's Track Planning for Realistic Operation will pay great dividends, IMHO. I would also suggest that you try to find opportunities to visit some layouts in person to see how other have approached their track plans as background for designing your own.
On thing to consider might be a reasonable continuous run route, either high enough to clear the obstruction or a "dogbone style" loop-to-loop, combined with a separate stub-ended branch to provide some of the vertical scenery and isolated switching opportunity you desire. I think the access and elevation issues of the current plan would prove pretty difficult in the long run.
Best of luck!
One option I have is to go with a small mini split heat/ac unit instead of the window unit. They cost more but gaining the needed elevations prohibited by the window unit will allow a true loop around the room to gain elevation along the wall. Back to the CAD.