Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Dream Layout Quest continues.......

14183 views
33 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
  • 1,484 posts
Posted by Paulus Jas on Monday, July 6, 2009 2:46 PM

Dear Darrell, not so quiet right now.

May be you found your solution. After reading all the comments and above all, all your thoughts i am getting the picture.

One question, why the main up front?

You hit one of my concerns. When you are going to switch those long trains your yard, your A&D tracks, every thing has to be huge. With the main more or less isolated you'll find the space for some informal switching and your beloved engine terminal. I am jealous, you'll need a fleet of bigboys to fill the roundhouse.

Wish you all the best and post a photograph of your grandchildren watching the show.

Paul JAS

 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • 1,168 posts
Posted by dgwinup on Monday, July 6, 2009 4:09 PM

Yes, Paul, I've not been very quiet recently!  LOL

I know a large roundhouse and engine facility dictates a large yard, etc.  With the recent comments, perhaps the best solution is to model the roundhouse and 'imply' a large yard (in a staging area).  A simple mainline allows those big trains to entertain the kids (and me, too!).  With the roundhouse situated near or in a town, there's opportunity to have industry sidings operated from a small yard in the town.  The town could be big enough to justify some passenger traffic, too.

While running long freight and passenger trains on a mainline is my desire, I don't really need or want to model the making and breaking up of trains off the mainline.  I might be content for the long trains to just pass by the "operating" part of a layout (the roundhouse, town and sidings)

Years ago, I built a Thomas the Train layout for one grandson.  Here is a photo of Ryne and his brother, Spencer, playing with the trains.

They had a good time with it but it wasn't a permanent layout.  And, like many youngsters, their interests change over time.  Right now, they're both Star Wars fanatics.  They haven't forgotten the trains, though!

Darrell, (trying to be) quiet...for now

Darrell, quiet...for now
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sorumsand, Norway
  • 3,417 posts
Posted by steinjr on Monday, July 6, 2009 4:16 PM

Paulus Jas
One question, why the main up front?

 Umm - as I understood Darrel, he was considering putting the mainline along the walls, with the switching/service part of the layout in front (and maybe a little lower). That would put the main to the rear, not to the front ?

 Stein

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • 1,168 posts
Posted by dgwinup on Monday, July 6, 2009 4:18 PM

fwright

Another possibility is the now jointly (BNSF & UP) operated Front Range section from Denver to Pueblo.  Between Colorado Springs and Pueblo, the original 2 mains were within 1/2 a mile of each other for a good portion of the distance.  Just rewrite history a little and say that the UP got control of the D&RGW trackage much earlier.  And agreed much earlier to operate both the original ATSF and D&RGW mains jointly.  The grade over Monument Pass and through Palmer Lake (either or both directions would work) could make for some good scenery and reason for being for your Big Boy.  The D&RG established a picnic resort at Palmer Lake (the summit on the route) to boost passenger traffic from both Colorado Springs and Denver.  You have the choice of the Front Range scenery from Colorado Springs/Pikes Peak north to Denver, or the high plains (desert) between Fountain and Pueblo.

Pueblo had smelters that processed ore from Victor and Cripple Creek and perhaps as far as Leadville.  And Pueblo still has a steel mill.  The Pueblo Army Ammunition Depot was a major site of rail traffic during WW2.

Your joint engine service facility could plausibly be located at Pueblo, Colorado Springs, or Denver.

just some thoughts

Fred W

An excellent suggestion, Fred!

I would tend towards the high plains area since I don't want to introduce grades on my layout.  I'd prefer the track to remain level while the topography rises and falls beside it.

I will have to do some more research into that area.  It seems to have lots of possibilities!  And re-writing a bit of history would be no problem for me!  LOL  As I said earlier, I'm not planning on writing and extensive history for my layout, just a brief history the defines HOW my layout came to be, the reasons WHY these layout elements came together.

As an aside, I know the Big Boys operated through Wyoming and, to the best of my knowledge, never operated into or south of Denver.  Operating Big Boys, and the later Centennials, on my layout will take some serious modeler's license, something else that isn't a problem for me!  LOL

Thanks for your suggestion, Fred.  I'll go do some research.

Darrell, quiet...for now

Darrell, quiet...for now

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!