So, there are a few perks to owning my own home now ... like commandeering an entire room for a layout.
To that end, I've been playing with xtrkcad to get a layout I like, and this one seems to be promising, but I can't shake the feeling that I'm making errors such that I will get bored with the layout. Not that adding/changing this is bad - but I'd rather not be continually tearing things up because I goofed in the planning stages.
Here's a pic of my most current trackplan:
Quick Legend
brown/red tracks = mainline
green = yard limits
pink = passenger station
The large blue section along the north wall is the local town, which has some rail-served customers.
Givens
druthers
History / etc.
The railroad itself is a fictional branch of the NYC, situated in a fictional town between Cleveland OH and Erie, PA in or around 1947. Due to high land prices in Cleveland (Collinwood) and past resistance from the locals, the NYC has built up this area as their engine and car servicing facility for the region.
With the proximity to Cleveland / Collinwood Yard and points west, as well as Erie and points East (about an hour in either direction), many residents take the commuter trains between here and Cle/Erie. As this city also happens to be on the Water Level Route, the 20th Century Limited comes through town, though is not scheduled to make a stop here.
Timetable for Daily Trains* (weekdays):
Extras are fit into the schedule as where appropriate, and movements within the yards are happening all day (e.g. switching out cars/locomotives in the shops, other switching of cars in the yard, etc.)
So, what have I missed or what can I re-work to give myself "more" to do operationally?
*I.E if I had people over and we were operating. If I'm playing trains alone, this doesn't apply entirely.
-Dan
Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site
It’s all about personal preference, of course, so if you have had experience designing, building, and operating layouts and this design reflects what you like, then that’s what you should build.In the same space, many folks would choose to include more staging to allow for more realistic movement of cars and trains. But I may just not be clear on where all the trains you describe are running from-and-to.Likewise, many people would not devote such a large percentage of the space to engine service facilities, car shops, etc. at the expense of room for industries to create a reason for all the yard tracks and service facilities.There are a number of minor points that others might find less realistic (if that is your goal). It’s hard to tell on my screen, but if that is a slip switch to the sand house, it seems extremely unlikely that a real railroad would use a component of that complexity to reach such a facility.Best of luck.
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
How high is your layout? It appears that you have a duckunder into the workbench area. You may, depending on the height, be able to put the workbench under the layout and claim that space.
Also, that room looks like it would fit a good-sized helix if you wanted to go to two levels. This would also require moving the workbench, but it would be more difficult, as the lower deck will likely be low enough that it cannot go underneath the layout. Putting it in the helix probably isn't a good idea.
I designed my current Layout after the Conrail line that ran in my area.
It connected with 7 other shortline railroads and was mostly a Coal hauling branch.
I had the maps of the railroad so I knew what industries were there in the 1975 to 1985 time period.
I knew that the track design would work if I patterened the model off the real thing.
While the layout is Operations orientated and we have OPs Session every 2 weeks - I have been building the layout right along as I started in 2001 building and Operations began (while very limited) in 2002.
This allowed me to check the way the track was laid and how the Operators would run the trains.
If we needed to make changes (due to the compressed nature a Model is compaired to the Real Railroad) we did so and then watched if it improved or not.
So I felt - if things needed changed - I was not afraid to rip out sections and make the changes - if I didn't the Operators would soon drift away due to the inability to have fun running the trains.
Appeariently I have made the proper choices as my crew count keeps going up and I regularly have 20 Operators attend my twice monthly sessions and this is after 14 years of operations.
Not many layouts even last that long as the Owner gets bored quite quickly.
I on the other hand look forward each day to head for the basement and will - on average - spend 40 hours a week working on the layout.
I suppose I should mention it covers 2500 sq ft and has over 4000 feet of track - so I have a lot to work on as the Scenery is slowly being worked on as I need to scratch build most all my buildings (as I am trying to model the local area as Prototypically as possible).
This is what keeps my intertest up - trying to accurately duplicate the railroads that were once running everyday in my area.
This may be why so many lose interest in their layouts over time as there is no clear vision of what they want to accomplish and begin wavering as to what the ultimate goal is.
My goal is OPERATIONS and it is been this way almost forever - so making an Operational layout is what keeps me going - the Scenery and buildings will get done - but if the layout doesn't run right - then it won't be any fun and the operaors won't be back as they are the ones that make the layout come alive every session!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
Thanks for the replies so far guys ... this one's gonna be a bit long...
cuyama In the same space, many folks would choose to include more staging to allow for more realistic movement of cars and trains. But I may just not be clear on where all the trains you describe are running from-and-to.
In the same space, many folks would choose to include more staging to allow for more realistic movement of cars and trains. But I may just not be clear on where all the trains you describe are running from-and-to.
Yeah, the "off-site" trains would go to/ftom staging under the peninsula the trackwork got ugly/confusing when I left it in (beyond the fiddle tracks up north, near the "local customers". (includes a wye so that trains can properly enter coming westbound or eastbound as needed -- though "Westbound" and "Eastbound" are a bit difficult with "it goes in a circle!").
cuyamaLikewise, many people would not devote such a large percentage of the space to engine service facilities, car shops, etc. at the expense of room for industries to create a reason for all the yard tracks and service facilities.
I like them . Also, they kinda work as "industries" in their own right (yeah, not in the same manner as say a coal mine ... but you get the idea).
cuyamaThere are a number of minor points that others might find less realistic (if that is your goal). It’s hard to tell on my screen, but if that is a slip switch to the sand house, it seems extremely unlikely that a real railroad would use a component of that complexity to reach such a facility.
Yeah, it is ... it's an oops from when I was playing with where/how to fit the car shop in. It should actually be near the "coal delivery" part (Though, looking at it some more, the coal tower is at the absolute wrong end of the yard for coaling right before departure, assuming a loco is on a ready track.)
NorthWest How high is your layout? It appears that you have a duckunder into the workbench area. You may, depending on the height, be able to put the workbench under the layout and claim that space. Also, that room looks like it would fit a good-sized helix if you wanted to go to two levels. This would also require moving the workbench, but it would be more difficult, as the lower deck will likely be low enough that it cannot go underneath the layout. Putting it in the helix probably isn't a good idea.
Hadn't thought of that. The deck shown is something like 51 or 52" from floor to the top of the benchwork (just plywood - foam or homasote will go on top of that). Using a helix in the northeast corner could be possible - just means putting the workbench along the other wall (or under where I have it labelled duckunder). I'll have to go back to the planning board with that one.
cmrproductsSo I felt - if things needed changed - I was not afraid to rip out sections and make the changes - if I didn't the Operators would soon drift away due to the inability to have fun running the trains.
I'm not opposed to pulling something out and re-doing it ... the thing that I'm trying to avoid is thinking that I've got it "right" and building the thing only to have it last "completed" for a couple of years before I get bored (not enough ops, too much ops, no I really don't like point to point/roundy-roundy, or other things that I can avoid). Changing it because "you know, that #6 turnout over there is always acting up ... maybe a #8 will fix it" (or "you know, I really need to make this run-around longer" or something like that) is fine -- everything needs a tweak here or there between "on paper" and "real world".
Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to tell me?
Liftouts and duckunders are to be avoided if possible! What do you want to run on the layout?
NeO6874 Thanks for the replies so far guys ... this one's gonna be a bit long... <SNIP> Yeah, it is ... it's an oops from when I was playing with where/how to fit the car shop in. It should actually be near the "coal delivery" part (Though, looking at it some more, the coal tower is at the absolute wrong end of the yard for coaling right before departure, assuming a loco is on a ready track.) cmrproducts So I felt - if things needed changed - I was not afraid to rip out sections and make the changes - if I didn't the Operators would soon drift away due to the inability to have fun running the trains. I'm not opposed to pulling something out and re-doing it ... the thing that I'm trying to avoid is thinking that I've got it "right" and building the thing only to have it last "completed" for a couple of years before I get bored (not enough ops, too much ops, no I really don't like point to point/roundy-roundy, or other things that I can avoid). Changing it because "you know, that #6 turnout over there is always acting up ... maybe a #8 will fix it" (or "you know, I really need to make this run-around longer" or something like that) is fine -- everything needs a tweak here or there between "on paper" and "real world". Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to tell me?
<SNIP>
cmrproducts So I felt - if things needed changed - I was not afraid to rip out sections and make the changes - if I didn't the Operators would soon drift away due to the inability to have fun running the trains.
Dan
I am not saying I changed things like every week or what ever. If the Crew felt it would make things better - I would evaluate the change and I had the final say - but usually the person suggesting the change was right!
As far as running trains - I am a member of a Club and sitting for 12 hours during a show and just watch the trains go round & round isn't really a lot of fun -no matter how good the Scenery is!
I never liked my home layout in my early years like that (Round Round) - I was trying to do Operations at 10 years old with my old American Flyer trains (had all the Operating Accessories to do it - just not enough room).
I have run on 50 or more layouts during their operations sessions and have been there a number of times and probably have a couple thousand hours of running time - so having an idea what to build for a Operatioal Home layout was fairly easy.
I have helped build probably 100 layouts over the years for the Club & Friends and we usually built them into an Operatonal layout after tearing down their current Roundy Round - which had sit idle for years.
We have fouind those that are interested in Operations tend to keep a layout and their interest in the layout a lot longer than those that just throw the layout together and just watch the trains run.
This is a big Hobby and interests very widely so I don't try and tell others what they should do - BUT - looking at all aspects of the Hobby and visiting as many other layouts (as ther are many all over the world) gives you chance to see others work first hand and also ask the Owner why they did what they did.
It may gives one views on aspects of the Hobby they may never considered (such as Operations) and just might keep ones interest going for more than a few years!
It never hurts to check things out! ;-)
NeO6874the "off-site" trains would go to/ftom staging under the peninsula
You might want to take a close look now at clearances and grades. It seems to me that would be pretty tight/steep, especially once you consider transitions from level to grade and back again (which can use up a lot more length than one would like).
NeO6874the coal tower is at the absolute wrong end of the yard for coaling right before departure, assuming a loco is on a ready track
I think it was more typical in the steam era to load coal on the way "in" to engine service, but of course it varied from place to place and time to time.
If you can fit it, a dogbone is best to my veiw even if you rairly use the return part and it is hidden. I built my layout point to point but with a loop on the back, best of both worlds!
Thanks again for all the responses -- have lots to consider
@ Bob H --> I think we're still on two different pages?
My intention with it isn't that hte layout operates "all the time" as roundy-roundy only ... but I still kinda like to have the option of allowing something to just go roundy-roundy if I want to railfan or let things run for a while as I do something else (like building a kit or switching the yard / engine facility).
@ cuyama -- the staging yard, while under the peninsula, actually has the entrance up in the northeastern corner, near the turnout leading to the runaround/local customer tracks. It then crosses the mainline to get behind (i.e. closer to the bench/boiler) the passenger station, and after that crossing starts a 2.1% drop (according to xtrkcad) around the wall until it gets to the door (where it flattens out across the liftout). total drop is 5.5" from railhead to railhead, and with 1-1.5" total of subroadbed (pink foam), roadbed, etc, I figure it'll be somewhere between 3-4" of vertical clearance between the staging yard and the bottom of the tabletop. I might see about doing that helix idea in place of where I've marked for the workbench ...
NeO6874 Thanks again for all the responses -- have lots to consider @ Bob H --> I think we're still on two different pages? My intention with it isn't that hte layout operates "all the time" as roundy-roundy only ... but I still kinda like to have the option of allowing something to just go roundy-roundy if I want to railfan or let things run for a while as I do something else (like building a kit or switching the yard / engine facility).
I never ment you couldn't do the Run unattended in circles - to break in units etc.
I had that option on my current layout but finally removed it when I made changes to the upper level where it connected - as I never used it from the beginning back in 2001.
I never myself could understand the reasoning why some want to run their trains unattended - wearing them out and taking a chance in having them derail at the most inopportune time - but that isn't my problem only yours.
Yeah, that makes sense -- though as far as "wear them out" goes -- I've got about 40 years before I have to worry about that :) (brand new castings).
though yeah, didn't really consider "what if it derails"...
SO far I haven't put a continuous run connection in my new plan, but I have plenty of room for one, either on the upper or lower level - IF the net grade from one end of the level to the other is 0 or close to it, my original idea was to have at least the lower level climb at least 4" net so the track going into the helix could cross the line coming out of staging. If I do that, the connection, comprised of 1/4 turn of 30" or so radius plus maybe 2 more feet of track on each side would have to climb that 4" - resulting in a well over 4% grade. If I rearrange things a bit, I won't need that 4" net elevation change and I can do a connection with no or a much more reasonable grade.
(I keep saying net change because I don't plan on having all the track flat and level - but nothing says that either end of about 3 scale miles can;t be on the same level, with ups and downs along the run that result in the ends being the same elevation but somewhere in the middle be several inches higher.)
On my previous-previous layout (the 8x12 donut one), I used to set one of my sound steam locos on the tracks and run it at like speed step 2 while I was facing the other way working at the workbench, for background sound. I could work for hours and there never were any derailments. The track never ran close enough to the edge that I had to worry about it taking a tumble to the floor if it should happen to derail. When i was actively running trains, I would often run one on the outer loop, just running free, while I switched off the inside loop. Sometimes I like to just sit and railfan, other times I like to run a legitimate train, picking up and setting out along the way. That's why I try to make it possible to do both in my plans.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
I've always thought of NYC's mainline as a multiple track affair. It appears that you've got some single track main in there, and that is a bit jarring. I would suggest that your fiddle yard could be operated as an interchange (NKP?). Tony Koester and others have written of the advantages of having this "universal industry". Also, didn't PRR have trackage rights over some NYC mainline trackage between Sandusky and Ashtabula? I believe PRR I1sa 2-10-0's would have been the dominant power for this traffic in the late 1940's. There's an excuse for a more diverse traffic mix.
Tom
yeah, they would've been (at least) double-track ... but I can't cram a double-track mainline in there while still maintaining the 30" min radius on the mainline.
would love to have it, but geometry says no (or at least xtrkcad says no, because you can't nip things to fit).
although, I've kept playing with it, and the areas (station, yard, etc) are a lot bigger than I originally thought, so maybe I can squeeze that second line in...
NeO6874 I figure it'll be somewhere between 3-4" of vertical clearance between the staging yard and the bottom of the tabletop.
Unfortunately, that will not be enough. You need clearance for the height of the trains, the tracks themselves, your hands (derailments happen), and any supports, wiring, and switch motors for the visible deck above. Most folks like at least 6" clearance, although a little tighter can work.
As far as roundy, roundy, I find it great to let an engine run while working on scenery or just to test the main as i tweek something like a turnout. Also great when just showing off the layout, non modelers rairly enjoy operations.
My basement is about the same size and I am also in NE Ohio. If you know anyone in the area that is working in N scale and using DCC, let me know. That layout looks good. Like to see what you're working on. Thanks
rrebell As far as roundy, roundy, I find it great to let an engine run while working on scenery or just to test the main as i tweek something like a turnout. Also great when just showing off the layout, non modelers rairly enjoy operations.
Sounds a lot like some that have the TV on and never watch it!
Also seems like a really expensive TV or Radio just to make noise.
OK, so 6" puts the long (clockwise) route up to a 2% grade. I think that's still "OK" (if a touch steep); the CCW grade is far too high (4%), so that's gotta go. I think by doing that though, I can also move the yard throat around, and get a gentler grade for the CCW route. Thing is, this seems to be a lot of messing about with things, so I'm gonna try re-working it and putting in a helix in the upper right corner (in place of the workbench) and see what that does for me.
thanks again for all the insight guys
Well, I've been at the drawing board for a while, and was able to come up with this revision. Uses a helix to go down a few inches, and then traverses downhill along the wall. I'll see about adding another turn or two to the helix for the same vertical drop (about 12" all told), but I'm having a heck of a time keeping it all straight once it goes down more than the two turns that it does currently.
Upper deck:
Mainline only:
And staging:
The light blue lines / curves across the upper deck are rough indicators for the viewblocks between "sections".
Red lines show where power gets cut when the bridges are out (yeah, they're huge sections - I can probably move it closer, but these spots looked convenient on paper).
Very rough order for a train coming out of staging will be it can either take the turnout left, and head "Westbound" (inner / Orange tracks - past the station), or go straight through the turnout "Eastbound" (through the industrial district). Upon heading "Eastbound" out of the station, a train immediately enters staging.
From the industrial district, the train will head through light urban / suburban type setting (not the same town as the yard / engine facility), then moderately heavy urban with things getting denser as you get closer to the passenger station -- maybe a warehouse discrict around the corner leading into the engine facility ... and then more commercial / apartments as you approach the station.
Through trains (staging to staging) will be "reversed" in staging by swapping the ends the power and caboose are on (simple enough). For passenger trains, the cars having a true "forward" (sleepers, platform-ended cars, etc) will be uncoupled from their train and brought around the layout backwards ... or maybe I can put a cassette type system on one of those outer tracks.
At no time will a train be pushed beyond the limits of the staging yard (i.e. around the bend). Some power is to be kept in staging, although it should also be cycled with power in the "on stage" locomotive facility regularly.
For the passenger station - just make one station, and put it near the edge, with platforms between the tracks - two mains plus one passing siding each, to surround both platforms, one being the eat platform and the other being the west platform, but parallel to each other, Much simpler track arrangement and more typical of a passenger station along the middle of a line.
Not sure you need all that complexity of the second turntable and tracks in staging - to restage, you just back trains out and turn them on the visible part of the layout. Or alternately, put enough turns in the helix to make a true double deck layout, although this means back to no staging. Or could always be 3 levels, the way too low level being staging, then the lower deck 8-10 inches above that one, then 15-18" above that, the top deck. But now we're getting quite complex.
the staging TT was planned as a quick "make a new train" setup. Put loco on it, spin around, couple to the back (now front) of the freight / coach train, work's done.
Was (am) going back & forth on it myself.
A true double-deck layout would be nice (I'm already down 12" in the staging yard - so, I could probably get down 18" in the helix with a couple extra turns in the helix. Though that'll put me down to about 36" on the lower deck - quick checks against my desk here shows it to be several inches higher than the desk ... not quite eye-level, but pretty close (cheap-o "office chair" from walmart / target all the way down would probably put it a little closer). Not gonna mess with this one -- took me months to get it feeling "just right" and don't want to go through that mess again .
Downside to double-decked is "what will I do with all that space??" .
Well, it's been a couple of days, and I've come up with this double-decker design. Real quick napkin maths say I've got about 9 scale miles of mainline track (EB + WB combined w/ the helix -- about 4mi is visible, the rest is in the helix), with at least another 2 miles of sidings, leads, etc.
Some of the trackwork still needs to be re-worked / checked more closely for clearances, but I like how it's looking overall. Don't think I've completely mangled things ...
Upper Deck (54-56"):
Lower Deck (36-38"):
Staging (24-26"):