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!

Would Anyone Be Interested?

674 views
17 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Would Anyone Be Interested?
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 1:53 PM

Hello to everyone, i come to see if there would be anyone out there that enjoys the design aspect of model railroading and that might be interested in helping me "Re Design" or alter a track plan to accomodate my benchwork? The layout i am referring to is the "Salt Lkae Route" which was designed to fit into a 4'x9' layout. My new benchwork is an around the room shelf style design now measuring 12'x20'. My benchwork that i am currently building is like i said, a walk in style shelf around the room. The shelves are 2' wide with a planned turnaround at each end on each side of the room that will measure 40" to accomodate a nice radius turn around. I am not looking for every detail to be axact, rather just to take some of the nicer points of the layout such as the river scene, mountains, some continuious running with some double main line and i would also like to be able to squeeze some industry and maybe a smaller yard for switching/storage etc. if possible somewhere. As of right now i am working at just 1 level but i am not opposed to adding a second lever at some point. I am not necessarily stuck on the location or era as modeled in the salt lake route, i prefer the eastern part of the USA especially the Appalachian Mountain region. As far as era i am partial to the post steam era but not the newest or biggest locos, mainly the early SD and GP days of diesel. Also, i have no particular road in mind to model after but i am partial to the Chessie, B&O, C&O days. I would be willing to pay someone if that person thinks they might be interested in helping me. I have been messing around with AnyRail on my computer but i am in no way a professional with it yet. Anyways, i will attach a couple of pics of the originol layout as well as a rough drawing of my benchwork. Also, i am not set in stone on the salt lake route, i just like a few of the features of it like i mentioned so please feel free to suggest or reccomend any track plan that would fit my benchwork that might also have some of the things i like about the salt lake route....Many thanks!

 

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 5:29 PM

Just a little update concerning my current track plan or my plan in general....I have decided that after much thinking and contemplation i am going to scrap the "Salt Lake Route" idea as far as designing my new track plan based off of it. I have decided that the only reason that i ever built the SLR was due to space restraints and being bored. I have decided that i want this new bench work to be home for an entirely unique and new design based on my givens and druthers as well as what equipment i plan to run. Also the era i really like will play a big role in my new design/layout. Anyways, i just wanted to let everyone know this just in case someone out there was to decide to work up a track plan based on the SLR. I still welcome any and all help, suggestions and comments working forward on my new layout.....Thanks again everyone!

  • Member since
    May 2010
  • 5,611 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 5:36 PM

I think your much better off designing a new layout with your new space.

Keep us posted with your layout designs.  There a many on here that give good constructive ideas as you design your layout.

I take it you will still be in N scale?

Mike.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,238 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:03 PM

I agree with Mike, do it yourself.  It will be much more self satisfying doing it yourself.  Only you know what you like and what your wants are.  I made a must have list and went from it.
 
1) I love the early 1950s era, my teen years.
 
2) Continuous running mainline
 
3) Mountains with grades and tunnels
 
4)   A roundhouse and turntable that will handle my largest locomotives
 
5)   A large trestle
 
6)   An open Howe Truss Bridge
 
7)   A small river or creek
 
8)   A passenger station
 
9)   A small yard (switching is not my thing
 
10) A mainline double crossover
 
11) A reversing loop
 
 
My layout has all of the above and I’m very happy with it.
 
 
  
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 26,630 posts
Posted by rrinker on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:33 PM

 I would strongly advise you to have a track plan BEFORE building any benchwork. Otherwise you will be artificially limiting yourself to a predefined benachwork form which will most likely be less than an ideal use of the space.

                                 --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Tuesday, December 3, 2019 8:16 PM

Here is basically what im looking for. This was found searching the web but i really like the track plan other than my shelve being 24" and his is 28". Also his room size is somewhat smaller than my 12'x20' and the one turnback penninsula i have built is 40" where his is 33.5". What is some of your thoughts on me possibly expandind this plan to fit my needs and maybe omitting a few of the front tracks on the straight where his is 28" and mine is only 24"? I dont want to copy his exact track plan but i sure do like it. Anyways, your comments are appreciated!

  • Member since
    June 2014
  • From: East Central Florida
  • 401 posts
Posted by Onewolf on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 6:29 AM

I assume this is N scale?  Can you effectively reach the back side in the 40" turn back areas from the "aisle"?

Modeling an HO gauge freelance version of the Union Pacific Oregon Short Line and the Utah Railway around 1957 in a world where Pirates from the Great Salt Lake founded Ogden, UT.

- Photo album of layout construction -

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 7:44 AM

Looks like it is marked N scale in the diagram.

Hey OneWolf, how is the layout coming along?

rrinker

 I would strongly advise you to have a track plan BEFORE building any benchwork. Otherwise you will be artificially limiting yourself to a predefined benachwork form which will most likely be less than an ideal use of the space.

                                 --Randy

Yes.  Design track plan first, then benchwork to fit.  Horse before the cart!

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,238 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 8:25 AM

That layout has one thing I didn’t have on my “Must Have List”, a second long storage track.  Looking back the more storage tracks the better.
 
When I designed and built my basic layout it was in the late 80s.  I didn’t have any idea that I would have the ability to run multiple trains simultaneously.  My layout is an HO scale twice-around, a connected double loop with 3½% grade and a 3½% helix, partially hidden in my mountains.
 
Had I been smart I would have made several storage tracks long enough to store multiple full length trains in my hidden areas.  That way a Steam freight could go in the East bound tunnel, be parked, and a passenger train could come out of the West tunnel and vica versa.
 
I’m an old school guy but I have added DCC to my layout, I still run more in DC mode than DCC mode, one or the other, not simultaneously.
 
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    June 2007
  • From: Grew up in Calif, left in 84, now in Virginia
  • 7,053 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 9:06 AM

RR_Mel

That layout has one thing I didn’t have on my “Must Have List”, a second long storage track.  Looking back the more storage tracks the better.

 
For sure.  I went a little nuts and had 11 staging tracks on my 10x18' layout.
 
When I designed and built my basic layout it was in the late 80s.  I didn’t have any idea that I would have the ability to run multiple trains simultaneously.  My layout is an HO scale twice-around, a connected double loop with 3½% grade and a 3½% helix, partially hidden in my mountains.
 
 
Mel

 

Even if you aren't running multiple trains simultaniously, you can still leave entire trains on the track to simulate a day of scheduled trains, or run different trains as you feel like it. 

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    May 2010
  • 5,611 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 9:29 AM

Storage/staging tracks is one of things I neglected to consider when I built my small layout.

Mike.

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 4,238 posts
Posted by RR_Mel on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 9:31 AM

riogrande5761

 

 
RR_Mel

That layout has one thing I didn’t have on my “Must Have List”, a second long storage track.  Looking back the more storage tracks the better.

 

 
For sure.  I went a little nuts and had 11 staging tracks on my 10x18' layout.
 
 
When I designed and built my basic layout it was in the late 80s.  I didn’t have any idea that I would have the ability to run multiple trains simultaneously.  My layout is an HO scale twice-around, a connected double loop with 3½% grade and a 3½% helix, partially hidden in my mountains.
 
 
Mel

 

 

Even if you aren't running multiple trains simultaniously, you can still leave entire trains on the track to simulate a day of scheduled trains, or run different trains as you feel like it. 

 

 

The drawing below is essentially what I have if I stretch out the twice-around.  The drawing is two rails not two tracks, its for wiring purposes.
 
  
 
It would have been easy to compress the oval to allow for a second storage track.  The minimum radius of the end curves are 32”, dropping them 2” would have been easy.
 
I didn’t go with DCC until 2006, I had been running 17 years without needing the second storage track.
   
 
Mel
 
 
My Model Railroad   
 
Bakersfield, California
 
I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
 
  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 12:42 PM

Onewolf

I assume this is N scale?  Can you effectively reach the back side in the 40" turn back areas from the "aisle"?

 

 

Yes Sir i can reach the back side of the 40" from the aisle but i also have access from the end of the turnback also so getting to the back of the layout at the 40" turnback is no problem and yes, it is N scale.....Thanks!

  • Member since
    April 2018
  • From: 53° 33′ N, 10° 0′ E
  • 1,565 posts
Posted by Tinplate Toddler on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 5:29 PM

The signature feature of MR´s Salt Lake Route project layout was the front part with the track "snaking" through the breathtaking scenery. Somehow, this gets lost in the layout idea you show us, making that layout yet another visually boring layout filled with way too much track!

Happy times!

Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)

"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"

  • Member since
    October 2016
  • 9 posts
Posted by jim57 on Wednesday, December 4, 2019 7:19 PM

Like you, I am a fan of Appalachian railroads.  The mountainous terrain guides the twisting trackage.  Unfortunately, the Grit City plan is so linear that changing it to a mountain scene by erecting mountains over the tracks would certainly be disappointing to anyone familiar with such landscape.

I suggest you look at plans on Dan Bourques' website appalachianrailroadmodeling.com for inspiration (includes N-guage).  Also you may enjoy reading Tony Koester's "The Allegheny Midland: lessons learned" and the classic design guide by John Armstrong "Track Planning for Realistic Operation."

 

Hope this helps,

JimW

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:19 PM

Tinplate Toddler

The signature feature of MR´s Salt Lake Route project layout was the front part with the track "snaking" through the breathtaking scenery. Somehow, this gets lost in the layout idea you show us, making that layout yet another visually boring layout filled with way too much track!

 

 

You sir are correct and i see what you mean. I am just desperate to try and get some kind of layout going is one reason i picked the track plan that i did. I think i will go back and do some more reading and give it some more thought....Thanks again, it sure is easy to loose sight of what you want on a layout and get drawn into doing just any old thing.....

  • Member since
    February 2018
  • From: Great Plains
  • 775 posts
Posted by York1 on Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:51 PM

Trainzman2435
I am just desperate to try and get some kind of layout going is one reason i picked the track plan that i did.

 

With the risk of angering some posters who have given you advice, I'll give you my advice.

Don't overthink.

Don't over plan.

Don't obsess over over drawings.

Build a table, get some flex track, and start laying it out on the table.  Turn it, reverse it, and get a loop of some kind laid out.  Join the sections, add some wires, and get a locomotive running.

You can then change things you don't like, add to sections, add another section of table and extend it, and add some more sections.  After all this, if you don't like it, then take out what you don't like and try something different.

After you've done this, you will have learned what works, what doesn't work, what you like, what you wish you would have done, etc.  If you are completely unhappy with it, then junk the whole thing and start over.  Some of the people posting here are working on their 3rd or 4th layout.

 

Now, that's my opinion, and for many, they probably think I've given you bad advice.  But it's your hobby.  Do what you want.  Enjoy the process and the work.

Saints Fan John

  • Member since
    October 2019
  • 35 posts
Posted by Trainzman2435 on Thursday, December 5, 2019 2:53 PM

York1

 

 
Trainzman2435
I am just desperate to try and get some kind of layout going is one reason i picked the track plan that i did.

 

 

With the risk of angering some posters who have given you advice, I'll give you my advice.

Don't overthink.

Don't over plan.

Don't obsess over over drawings.

Build a table, get some flex track, and start laying it out on the table.  Turn it, reverse it, and get a loop of some kind laid out.  Join the sections, add some wires, and get a locomotive running.

You can then change things you don't like, add to sections, add another section of table and extend it, and add some more sections.  After all this, if you don't like it, then take out what you don't like and try something different.

After you've done this, you will have learned what works, what doesn't work, what you like, what you wish you would have done, etc.  If you are completely unhappy with it, then junk the whole thing and start over.  Some of the people posting here are working on their 3rd or 4th layout.

 

Now, that's my opinion, and for many, they probably think I've given you bad advice.  But it's your hobby.  Do what you want.  Enjoy the process and the work.

 

 

Thank you sir and i do appreciate your advice. I am going to go ahead and get a few things laid out and at least get a train running....Then from there who knows? Thanks to everyone, i do appreciate all of your commensts and suggestions!

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!

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!