Hi all,
I was invited by Trickster Kevin (whose essay in the April MR has ensured that I will never believe anything he says) to introduce myself and post a little about what I'm doing.
I'm Matt. Native Seattleite. My brother and I had several layouts when we were kids in the 70s. My father wired the track, built control panels from parts he had lying around the shop, and even installed what he called "flywheel action" (now I guess "momentum" standard on DCC products) controlled with a giant knob from an old ham radio. My brother and I just ran the trains and argued over territorial infractions -- his out-of-scale army men on my side of track, etc.
Now I'm 58. I'm modelling the Spokane Portland & Seattle very loosely; in name only, in fact. I want to be able to somewhat realistically run SP&S, NP and GN power and rolling stock, and was hoping also to tie in some logging. Washington State is perfect for all that, though this first layout doesn't accommodate a logging scene yet. That's okay, because I want a Shay or Climax and so far the cost and fragility of those models are prohibitive.
I'm building a folded dogbone. I don't have fancy software and I'm not much of a draftsman, but I know how to use a ruler (and didn't we put a man on the moon with just a slide rule and a bit of math?), so I've drawn up the basic plan and I share it with you here. The mainline is the dogbone: it's single track but it looks like a double mainline in places. I just can't dispense with the continuous run. For me, waiting for the train to "come around into view" again is the heart of the thing. However, I wanted plenty of industry and switching, too.
But this all has to fit in basically one side of a cluttered 2-car garage, and unfortunately the door into the garage has to be on the layout side, not the side where the car is, so I have to sort of bend the layout off to the side.
The mainline loop squeezes together at the bottom to two tracks and goes into a tunnel, emerging at the other end of the layout behind a short wall that will divide the two scenes. Originally, I folded this part under the layout just to have room for continous run, but then I realized I could daylight it and use a scene divider, something I'd not previously considered. So the larger scene will be a town and industrial area, and the little wedge behind the wall will be mountain cliffs, tunnel entrances, a mining operation, and a wooden trestle.
I must here apologize to all the inhabitants (historical and present) of Priest River, because I'm moving their cozy little town from the Pend Oreille River -- where it was served in real life by the Milwaukee Road-- to an unspecified location on the SP&S line. And it will be more of a city. Sorry. I like the name. Had to have it. Introducing, the Priest River & Western Railroad.
I have no idea how to wire this thing. I have several sweet old DC engines, which I want to be able to keep, and one Atlas YB RS-3 fitted with DCC. I'm not very smart, so I'll be asking for a lot of help here.
Thanks for the welcomes so far. I'd love to hear how you think this track plan could be improved, or any stern warnings.
Returning to model railroading after 40 years and taking unconscionable liberties with the SP&S, Northern Pacific and Great Northern roads in the '40s and '50s.
Hi Matt,
I'm looking forward to your "stunning wooden trestle!"
Take lots of pictures as you go (and share them here).
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
You said 'Milwaukee Road' so I'm in. Look forward to seeing your progress!
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milwaukee native modeling the Milwaukee Road in 1950's Milwaukee.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/196857529@N03/
Welcome to the forum.
I think it looks like a fun plan.
If you could clarify, will you be viewing the layout from the right side, two sides, three sides, or all four?
Confused: I assume that the left side is against a wall because you need to have access areas there. If so, how will you see the scenes that are behind the divider? Conversly, If you can stand to the left of the layout, why need the access?
A few thoughts:
No need to be defensive about using pencil and graph paper. As long as the dimensions are reasonably precise, things should work out as a template for building. Usually folks tend to make the turnouts too short and the angles too steep. There may be a couple of areas where you have two turnouts stacked together where this might lead to dimensional imprecision, so be careful to leave enough space for turnouts. They are space eaters.
Generally, even small layouts benefit from being able to spot a short string of cars rather than just one car on each spur.
Especially like grain elevators and coal mines. They work better when you have space for longer strings of cars and the mine is placed tracks have as much room after the mine as before (the mine could be in the middle of the lodaing track instead of the extreme end).
You could reduce the size of the access, and try to lengthen the mine loading track and fit it against the scenic divider. This would allow that spur to hold two cars in front of the mine, two cars after the mine, and one car underneath the loader. The other spur could remain short and be used as a place to hold cars as some are being swapped out. Would look and operate better, IMO.
- Douglas
Thanks for the good wishes, guys.And Douglas, thank you for such specific advice on the actual placement of track. Very helpful.
DoughlessYou could reduce the size of the access, and try to lengthen the mine loading track and fit it against the scenic divider.
Doughless If you could clarify, will you be viewing the layout from the right side, two sides, three sides, or all four? Confused: I assume that the left side is against a wall because you need to have access areas there. If so, how will you see the scenes that are behind the divider? Conversly, If you can stand to the left of the layout, why need the access?
As for your astute remarks about the weirdness of my viewing angles, here's what happened. Originally the left side was against the wall, yes, and the difficult thing about this whole project is that there's a door into the room in the bottom left corner of this drawing, and my wife needs to access her car in a trajectory that runs upward and to the right, so any more width in the layout at the south end would create irritations for her, and the PR&W RR needs her full backing. Thus the folded loop.
To constrict matters further, there's a set of built-in shelves at the top left -- you can see two lines indicating them in the drawing. Even before I decided to daylight the lower loop, I put Access 1 in there because I realized that would be a dead corner, hard to reach. Also it would enable me to discreetly stage trains behind the depot and some other buildings. The problem was the viewing of that trestle scene. Oriented the original way, you could only see it when you walked back along the north side and looked behind the divider, and the shelving there made it so only one person could peak at it. I sort of liked that "hidden scene" aspect, but while I started the benchwork it dawned on me that I could flip the whole thing upside down and solve a lot of issues.
With the room door now top right and the shelves below, the L of the layout fits the space more naturally. The shelves are then at bottom right (drawn there with large Xs), and only the upper right 4 feet have to touch the wall. Yes, traffic between the door and the car is impeded, but I round (and protect) the trestle corner and scoot the whole thing downward parallel to the shelves (drawn in at lower right), and now all areas can be seen without much trouble, although now I'll have to climb under to the control cockpit below Priest River.
I dunno, I could still do it the original way. If I get time soon I'll draw up a plan that shows the room better.
Thanks again for your interest and ideas!
-Matt
Ok. Sure, opening up the loop to add a scene that might be obstructed from some angles is a net gain over leaving it closed.
My specific track placement comments might not ultimatley work. I was trying to more illustrate general principals about longer psurs and cuts of cars and used the mine as an example. There are certainly other things to think about.
And the general rule is that, IMO, a layout with fewer number, but larger, industries with longer spurs tends to look less "train set" like than a layout with many more smaller industries with shorter spurs.
But that might not matter. More spurs, but only switching one car per industry, might let you switch more variety of cars depending upon the industry. One tank car, boxcar, flat, hopper, gondola, etc. Fewer industries might allow more cars per building, but fewer types.
Neither is better, but if you're a rolling stock junkie who wants to have places to switch a variety of cars, or somebody who wants longer strings to switch no matter what variety, then that might play into how you arrange the spurs and how many buildings you have.
DoughlessIMO, a layout with fewer number, but larger, industries with longer spurs tends to look less "train set" like than a layout with many more smaller industries with shorter spurs.
Great point. I have little experience with spurs, so my plan basically copies what I've seen in the Kalmbach 101 track plan books where small-space layouts are depicted.
101 trackplans is certainly a good reference for small-ish plans. Its sometimes a challenge to fit a lot of stuff into the loops. The one loop you have 4 spurs competing with an access for space. And the stacking of turnouts might take more space than what's showing. Not taking out my measuring tape, but my gut says that loop scene might be ambitious as you have it.
Just off the top, there is a member here RRMel I think, who posts photos of his layout and sometimes his trackplan, which fits into a similar shaped space that you have, maybe bigger though. Maybe he'll be kind enough to chime in or you can maybe search his posts to get some ideas too.
Also off the top, your plan has a look similar to a very popular MR project layout built a few years back, the Virginian in 4x8. Very nice small layout. If you're not familiar with it, check it out and it might give you some ideas too. The space usage is different ,but you might see something that strikes you.
Also, there is an entire series about how to build it from benchwork to scenery that might also help.
crossthedogI wish there was a Thumbs Up button here
When you respond, in the menu of things below where it says "post body", you'll see a yellow smiley face thing. Click there and that will take you to a bunch of emoticons. You'll find a "thumbs up" there.
And no, they needed more than a slide rule and a pencil to put someone on the moon. You forgot the rocket.
crossthedogI was invited by Trickster Kevin (whose essay in the April MR has ensured that I will never believe anything he says) to introduce myself and post a little about what I'm doing.
Being known as "Trickster Kevin" was not a goal, but I'll take it.
Thank you for sharing so much about your plans. It looks like a very fun layout design to me.
I look forward to hearing lots more about this as you move forward.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
maxmanClick there and that will take you to a bunch of emoticons. You'll find a "thumbs up" there. And no, they needed more than a slide rule and a pencil to put someone on the moon. You forgot the rocket.
Well, Maxman, I bungled my attempt to respond with a smile to your rocket gag. And Kevin, thanks. I hope I did not offend. I enjoyed your essay very much, and you've already been very helpful in responses to my other posts. Benchwork is going up, somewhat crudely, so I'll post pictures anon. Nothing is level or square in my garage, not even the floor.
crossthedogAnd Kevin, thanks. I hope I did not offend. I enjoyed your essay very much, and you've already been very helpful in responses to my other posts.
Wow. You are the second person in 24 hours to say I have been helpful on these forums.
I really appreciate the kind words.
SeeYou190Wow. You are the second person in 24 hours to say I have been helpful on these forums.
I sense a payoff.