Olympic layout (part deux) - 6x9

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Thanks all for the ideas and comments!

When it comes to yards, I'm still figuring out how they work.  Also, I don't have a whole heckuvalotta space.  I've redone both the docks and yard, as well as adding some industries / scenicing details to Irondale.  Feedback appreciated!

 

 

[fredswain]

I assume he wants the runarounds so he can move the engines to the other side to get out. This isn't really necessary at a logging camp though as they'll run those engines anywhere. He could always use that siding as storage and then still be able to get an engine out depending on how he got it in there. Same in each place.

The turntable/yard area is probably the only area that I'd really change around. At least one track has to be an arrival/departure track and another track is already a turntable and service track lead. That doesn't really leave any room for switching. It could however be setup as staging without switching for operations. I prefer staging to be hidden though. I'd find a way to get at least 3 usable switching sidings (they can even be stub ended) and one a/d track and then keep these independent of the turntable lead.

As far as the back turntable lead, I don't see much of an issue with it. He could always make it a little rougher, keep it poorly ballasted, and have lots of weeds growing up around it. Of course still find a way to make it usable. You never know when the ore docks or iron mill will need an engine sent out of the roundhouse to switch some cars around. That could be another operating session option that isn't always used.

[gpa]

I like it. I can picture a bunch of little jobs running around the layout.

I'd probably make the sidings at Pysht and Sequim bigger.

I'd also stub out the top two tracks in the yard and route the rip lead off of the roundhouse lead. This will give you three usable yard tracks instead of just two.

I had a few questions about some of the tracks.

1. What is the runaround at the logging camp for?
2. What is the runaround at the kilns/ore docks for?
3. Why does the turntable have a track that runs out toward the right wall, over the crossing and toward the kilns?

Nice plan.

[fredswain]

I still don't think there's too much to worry about when it comes to the plan. It may seem busy to some but it all depends on what you are going for. If you want an overall feel of wide open spaces, this isn't it. However in industrial and urban areas, tracks may run everywhere. Many times prototype track plans can be crazier than those we imagine and build. The nice thing about urban scenery is that you have lots of scenery breaks. This means you can get a vantage point of realism from a small area without seeing lots of other things in the background that would kill the illusion. It's really all about illusion. You looks at a layout differently from track level as opposed to above and the feel is very different. In modelling we use selective compression and forced perspective all the time to get a sense of realism. Yet none of those is real. In the same fashion, a track plan doesn't have to be wide open to get a sense of realism either.

If everyone wanted pure realism, we'd never see HO layouts set up on 4X8 sheets of plywood or hollow core doors which is basically the equivalent of trying to stuff a real train inside a football stadium. You've definitely got lots to do and operations could be quite fun. Remember in the real world, not every industry gets served at the same time. You have all kinds of options. Have fun with it!

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Hey Doughless,  thanks for the observations.
I do worry about packing in too much track, but at the same time I want things to "do" so I can work on my railroad after I work on my railroad.

Irondale, Sequim, Pysht River and Forks are on the Olympic Peninsula, and in 1900, kinda isolated from the "big" cities of Seattle, Tacoma or Olympia.  On my layout they're served by a fictional connection to the SP&S by the yellow track coming up from the south on the upper left hand side. 

They also connect with the rest of the world (Seattle, Vancouver BC, etc) through the docks.  Irondale had specific ore docks while the rest I'm borrowing / compressing from nearby Port Townsend.  I figure I'll need a dock for outgoing lumber, another for a cannery (the loggers and miners need food) and one more for frieght traffic.  Thats in addition to the ore docks, which would receive ore from all over (there's a pict of a boat from China dropping off a load.  How much? Wan ton ).  I'm still debating if I want the finished metal products to go back out the same ore dock or get railed to the main docks for shipment (though some would go down the peninsula to Portland via the SP&S yellow track.

I love dock operations, but I hear you.  I'd like to play around with that layout.  I'll try to post some possibilities soon.
Cheers!
--Mark

[Doughless]

The plan has lots of track.  Some may think its a bit busy, but since the layout has an industrial theme, I think it works.  Trying to model mainline running with a lot of track gets unrealistic.  Overall, the plan looks good and entertaining.

To me, the issue of short spurs are only obvious in the dock area.  Do you really need two docks plus an ore dock?  Seems a bit crowded there, and maybe the spurs are a bit short there, even for the era you're modeling.  Maybe only an ore dock plus one other, making each a bit longer.

I haven't studied every word on your plan or the likely way it will operate, so I don't know if you have an interchange track.  The track that serves the ore dock spurs, the light blue track crossing one of the mains, looks like a good option for an interchange track, with the way it crosses the main and originates at the siding of the other main.  You could cut down the number of docks and add this other element.  If you feel you need the number of docks you have, maybe devoting a bit more space to them to make the spurs a bit longer would be the right option for you.

Just observations.

 

[mcfunkeymonkey]

I think he means that he'd like to meet a woman who would be ok with ("allow") a dude to build a layout in the masterbedroom.  Or at least know they exist.

Given the eye-rolling I get while puttering away on my module, I'm not sure they do.  And they probably won't when I explain the scope of what I want to do (I've discussed all this with her in general terms, but that's not quite the same when there's an actual plan involved).  But, like I said, my footprint would be smaller and the storage underneath would clean up the current mess, so I'm hoping it all works out.

And while I'd love to extoll the virtues of my wife & sister-in-law, here, on this forum I'd love some more ideas / thoughts about the design aspects of my layout (see any of the questions I've asked earlier).
Cheers!
--Mark

[HarryHotspur]

Wazzzy

and this is being built in your master bedroom? does your wife have a sister? what does the wife think of your plans to use the corner?

 

Just curious, but what does his sister-in-law have to do with his model railroad?

[mcfunkeymonkey]

I like the hands-on approach too, so I was going to have manual throws everywhere.  Still debating about that back lower-right corner (the Irondale Iron & Steel Mill complex).  I'm thinking manual around there too, but I'll see when I build the benchwork and decide on a final hight whether to makes those manual or electric.

I'm also leaning towards manual skewer uncoupling: I put a couple microtrains delayed uncoupling magnets on the module I'm making but they just look ugly.  I was trying to follow the other forum about the small round magnets (cheaper) but in n-scale they'd fill the space between ties and the next size smaller has 1/4 the pulling power.  The trapdoor and other hidden mags are possibilities, but I haven't played around with them to find a method I dig.

In Building a Model Railroad: Step by Step, David Popp doesn't mention uncoupling at all (odd, I thought, unless I missed something), though some picts of his yard show those circle-in-square pairs of mags (radio shack?) under some of his lower yard tracks.  I'm assuming he uses skewers elsewhere.

Any major drawbacks to skewering trains that I should be aware of?

[fredswain]

It looks like your longest reach to uncouple cars, assuming you are doing it manually and not with magnets, is about 24" or so which is fine. I personally like to use manually thrown switches on industries but use electric for mainlines. I even like to use manual off of the mainline feeding those industries. That's how it's done in real life. On your however I'd veer away from that in a couple of places. On the right hand side of your layout, the switches against the back on the mainline and immeidately by it, I'd make electric. That way you don't have to reach those 30" or so to manually throw them. Everything else can be ground throws. The crossovers on the mainline I'd make electric as well. Then again that is on a drop in piece so that may or may not be advisable.

You shouldn't have any reach issues this way. Using uncoupling magnets could also help if there is an issue. Just make sure your couplers are adjusted so they work reliably.

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Thanks for the thoughts.
I prefer the shorter, older cars anyway, but I do want to make sure I have room at the industries & sidings, and that they're layed out in the best way (sometimes just flipping a switch over can work wonders).
I'm guessing the longest cars I'd be using are 50' Overland/ton passengers, or maybe a wreckcrane.
Also want the options for different size steam: is 11'-14" radius curves going to limit me to 0-6-0s?  What's the largest steam I could go with 11" radius?  Just want to weigh my options.

Of course, I'd love to get one of those 2-truck shays at some point!

So if any siding or industry doesn't work (like the docks or the woodmill), I'd love to know how to improve / rearrange.

Thanks again!
--Mark

[fredswain]

I actually think it's a pretty nice plan. You've done your homework and have given a way to switch your industries without clogging the mainline which is important. The twice around is a personal preference. Some like it. Some don't. As far as your siding length is concerned, I don't really see an issue with it. If your longest trains are going to be 6-8 cars, you don't need much length. If you ever want to run later era power though it may get unrealistic. Then again selective compression is what it's all about for illusion sake and that by nature is unrealistic.

I also don't see much of an issue with 3.5% grades. You are running short trains. Since you are modelling an earlier era, make sure you're engines can pull that many cars up that grade. Smaller steamers don't pull a whole lot so set up a test track as a simulation. If it works, then the only other concern to worry about it the transition point to and from the grade. You want it to be gradual so you don't have uncoupling issues.

The nice thing about a layout is that it's your own little world and anything can happen in it. If you want to set it up for operations, you'll obviously favor shorter trains with older power. If you just want to watch them run, you can do whatever you want. Want 30 car trains being pulled by a Big Boy? Go for it! Want a modern diesel? Do it! Just because a layout has a particular theme doesn't mean anything that doesn't fit that theme should be prohibited. My new layout is going to use modern power and old steam. Whatever I feel like running at the moment. I may even operate with each one. I like steam and the most modern new equipment as well. I'm a MOPAC fan though. I'm going to try to paint some newer engines with the old Jenks Blue. It'll be a "what if" railroad but it's mine and I can do what I want. They layout will have it's own theme and if done properly can be almost any time over a very wide period.

I think it looks good. Even the 30" max depth isn't much of an issue. I know people raise concerns about it but if that's only a small part of the layout and trains only run through that area, you don't really ever need to reach back there except in the event of a derailment. Keep manual switching out of that spot and life will be easier. Overall I like it. Good job. You'll find that you'll make some changes as you build it as you'll see something that looked good on paper that didn't work in real life and vice versa.

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Since dust is her major issue, I was going to build the benchwork over the two-months of summer while my wife and kids were in Japan visiting family (My wife does have a sister: she's in Japan & single, though "available" isn't the word I'd use for her...).

Right now the same space is occupied by books & the module I'm working on now, so by building shelves underneath I'll be actually reducing my "footprint" in my "office" (I have a very big desk & bookshelf sprawl here right now). 

I've also taken over the 1/2 bathroom connected to the bottom for storage / workroom.  The fan in the bathroom ceiling isn't the same as a spray booth, but, being California, I do spraying of anything outside in the fine weather, or I wait.  Magic Water doesn't smell and I've soldered quite a bit without a complaint.  She also stays up way later than I do in other parts of the apt.

But that's the space I got, so trying to figure out the best use with it.

Looking forward to more critique!
Thanks in advance
--Mark

 

[Wazzzy]

and this is being built in your master bedroom? does your wife have a sister? what does the wife think of your plans to use the corner?

i'm just thinking of the usual mess that happens with the building and scenery process; not to mention the storage of 'stuff' to get 'er all done. some of the steps can get very messy and a toxic smell may linger in the room, too. what if she wants to sleep and you want to play trains?

 i like the track plan and will look at it more indepth after i sleep; 3rd shift working the real RR yards in the rain/cold. its a job that pays for my hobby (model RRing).

 

[mcfunkeymonkey]

I was hoping to get to 1895-1920s.
That's when most the industries boomed there.
Most the buildings were still around through the 60s & 70s, so I could run some desiel (which is all I have right now). 
But, slowly, I will build up my steam!

Any sidings / spurs that need to be longer or reworked (for operational joy?)

[markpierce]

With the exceptionally short sidings and spurs, it would work much better as a 19th century railroad.  If more modern railroading is your thing, I'd suggest reworking the plan.

Mark

[steinjr]

 

mcfunkeymonkey

A wall runs along the top of the whole drawing, and down the right side.
The left section come out from the wall, with the "pit" on the right with 48" of space at the widest, and opens out into the bedroom on the right.
If the drop-in section is gone, I can walk from the yellow staging track next to the full window in the upper left hand corner, all the way around to the waterfall in the pit.

The farthest reach is 30" back behind the Irondale Iron & Steel Works at the lower right hand corner.
And I got long monkey arms.

I'll draw in the walls and repost, unless there's a better way to show it.
Thanks!
--Mark

 Sorry - just noticed that you were using 6" squares on your plan instead of the more common 12" squares. If so, deepest part is 30" deep, not 60" deep.

  30" is marginally doable. I still wouldn't want to reach for something 30" deep if I could avoid it. I have 20" depth on the deepest part of my layout, and that still is pretty deep to reach when the layout is at height 40-some inches off the floor.

 Stein

 

 

[mcfunkeymonkey]

The walls are in black.  All the area to the left opens to the bedroom.

 

The longest reach is from the docks to the depot at 30", which, at 40-44" hight, I can reach without a whole lotta problem.  That back corner will get scenery done first, and back to front.  After that, a wayward car is reachable.

I try not to assume, as "it makes an [donkey] out of u & me." 
(mostly me)
Other issues?
--Mark

[SpaceMouse]

Don't assume. Be sure of your limitations before you build.

[mcfunkeymonkey]

A wall runs along the top of the whole drawing, and down the right side.
The left section come out from the wall, with the "pit" on the right with 48" of space at the widest, and opens out into the bedroom on the right.
If the drop-in section is gone, I can walk from the yellow staging track next to the full window in the upper left hand corner, all the way around to the waterfall in the pit.

The farthest reach is 30" back behind the Irondale Iron & Steel Works at the lower right hand corner.
And I got long monkey arms.

I'll draw in the walls and repost, unless there's a better way to show it.
Thanks!
--Mark

[SpaceMouse]

Stein,

I have a person take two paper cups and place them on a table. The first one you place on the edge of the table. Next you lay a piece of track at the distance you are planning to place the track on the layout. Now put the second cup right in front of the track.

Next measure from the ground how high the layout is going to be and note on your body where that is. Now position yourself next to the table so the table is at the relative height the layout will be in relationship to your body. . Next take a paper towel and see if you can clean the track without knocking over either paper cup. Move it closer until you can do it. That will be your reach limit.   

[steinjr]

mcfunkeymonkey

Is there some major flaw that I'm not seeing

 

Your arms are not as long as you may think. A good rule of the thumb is holding the distance from layout edge by aisle to innermost track under 20" if possible. You can do 28" or 30" at an extreme stretch, if you are tall and the layout is low.

 But you have a 5 feet (60") deep scenes on the left, with tracks all the way in by the wall. Take a big piece of cardboard, thumb tack the rear to the wall at expected layout height and depth, stand in the aisle and try to do imaginary work on scenery, soldering og uncoupling a car at that distance. Not going to work.

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Well, either I've come up with a layout design that's so perfect that everyone's stunned into silence (unlikely),
or there are so many problems with it that people don't know where to start (very likely).

First, I played with a few minor things (like the yard crossover and sneaking the programming track into the yard disguised), and got the grid dimensions right, so here it is again:

 

Let me ask some specific questions:

1.  Is there some major flaw that I'm not seeing that would make it better to scrap and start over?  Sometimes I focus so much on the rich roar of the engine and feel of the wind in my face that I don't see the oncoming truck.

2.  I tried to leave room for about 16-18" at the sidings / industries for consists of about 4 cars (at 4" each).  Am I leaving enough room?

3.  Are the industry sidings set up right? For example, at the bottom of the logging (near the word "operations"), should I flip the last pain of turnouts around to make a "bow" shape rather than the parallel?  (I tried to follow some in plans, others from prototype, but I'm game for what works)

4.  Am I trying to cram too much in?  If so, what should go /be reduced first?

That'd be a great start & help to me.
Thanks again!

[mcfunkeymonkey]

Hello, all!
I’ve paused work on my 1x4 module to start developing my 6x9 n-scale layout.  After a silly hand-drawn posting a couple weeks ago, I got Anyrail and had a blast! (It's my first cad attempt, so if there's anything else I need to effectively communicate it, let me know!)
Your feedback is invaluable and greatly appreciated!

NAME:  Sourdough & Sequim Rail Road
LOCATION:  Olympic Peninsula, 1920s-1960s
DCC
The Mainline is Red.
 GIVENS: 
--Benchwork shape is pretty set: this is a nook in the masterbedroom, so it's limited by full window along wall to left (bedroom opens up to left, though, so left section is an peninsula), walls on top & right, bathroom door behind & wife all around, as well the center is going to have a 1.5'-2' deep, 4' wide removable desk that fits below the benchwork (at 30" or 32") for a laptop, workbench & grading papers. (I'm guessing track "0" at 40'-44", so room for stuff underneath).  I can play with the shape of the left section, but it can't extend more than the 5' it does.
--Thick lines show sections (needs to be semi-portable), will build all framework this summer while wife & kids are in Japan.
--Atlas Code 80 flextrack, & still debating between Peco & Atlas Custom turnouts ($$ is main issue).  Currently using Caboose handthrows on 1x4 module, but like the idea of Peco "snap" with finger.  Probably use Peco on mainline & Atlas on yard / spurs.
--DCC (NCE Powercab looks good)
--Long mainline for continuous running (distance, meditiation & kids love it)
--fictional interchange with SP&S at far left
--I'm sure I'm forgetting others

DRUTHERS:
--The removable drop-in turns two point-to-point lines into a continuous twice-around.
--Love logging!  Tried to provide enough space for operations at bottom left (it's about 2 inches lower than the town of Pysht River above it & on other side of double-sided backdrop.
--Really like the Irondale Iron & Steel works:

Check out those cool kilns! 
--I dig docks! The Irondale / Port Townsend docks include the Union Wharf, metal, coal & cannery.
--Need a yard (got arrival & departure plus one on end for ice / runaround) but it doesn't have to be really long.  I'm guessing the longest consist will be about 4-6 cars plus caboose.
--Small passenger service stopping at the depots around the mainline.
--Since most buildings / industries are from the 1890s - 1930s, I'll be able to run both steam and / or desiel, and the period will shift between early & later 1900 depending on the motive power.

Questions / issues:
--I've read Armstrong's Realistic Operations a few times, but since still a novice, am wondering if this layout "works"?  I can imaging most opertations in my head, but any suggestions?
--Grades: steepest outside of logging area is 3.5%.  Too much?
--The docks / yard is all same level, while the track split-levels to cross over on the left (Forks is at 2" while Pysht River is at 4").  Does this work?
--I tend to overcrowd, so I tried not to crowd it too much,but there's always something else that'd be cool to have!  Does anyone see any potential roadbocks, bottlenecks or paininthenecks?

I hope this makes sense & thanks for all your imput!
Don't worry about sparing feelings: not only have I read many postings here, but I'm a high school teacher, so I'm all about constructive criticism!
Mainly I'm looking for a combo of mainline, switching and sections so that I can build & operate (really operate) over many years (and son & daughter can too as they get older).Thanks again!
--Mark