I'm not sure if I'm violating any forum codes by posting two layouts for comments at the same time, but technically this one is not mine: A fellow teacher asked me to help with the design of a 3x5 n-scale layout for him and his son and since I have the Anyrail, here I am.
I tried to include both continuous looping (for son) as well as some real operations & industries (for dad).Period is kinda vague, since he'll be making most the structures, but I'm allowing for transition era.Its layed out for Atlas code 80, but I'm thinking Peco 55, since both the turntable and the turnouts are smaller.
The steepest grade is about 3.5%, but since I don't think he'll be running trains of longer than 4-6 cars I don't think it'll be an issue.
The tightest radius 11", so I could squeeze some turns down to 9 3/4" if I need more room.
I was going to go DC on this one, mainly because he's got a DC powerpack hanging around, but also because probably only one person will be operating at a time (or father & son together).
The kicker here is the "brilliant" idea I had floating around to make the train table into an actual table by designing the whole thing with a lid that latches on:
This way the layout would be protected from other play (it is going in the boy's room), be used as a desk when he hit elementary school, and/or easily stored under bed. All of that would involve various-length legs at he could bolt into place or remove.
I was thinking 1/2" plywood or something for most the framing, with a 1/8' masonite internal support for the scenery. That way, when you take the lid off, the access holes for both the curved tunnels as well as the hidden staging in the rear are available.
I'm still kicking around exactly how to contruct everything, but a pretty do-able idea is forming in me head.
So, I guess this is a two-part post:
1. Trackplan work? Too busy? Just silly?
2. Thoughts on constructing a traintabletable?
Thanks again!--Mark
M.C. Fujiwara
My YouTube Channel (How-to's, Layout progress videos)
Silicon Valley Free-moN
I quite like this kayout - especially the idea with the "hood" to cover it. Quite a lot of track, but that´s ok. A good starter layout! But why not directly go in to DCC? If it is a father-and-son layout, they both can operate it together - a lot more fun. Just because there is a power pack already available should not be the reason. After all, the layout is much easier to wire for realistic operation.
Here's a revised plan, making space for a yard & putting the enginehouse off the turntable.
Yes, it's more track! but would allow for some more operations for dad.I've tried to allow space for an engine and at least a car or two at all sidings.Anyone see any major gaffs?
Also been thinking about construction of the table:frame is 3'x5' made out of 1x4's with butted-grid interior framework, with a 35"x59" sheet of 3/8" plywood cookie-cutted for elevations on top,that would leave 1/2" space around the edge of the 1x4 frame for:1/8" masonite backdrop attached to sides of cookie-cutted plywood &3/8" plywood (or nicer wood) sides for the lid of the table.
dcc does sound like the better way to go.I'm thinking Powercab. Would we need power sections with a layout this small?
Any feedback appreciated! The school year's almost over, and our summer unemployment period (commonly misunderstood as "summer vacation") is the best time (time-wise, but not money-wise) for us teachers to build & play with trains!Thanks again!--Mark
I mostly like it but would suggest two things. Remove the turntable, your drawing is not round and when you do round it just won't fit. TT's take a lot of space.
Second remove the bridge over the switching area and connect to the outer loop on both sides. Uncoupling is hard enough in N-scale and to work around the bridge may end up driving Dad nuts. If you want a bridge put it on the left edge and have it go over a road or creek.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Thanks for the feedback & the warning about the TT.I'm not sure what you mean about the drawing being not round: it is on my screen and I used the anyrail dimensions. Are they wrong?
I could take the enginehouse out and just use the TT as a turnaround.
Also I was thinking about the Peco turntable: it's a wee bit smaller: 6" instead of 7 3/4". But that's 55 not 80 (which is what the design is layed out for).
Or I could turn the engine service facilities into a runaround with a single enginehouse at the end.
As for removing the bridge: I'm having trouble visualizing what you mean. The bridge is there because of the elevation change. Do you mean a flat double mainline?
As for the bridge, I was going to keep it as thin & unobstructive as possible. I totally agree with you on the switching. We might have to mock up the table and track with cardboard to see how the bulk mass & navagation of it goes.
Thanks for the ideas!--Mark
OIC--At least on my screen the whole drawing is compressed so that the squares look like rectangles.
I'm not saying you need to be flat, but if your bridge is there just because you have an elevation change, you need to find another way.
Also the elevation change between the TT and the coal mine is awkward. Will be hard to scenic.
Maybe you could put the coal mine in another location?
Keep playing with it until everything works. Never accept compromise until all other options are exhausted.
Success now is a lot better than coulda-shoulda-woulda a year from now.
A miscalculation folks often make is not taking into account the clearances between adjacent tracks (especially curved tracks) and how that shortens the effective lengths of spurs and yard tracks. I think you may find that some of your spurs will hold only one car in the clear, if that, once you allow for clearance from buildings and adjacent tracks. Also, the effective length of the yard tracks look to be pretty short and maybe not worth the trouble.
In this size range, it's often more effective to have yards outside the oval.
I'm not sure that you are adequately taking into account the angle of the tracks coming from the turntable. They can't be parallel directly from the TT into the engine house the way it seems to be drawn. This is especially true if you choose the Atlas TT, which has fixed track angles.
Staging seems to connect in an unusal and awkward configuration.
Grades seem like they will be more than 3.5%, once you consider the length of track for a vertical transition from level to grade or between grades at each end. Not to mention the effect of the tight curves adding resistance to the grades.
Some of the building footprints seem pretty small. I'm not sure a building less than 1 inch wide will be very convincing, even in N scale ... but it's hard to scale because of the way the image is squeezed. Maybe I'm just seeing it wrong. The pond, industries, quarry, etc. seem pretty crowded in terms of making a realistic-looking scene, but that may not be a goal.
Best of luck.
ByronModel RR Blog Layout Design Gallery
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
Once again somebody did something that made me think and second guess any layout plans I had. We have a two bedroom apartment now and may have to move into a smaller 1 bedroom so I loose that extra room. We also have a pretty nice 3x5 dinning table that doesn't get used, just toss junk on top of it. I did have the idea of using it, mostly because then all frame work would be done with out spending any time or money on it, but that was when we still used the dinning table as a dinning table. You idea of making a seperate flat top to go on could make it work both ways, as a decent sized N scale layout, and a dinning facility. If it gets made keep going with up dates. I want to see how second table top progress goes. It would even give me more room to use than the around the walls plan, which actually only would have gone along one wall in the spare room.
Much good stuff to think about!
Here's another version for comparison:
No turntable, spurs / sidings lengthen (calculating 1 car = 4"), removed some track, changed angle of staging.
The removal of the TT means trains are always pointed in same direction, which might be okie dokie.
As for the staging: there's at least 12" (3 cars) we could place from the access space in the rear, or I was thinking maybe removable staging yard, like some of the groovy ones I've seen here. I'm not sure how much more space we'd need though, given it seems trains would be 3-4 cars.
We were thinking manual uncoupling, so I don't know if that adds usable length to spurs (doesn't have to be straight for the magnetic uncoupling).
As for the grade: the tightest is the 11" radius inner loop on the left, and I do have space to move the bottom left down and open the radius a wee bit more (using flex track instead of set).
It's going to seem crowded no matter, so why not embrace it!
mcfunkeymonkey It's going to seem crowded no matter, so why not embrace it!
I guess I don't agree with your premise that a small layout must be overcrowded. But good luck with your approach.
I don't think, in principal, that a small layout must be overcrowded.
But given the druthers of the father/son team who wants this layout, especially dad's desire to do a lot in a small space, then it's probably going to seem crowded, especially with the sides & back giving it a bit of a diorama look. And I have CTD (compulsive tracklaying disorder) so I do tend to want to squeeze just a little more in , so I appreciate the feedback.
I'm also trying to design a layout for him that allows the possibily of good operations, rather than just round & round.
I'm just helping with the layout design & basic construction (up through tracklaying and electrical). He's going to be doing most the scenery & buildings, so I guess he could make it as sparse or crowded as he wants.
Doing a lot is more conceptual than track. What I mean by that is if you want do do a lot you need to have an operational plan that facilitates it. For instance, if you were to provide an interchange track, something that gives the illusion of products moving off layout, you open the door to geometrially more operations.
Having stuff to do and having a reason for having stuff to do makes all the difference with the boredom factor.
Totally agree with you.
I was thinkin' of some of the operations being:--Coal from the mine comes down the mountain, some gets dumped in town, but most would be transported out through the staging.--the Brewery would receive supplies and then ship out barrels, some would go up the mountain, most would go off layout (perhaps I should get rid of the mason, go back to the two track sidings on the left, and let the brewery have one all to itself)--the stone from the quarry receive empties from off and then loadeds travel both up the mountain (to whatever's being built up there) and off--the town center, the town front and the small camp up the mt would need supplies from off layout--small passenger service, mainly moving work crews to the various jobs around (perhaps I should put a WPA dam along left side front or rear: would give more purpose to quarry & crews)--empties are stored in the yard (accessed either moving up & down the mainline under that bridge or going 'round the line once) and are taken by the local job to be spotted at the industry that needs it according to schedule.
I also left the bottom right open & the staging open for attaching a module, cassette or fiddle yard.
That's my thinking so far. Suggestions for any / other ways to give it purpose appreciated!Thanks again!--Mark
I also want to add a brewery. This one thing alone adds so much more to the layout. Inbounds include barley, malt, and hops all of which can be delivered in covered hoppers, box cars, and box cars full of bagged product, bottles, cans, and packing material. Outbounds include spent grain in covered hoppers and box cars, cullet (broken glass), and if wanted beer in box cars and reefers. I won't be modeling shipments of beer, I want my brewery to be regional. Big enough business to by supplies in bulk by rail, but small enough to have most or all shipments of beer by truck. I'm sure I will end up throw some WI, MN, MI, and IL railroads in there for beer shipments, but still keep it fairly local. I have a post in general forums about looking for pictures of peoples finished saw mills and power houses and asked about breweries and someone posted a response that was pretty informing. Thats were I got the list I just gave here but I know I forgot a few things. Two of my saw mills will have outbounds of dimensional lumber (2x4s and such), gondolas full of scrap wood shipped to (off layout staging) pulpwood factories, my other saw mill will produce lumber panels like plywood and such. I may also model outbounds of saw dust but being set in the 50's I wouldn't really have to worry about Mr. EPA yelling at my company about burning wood and creating air pollution.
Oh, and on a side note, I told my gf about the dinning table idea and as long as I made a usable dinning top that can be put on top it's a go.