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!

Help with Layout Plan!!

19933 views
74 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,260 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Friday, November 26, 2010 8:58 AM

Paulus Jas

hi,

is it possible i have seen this plan before?

 

if you're referring to my plan, yeah -- you've probably seen it before. 

Not to hijack the thread, but your concerns were raised (by stein mainly) elsewhere, and the druthers listed are naught but a "quick 'n dirty" runthrough of what the other guys are looking for (was at work, so I didn't have the list with me Cool).

back to the issue at hand -- helping mjmueller with his plan.

mjmueller -- must've missed the pic of the new plan... how're things looking now?

 

 

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • 109 posts
Posted by mjmueller on Friday, November 26, 2010 10:42 AM

Ok, here is the new benchwork layout.  I do not want to completely close off the room.  The problem is my layout keeps getting smaller.  I know the 36" might be a little deep, but I plan to have hills in the back to make up for the length.  I will report soon with track plans.  Any comments are more than welcome.

 

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
  • 1,484 posts
Posted by Paulus Jas on Friday, November 26, 2010 12:02 PM

hi mjm,

if all books tell you don't design wider then 30" and most modern books and entries in MR often talk about width of 18" or less; a newbie chooses to do different. It's your choice of course.

Designing a workbench without telling you're probably going for a loop to loop design is not the best option. I would not take any decision now, just draw several plans and choose later.

A cassette or drop-in connection is not a bad option, two blobs are eating away valuable space.

We were talking about a vision..............i still don't have any clue about what you want to achieve.

Just a double or triple tracked layout, watching your trains doing laps? Or do you want to run your layout as real railroads are doing? If that's your aim, you'll have to describe the the parts you like the most; eg switching an industrial district, working a yard, dispatching trains during their journey. Though dreaming is nice the last option takes way more space. You have to decide where trains are coming from and heading too and allow space for these topics.

 

 

Three designs , that could be reworked for your space; staging, a small yard ans industrial switching

Paul 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    January 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,260 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Friday, November 26, 2010 12:34 PM

+1 -- 36" is very deep for a shelf layout. 

It *CAN* be done -- though you'll want access hatches and/or naught but scenery back there. Same goes for the turnaround blobs at each end.

Mjmueller -- I think the biggest stumbling block is your list of druthers. I see that you mentioned inclusion of a swamp and some other features... but what I'm not seeing is the purpose of your railroad empire.

What we're looking for is you saying explicitly what purpose the railroad serves (railroads are transportation companies afterall).

here are a few examples of what this might be:

  • I want to just watch trains run, I don't care the prototype/era/whatever -- everything is fair game (even running 80' double-stacks behind my 4-4-0).  The yard is nothing more than on-layout staging.  OR
  • I want to do light switching in the yard, but still want continuous-running while making up a new train in the yard. OR
  • I want to have light industrial and commercial switching, two towns with passenger stations, full-blown locomotive servicing facilities, and a yard having 12 tracks. OR
  • I want to model the exact operating schedule of the NYC between NYC and Washington DC on December 21st 1941. OR
  • I want to model Penn Central in late fall 1967 between Pittsburgh PA and Philadelphia PA.
  • et cetera

 

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • 109 posts
Posted by mjmueller on Friday, November 26, 2010 1:45 PM

Ok, well here is the whole story,

I have always been a huge rail fan & model railroad fan.  I built a layout many years ago with my father.  I am now since getting back into the hobby & need help.  I am not very knowledgeable about the workings of a layout.  This may sound really bad, but I don't want to go out and buy a bunch of books and read about what makes for a great working layout.  I just want to have fun and enjoy the hobby.  This is where you guys come in.

I love double mains, with mixed freight & stacktrains.  I would really like a well functioning layout with a double main looping & some mixed industrial, One town, and a yard that operates as a passthrough for my main.  Please let me know what else I can tell you.  

The whole reason I'm on here is to get some "Expert" advice from you guys on what you think I might be looking at.  Thank you all for your comments so far.  But please try not to belittle me, I just want your help.

mj 

  • Member since
    January 2006
  • From: Northeast OH
  • 2,260 posts
Posted by NeO6874 on Friday, November 26, 2010 2:32 PM

mjmueller

Ok, well here is the whole story,

I have always been a huge rail fan & model railroad fan.  I built a layout many years ago with my father.  I am now since getting back into the hobby & need help.  I am not very knowledgeable about the workings of a layout.  This may sound really bad, but I don't want to go out and buy a bunch of books and read about what makes for a great working layout.  I just want to have fun and enjoy the hobby.  This is where you guys come in.

I love double mains, with mixed freight & stacktrains.  I would really like a well functioning layout with a double main looping & some mixed industrial, One town, and a yard that operates as a passthrough for my main.  Please let me know what else I can tell you.  

The whole reason I'm on here is to get some "Expert" advice from you guys on what you think I might be looking at.  Thank you all for your comments so far.  But please try not to belittle me, I just want your help.

mj 

 

now we're getting somewhere!! Big SmileThumbs Up

Here's what I'm hearing (reading) from your druthers

  • I want a layout that allows for continuous running
  • I want to run modern equipment (double stacks, etc)
  • I want a double-track mainline
  • light industry/commercial area with some switching, and a railyard somewhere
  • Not so focused on "operations" yet, but maybe sometime in the future

 

with that in mind, it sounds like your best bet will be some form of a dogbone style layout, or a donut with liftout/swingout section.  Each has its pros and cons.  Dogbone needs big "blobs" for your reverse loops, whereas a donut needs the liftout/swingout section (which takes a little more work than "simple" benchwork)

 

-Dan

Builder of Bowser steam! Railimages Site

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • 109 posts
Posted by mjmueller on Friday, November 26, 2010 3:54 PM

Hey,

Here is some more information for you.  Below you will find some of the stuff I have so far.  Yes, I do like modern, that's what I'm going for.  I do have a Trestle in the picture, but probably won't use it.  Do I really need reverse loops, or can I just make them come back around.  

Thanks for the info, and could you show me some examples of both idea's you were talking about.

mj

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
  • 1,484 posts
Posted by Paulus Jas on Friday, November 26, 2010 5:53 PM

hi mjm,

if you can read my writings you can also read a book. If you had John Armstrong's Track Planning For Realistic Operation i could give you the pages where he describes the problems and assets of a double tracked main.  How to design a small yard is also covered. The word loop is a difficult one, can have different meanings.

You belittle yourself, you don't want to read, fine................. your not very knowledgeable great...... don't blame others.

mjmueller

I love double mains, with mixed freight & stack trains.  I would really like a well functioning layout with a double main looping & some mixed industrial, One town, and a yard that operates as a pass-through for my main.

 

Trains going around and around without a goal, might be boring soon. Think about the title of John Armstrong's book.

A town is not important........the yard is. The yard is NOT for a pass trough. Here trains stop and set out or pick up blocks of cars. A local takes over and switches industries. Described brilliantly in John Armstrong's book in detail.

On a smaller layout your trains are back in the yard within seconds; no time at all for switching. A holding place for mainline trains is needed (staging).

I showed you a couple of possible designs; staging or holding, a small yard, some industries and the possibility to run around and around are in all of  them.

It's up to you to find a good design, i can only help if your willing to read and to express your thoughts. Focus on the track plan first, its hard to make major changes later. A town can always build in later.

paul 

 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • 109 posts
Posted by mjmueller on Friday, November 26, 2010 7:55 PM

Sorry for my words before, I know I should read all this stuff......I will see what I can do.

Thank you.

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: In the heart of Georgia
  • 3,981 posts
Posted by Doughless on Friday, November 26, 2010 10:19 PM

I've been following this thread for a while and thought I would jump in.

MJ, before you worry about how to design the best layout for the given space, you need to figure out how the layout will be fun for you.  Maybe that's what you're asking the forum to help you figure out.  However, its tough for anyone else to figure out for you what the goal of your layout is.  If its to have fun, well isn't that the goal of everyone?  But, fun for one person maybe someone else's boredom or frustration.  

It sounds to me that you are very focused on the visual aspect of the layout and not so much how or why the trains are running.  I.e. You seem to like stacked trains for their visual appeal, not because you want to reduce a specific section of UP's mainline to a corner of your basement.  That's perfectly fine.  You seem to want a yard because it looks cool when a long train passes slowly by tracks full of parked cars.  Others may want a large yard on their layout because it helps them to model a specific section of a railroad, and the yard is NEEDED in order to ultimately facilitate the movement of car #123 in train ABC from Cheyenne to Omaha by 12:40pm, which also needs to take another car that arrived from Seattle on train XYZ.  Again, that's okay.  Many model railroaders, maybe even most of them, don't care about specific operations that much.

Its easier to develop a track plan for your goal of "railfanning" than another modeler's goal of "operations".   How the tracks are arranged are less important for railfanning layouts than for other types, as long as your goal of visual satisfaction is met.  However, no matter who you are as a modeler, there are certain facts that all tend to agree on:

  • Long locomotives and cars look better on broad curves and turnouts.
  • DO NOT have ANY track beyond 30" reach from the edge of the layout (and scenery that is built beyond 30" will require stout enough benchwork to crawl on in order to apply the scenic material). 
  • How high the benchwork should be is dependent upon YOUR height, not the height of the average person. The higher the layout relative to you, the LESS NEED there is for a liftout section since you can duck under. Ducking under depends on how limber you are, which is generally related to age. 
  • AVOID 'S' curves when laying mainline and embedded 'S' curves when laying turnouts.
  • Have spur tracks, passing sidings, and yard tracks consistent with the lengths of the trains you are going to operate.i.e: no need to build a spur for the feed mill that would hold eight cars if you are never going to spot more than two.  Conversely, don't build a passing siding that's even one car shorter than the longest train you are running.  

There are many more do's and don't's, but I can't list them all here.  That's what books are for.  If you want to avoid any studying of any material at all, you have been presented with two good choices already.

  • Use Stein's plan.  Add a yard along the right side and a long passing siding along the left side.  Have two spur's come off the siding, one at the top, and one at the bottom, so they head into the corners.  Place your Glacier gravel company on one spur and the feed mill elevator on the other.  You can shorten the peninsula if you want a wider ailse.
  • Scenic it like its the UP mainline in eastern WY or western NE.  Simple scenery that you won't cry about of you need to tear some out to add more sidings, spurs, or a helix in the future.

Or:

  • Use one of Paul's plans, which already includes enough track that's been wisely arranged to provide great operations if you care about it in the future.  I haven't studied them, but he has posted so many great plans on this forum that I'm sure the plans he's posted here all consider the bullet points I referred to above, and other points that would be found in books.

If you're set on an open plan, one without a duckunder/liftout, then make sure the turn-back blobs have a broad enough radius to satisfy the first bullet point, but also avoiding the second and fourth.

Good luck and keep reading.  Books, forums, wherever.

  

- Douglas

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sorumsand, Norway
  • 3,417 posts
Posted by steinjr on Saturday, November 27, 2010 12:47 AM

 Hi MJ ---

  I think the point Paul was trying to make about double mainlines while referring to John Armstrong's "Track planning for realistic operations" is that a double mainline on a layout has two big challenges - how to generate a large enough amount of traffic, and how to make something to do for the layout owner when trains are running.

 Staging gets pretty important if what you really want to model is having a parade of east/northbound trains on one track meet a parade of west/southbound trains on the other track of a double track main.

 Any layout where you want to run a parade or sequence of trains past a point, or into a scene (e.g. a station or terminal), or through a scene needs to dedicate quite a bit of area to staging - i.e. tracks to hold the trains that has not yet paraded across the stage, and the trains which has finished their moment in the limelight.

 Staging may also be important if you want to model the interaction between several trains, or how cars flow through the system - with blocks of cars arriving on one train from "somewhere else" (beyond the small part of the world you are representing on your layout), maybe get set out in a yard track or on a siding, and then gets picked up by another train and taken to the car recipient to be loaded or unloaded.

 And then later (after the car has been loaded or unloaded, maybe the next operating session) that car will be picked up by a third train, maybe be taken to a yard or siding and left there for yet another train. This fourth train will then pick up that car (and other cars heading in the same direction) and take off for "somewhere else" beyond the small part of the world you are modeling.

 But in the case of just modeling "somewhere else" or "down the line" or "towards the next town", you don't necessarily need room for a whole parade of trains in staging - could be that there is only one train arriving and one train departing your area during the time span you are modeling - so one single ended track would work just fine as staging - starting the session by holding the inbound train from elsewhere and ending the session holding the outbound train for elsewhere.

 Or you could even start your operating session with a train from elsewhere "having just arrived" and end it with the train for elsewhere "about to depart", on a track in your yard or on the mainline somewhere.

 Getting back to the double track main. If what fascinates you about a double track main really is the way the two parallel tracks looks in the landscape, and you are perfectly happy with pretty sparse traffic (just one train moving at any time, or having the same two trains meet again and again, one running eastwards on one track/loop and the other running westwards on the other track/loop), then that gives you a number of other design options.

 You could even have a single track loop that in some parts of the loop visually looks like a double track main  - by e.g. having a dog bone or dumbbell configuration - narrow center with two parallel tracks, widening out to a turn back curve on each end, or just by having a longish double ended siding along part of a single track main, so one train can go "into the hole" (i.e. stop in the siding), and wait for another train to pass on the main.

 Ironically, having a single track main with passing sidings tend to produce more interesting (at least to me) running than a full double track main. Having single track sections on a layout introduces the need to ensure that no two trains moving in opposite directions move into the same single track section, heading towards each other (unless you are into modeling crashes :-).

 And that gives the owner something to do. Just watching trains run and run and run loop after loop after loop can get boring in the long run. At least to most people - as the dad of a kid on the autism spectrum, I realize that some people actually do enjoy watching things repeat - it can be relaxing.

 Another aspect could be automating a layout - where a lot of the fun comes from the actual work of making the control and signal system work. Having trains move on autopilot, and slow down and automatically stop when they get to signals set against them. Again - probably most fun when you quite deliberately introduce choke points - single track sections or the need to cross over the other track or whatever.

 Anyways - what would work for you depends on which aspect(s) of the double main it is that most fascinates you.

  And that's why we keep pestering you to describe how you envision running your trains.  It will give us an idea about whether you will need staging. If you will need separate loops, or whether the important thing is parallel tracks for at least part of the layout and stuff like that.

 Hope I didn't totally drown you with this long missive. It is meant as help, not as criticism.

 Smile,
 Stein

 

 

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
  • 1,484 posts
Posted by Paulus Jas on Saturday, November 27, 2010 12:48 AM

hi mjm and doughless

  • Long locomotives and cars look better on sharp curves and turnouts.
  • will be an error.

    Mjm you've bought some pretty long engines, you should think about a 18" radius and using #7 and #10 switches (atlas). This may be already "Chinese" to you; if so, ask to explain.

    It's not only about looking better, to sharp switches and to small radii will cause many derailments. and you end up having no fun at all.

    Having a rather good book with trackplans like, 102 Realistic Track Plans by our host, might be a good idea. The plans are realistic  cause they are built, though not all sustain realistic operation. I think Pelle Soeborg's UP Daneville layout (#93) is a great example of a layout constructed for rail-fanning; it could be double tracked of course. It almost has it all: a mainline "loop" with staging so you can let your trains roll; a station with a small town, and some industries. Switching can be done independent from the main; only a small yard is missing.  

    It's hard to talk without references, books can be great.

    Paul

     

     

    • Member since
      April 2003
    • 305,206 posts
    Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, November 27, 2010 1:18 AM

    mjm - lucky you! You were able to enlist the help of some of the most knowledgeable (and also helpful and patient) folks in here when it comes to track planning. Listen carefully to what they say - they can give you the expert advice you are looking for.

    Building a model railroad is done in 4 phases:

    • Dream
    • Plan
    • Build
    • Operate

    From what I have gathered in this thread you have not yet concluded your "dream" phase to a degree, where you can start to make a plan. The dream phase determines your druthers or "must haves", which, adapted to your givens, set the foundations for your planning phase. From what you have conveyed to us, a number of different designs would be possible to fulfill what we think is your dream. You don´t actually need a room-filling layout for that.

    I am sorry if this may sound repetitive to you, but as you are about to spend not a small amount of $$$ on your layout, you should be quite clear of what you want to get out of it.

    Btw, have you had a chance to take a look at this year´s MR project layout in N scale? It has a double track main line, a yard, some industries and a spectacular scenery. It is designed with railfanning in mind. MR ran a serious on how to build this layout from December 2009 till April 2010. It is worth looking at!

    • Member since
      June 2006
    • From: Maryville IL
    • 9,555 posts
    Posted by cudaken on Saturday, November 27, 2010 6:11 AM

      MJ, one thing you might try is your local Library, I found quite a few books there. I like you am looking for inspiration as well.

     I asked this before and did not get a answer.

     What sizes is a tight turn in N Scale and what is concerted a wide turn? In HO scale, 18 inch is tight, and 32 is big, well to me. Give me a idea on turns and clearances for tunnels and I will play with some plans for you. I think we have the same taste as far as running styles. 

             Ken

    I hate Rust

    • Member since
      December 2008
    • From: In the heart of Georgia
    • 3,981 posts
    Posted by Doughless on Saturday, November 27, 2010 7:36 AM

    Paulus Jas

    hi mjm and doughless

    • Long locomotives and cars look better on sharp curves and turnouts.

    will be an error.

     

    doh!

    Yes Paul, it was an error.  I edited the post above to change the word 'sharp' to 'broad'.

    - Douglas

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Monday, November 29, 2010 9:15 AM

    Ok!!!

    I got some great information out of this.  I am going to have to look it over, think about what I would like & do some research.  Sounds like I'm going to use the enclosed room layout also.

    mj

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Monday, November 29, 2010 2:12 PM

    I really like this design, but more simple.  I will come up with some ideas and drawings for you later.  Please let me know what you think?

    mj

    • Member since
      November 2006
    • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
    • 1,484 posts
    Posted by Paulus Jas on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 7:32 AM

    hi mjm,

    you mentioned a layout with a double track mainline and minor switching. You can tell a lot, this layout is rather different.

    Is this a design by you?

    If have lots of questions about this complicated design; no use to spend time on it, cause you want something completely  different.

    In 48 Top Notch Track Plans and on Byron Henderson's web log (inspirational layouts) you'll find the Free Haven Terminal by Russel Schoof. An HO design for a 11 x 10 room that could easily be done in N-scale. The layout needs a three-man crew to be operated to the max.

    Paul

     

     

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:26 AM

    This is not my design, just one I ran across yesterday.  Like I said in the post, mine would be much simpler.  Just wondering if you like the general layout design.

    mj

    • Member since
      April 2003
    • 305,206 posts
    Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:43 AM

    If you scale it down to N scale, it would just about fit into your room, BUT:

    There would be areas which would be out of reach, as you cannot scale down the aisles below a minimum of 2 ft.

    For my taste, there is a little too much track crammed into the available space!

    • Member since
      November 2006
    • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
    • 1,484 posts
    Posted by Paulus Jas on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:20 AM

    hi mjm,

    i doubt if it will fit, you can't scale down man-space. As said before it could easily be the kind of layout in need of a hand full of operators.

    As usual your avoiding go give straight answers. This pike is completely different from your wishes, why spent time on it. The Free Haven Terminal is a condensed version of  this layout, again no response from you. 

    You are asking to let us do your work, changing your wishes won't help getting better responses.

    If you really want a condensed version of this scheme, you'd better understand its a huge switching pike with hardly tracks suitable for train watching. Are you really into operating nights with a handful of friends? Do you really want to give up your double track main? Do you really want to give up lap running?

    BTW its pretty unclear where both mainline tracks are heading for, a second deck for staging?

    Paul

     

     

    • Member since
      April 2003
    • 305,206 posts
    Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 12:15 PM

    mjm,

    i think it is about time that you come up with an own design for us to see which way you want to go. Having us comment on various design which you dig up, will not help you at all in finding what you want, and it is wasting our time. Sketch out a rough idea and we can help you refine it.

    • Member since
      November 2002
    • From: Colorado
    • 3,980 posts
    Posted by fwright on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 2:25 PM

    After re-reading this thread a few times, I'm coming to a few conclusions:

    • This is really in many ways a 1st layout for the OP.
    • The OP is unsure of what he really wants from the layout because he doesn't have operating experience to know.
    • His selection of models and visions are based primarily on personal visual appeal, not on a particular prototype scene.

    There is nothing wrong with the above; most of us started at a similar point.  And many of us still don't know for sure what operational aspects, if any, interest us the most.

    My personal thoughts are that the OP is trying to come up with a large room-filling layout that will take substantial time and money to build.  I would start with a KISS layout to begin with - to minimize the investment in time and money until mjm has a better feel for his vision.  Given his large, modern rolling stock, I would stay away from the traditional door or 4x8 starter layout. 

    Rather, an around the walls shelf or a dogbone with two turnback blobs with plenty of access to the blobs from 2 sides (if you hate duckunders) would be a good starting point.  Use progressive construction to taste the various aspects of layout construction and operations.  Start with a single track with one passing siding and maybe 2 spurs attached to the passing siding.  Build a town near the passing siding area.  Put in some scenery in other areas.  Manually change out your trains to watch different trains run.  Try a little switching at your passing track and spurs.  When you are ready, expand to a double track main, and perhaps add some visible staging (2-3 passing tracks).  Add additional switching areas if you find them fun.  At any point, when you feel the simple layout is not what you want, stop and design your ultimate layout, based on the lessons learned.

    An example of a good beginners layout to learn what you like while not busting the bank or taking decades is the Better Beginners Layout - the HOG (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OWJKbUUCx00/SyMKs_oR-xI/AAAAAAAACC8/4dZCKnp6I8E/s1600-h/Heart+of+Georgia+HOG+Layout+Rev+511.jpg).  Build it in the same space as the HO version, which will leave you room to double track the main if/when you want.  As simple as the HOG is, you don't have to build the full plan initially.  Just build the main and the staging spurs to start with; add the passing sidings and other spurs (and/or double track the main) later as desire and $$ permit.  The HOG benchwork is pretty simple, and will fit in your room.  And you will learn quickly if you can live with a duckunder in return for the wide radius curves and improved operational capability.

    Another advantage to the HOG is that are several on-line drawings and articles on building it.  Things like how to cut the 4x8 plywood sheet and other topics are covered - though not in as much depth as the typical MR project railroad.  I would also pick one of the MR N project layout books to get some initial guidance on things like laying track and building scenery.  If you pick project layout articles that use the same track system you plan to use, you will be that much further ahead.

    my thoughts, your choices

    Fred W

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 2:46 PM

    I did see this one & had it printed out to help me design mine.  I didn't mean to build the layout above, just wanted to know your thoughts on the general benchwork & specific areas.  

    mj

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 2:47 PM

    Thanks so much fwright. 

    How would i design this into a double track main?  You think it would work good?

    mj

    • Member since
      November 2002
    • From: Colorado
    • 3,980 posts
    Posted by fwright on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:12 PM

    mjmueller

    How would i design this into a double track main?  You think it would work good?

    mj

    Personally, if you are actually building an N version of the HOG in the HO space, I wouldn't worry much about designing in advance.  Build the benchwork, and lay out the track full size right on the benchwork.  Use the track plan for a guide, and arrange and rearrange until you have what you want where you want it.  It's just not that critical to follow the plan exactly.  Put 2 tracks at normal N spacing where the HO main is.  Then add the passing tracks and spurs on either side as appropriate.

    The idea for a beginner's layout is to keep costs reasonable while building "good enough" to learn from - which is the enemy of perfect.  For instance, the HOG would gain considerably by making each shelf wider than 12".  But that's another $50 in lumber for a second sheet of good plywood and extra supporting grid.

    Assuming you leave all the existing turnouts, spurs, and passing sidings, double tracking the main adds about 30ft (10 sticks flex) and 8 turnouts for 4 single crossovers between the 2 mains.  In addition to the 13 turnouts the layout already has, that's not chump change to me.  You are adding about 50% more to your total cost of track.  Hopefully, you will lay your track so that most of it can be reused on your ultimate layout.  Again, the idea is to keep the time and cost investment reasonable for what is in essence a 2 or 3 year layout.  Of course, you can change your mind and stick with your 1st layout for a much longer period of time.  Smile

    This is why I suggested you may want to build up to the final track plan in stages.  For me, it would cost too much to front all the track at once.  And for me, rearranging things on a small layout is half the fun.  Want to try a different track arrangement at a location?  Go ahead and rearrange.  Move the scenery as necessary, take up the old track, put it in the new configuration, put in new scenery (or put back the old).  Model Railroader used to push this concept of enjoyable change as part of the layout experience in the early '60s.  HO Railroad That Grows was a whole 4x8 layout built around this concept, as was the 1964-1965 project layout the Ma & Pa and the 1962-1963 Portage Hill & Communipaw.  Making the changes is itself a valuable and pleasurable learning experience - and an easy way to try out new ideas to find out what you really like and don't like.

    The latter is the reason I why I recommend that if you build the HOG, you start off with single track main and passing sidings, then add the double track later.  Then you will know from 1st hand experience whether you really want a double track main, and why.

    again, just my thoughts, your choices

    Fred W

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Wednesday, December 1, 2010 4:45 PM

    Does anyone have a shot of the "Building the Burlington Northern in N Scale" Kalmbach article.  I heard this would be perfect for my idea.

    Thanks

    • Member since
      November 2002
    • From: Colorado
    • 3,980 posts
    Posted by fwright on Wednesday, December 1, 2010 5:12 PM

    mjmueller

    Does anyone have a shot of the "Building the Burlington Northern in N Scale" Kalmbach article.  I heard this would be perfect for my idea.

    Thanks

    You can order copies of any Model Railroader article from Kalmbach Customer Service.  Used copies of out of print Kalmbach books can usually be found on eBay, Abe Books, and Amazon.

    Fred W

    • Member since
      November 2006
    • From: huizen, 15 miles from Amsterdam
    • 1,484 posts
    Posted by Paulus Jas on Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:57 AM

    hi mjm,

    this trackplan is an adaptation, for a 23 x 15 space in HO;  hidden staging added. On the original design visible staging was done where the yard is now. It was build for show purposes, not for real operating. On the original a small branch was added on the peninsula, i replaced it to the bottom. The general idea is the same, a double tracked main along a big river with a short single track section over the bridge.

    If this plan can be fitted in your space in N-scale is still to be seen.

    You could start by making a drawing of your room. All obstacles drawn in, and tell us precisely where the duck-under or lift out can be placed. The basic form is presented to you by Stein, if you had mentioned you really liked it, a lot of unnecessary entries could have been skipped.

    Some notes: switching in the yard can be done independent from the mainline. Way freights are run as turns to the branch; switching the spurs along the main will block through traffic,  the holding or staging tracks are creating time for the wayfreight. 

    Paul

    • Member since
      August 2010
    • 109 posts
    Posted by mjmueller on Thursday, December 2, 2010 7:49 AM

    Hey Paulus,

    Thanks for the reply.  That design I do like, but seems to be to long for my layout.  I have a 12X13 area to fit this this in, more like a square.  It's funny though, my last design, which I just got done tearing down in my garage looked very similar to yours.

    This layout was 13X17.

    My new area is this:

    My good friend was over last night and said he remembered in 1990 Kalmbach made a book & Model Railroader had a 7 part series, on building the Burlington Northern in N Scale & this was very close to the space that I have.  I will look for it.  If anyone has it, or could send me some shots I would really appriciate it.  

    I will have a  look at your design, to see if there is anything I can take away from it.  One thing I really hope someone can explain, is what hidden staging is for?

    mj

    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!