Well, yes, and, no. Yes, it will be using Dept 56 buildings (that's my main collection and what started this) but, no, it won't be a typical Christmas village either. The HO part I plan to do to the best of my ability (such as it may be) to be correct for December, 1880. The buildings will be D56, not kit built or scratch built. However, people and scenes are to scale, no Santa Claus flying over head, and no elves skiing by. So, in my mind, in not just a typical Christmas village, nor a typical model railroad or toy train, but a depiction of life in a town in early winter. To me, it seems to fall in the middle of everything. And yes, this will be a permanent, year round layout.
You can delete that long URL if you want, I did mine, and we won't need a six foot wide post -
Fun Senior Citizen Here's my station - <deleted long URL>
Here's my station -
<deleted long URL>
Here is a clickable tinyurl version of that mouthful: http://tinyurl.com/d4y98ob
I am maybe just a little confused.
In your initial posts in this thread, you asked questions like whether EZtrack was used for "serious layouts" and mentioned that you, while not being a rivet counter (i.e. extremely focused on things being 100% correct) were "not into the look of toy trains either, but somewhere in the middle".
Which several of us probably interpreted as you wanting to model some elements of a railroad, but perhaps without extreme focus on getting every little detail right - more creating a somewhat realistic impression of a railroad.
But looking at your station building, it looks like one of those pretty stylized porcelain buildings people buy to put on their mantlepiece at Christmas time to create a "Christmas Village".
If I make the assumption that your main goal is to put some moving trains (where the locomotives and cars themselves do not look like caricatures) into a largish animated Christmas village display, rather than to create an impression of a railroad or railroading (functionally or visually), then your track plans also makes a lot more sense.
I may be interpreting your goals wrong - but would it be fair to describe your overall design goal as creating a large permanent Christmas display you plan to leave out all year around?
Smile, Stein
For URL - see next post (thanks Stein)
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/media/p/2252676.aspx
Stein -
Yup - it's a lot easier that way. The easier it is to find things, the more will take time to look.
Yes, the track plan is essentially the same, but a foot narrower to help a little with the potential reaching problem. Besides taking out the gandy dancer reverse track set, I also smoothed out the left side outer line a bit, to make the incline a little easier. The hardest part for me was changing a bunch of the sectionals to make the new version come out right. (a problem you don't have with flex track)
As to the rest of the layout - two parts are fixed, and determined part of the track design. The main station will be inside the left loop at the bottom center, with the platform between the two tracks. The train store/station for the historic train rides will be inside the inner loop on the right side, beside the straight track. The rest will be trial and error. Most of the left side will be at the 2.0 level, and the right side and back of left side will be at the 6.0 level. The two tracks on the left will each go into a cut with almost vertical walls. Leaving the left loop will go into a tunnel under the right loop.
I have over 90 buildings (but I won't be using all of them). Which ones, and how many will be based on placing them on the layout and moving them around to get the placement I like the best. generally though, inside the left loop will be a town on a couple of levels. The right side will be like the outskirts of town. More room, a couple of mills with water wheels, and a few pubs/breweries. There will be a stream running from upper right corner to the lower middle area. The exact location will be determined by trial and error.
The most fun for me is picking and placing the buildings. Once I'm happy with the final placement, I draw an outline around each one and label it on the foam. Then remove all the buildings, do the wiring and basic landscaping (rocks, tunnel etc.) Then place the buildings finish landscaping, trees, etc, Final stages are the population, and then snow.
Fun Senior Citizen Thanks, Stein -
Thanks, Stein -
Not your fault that the people who make the forum software (i.e Telligent) hasn't thought of including an obvious "get image link" link or button on the gallery web pages - I just figured it would be easier for people to find it the image if I added a direct link, instead of having people look through the gallery.
Track plan seems essentially the same - little narrower, the third point-to-point track is gone, but otherwise it looks pretty similar.
One thing which may be worth trying is to either draw in buildings, roads etc (as squares) on your plan, or to do a full scale mockup of the entire layout in cardboard, so you can see how scenery and buildings etc will work with your track plan.
Fun Senior Citizen The updated layout is in the photo gallery - "Pops Plan 2"
The updated layout is in the photo gallery - "Pops Plan 2"
Here is a link to the page: http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/media/p/2252676.aspx
Thanks, Stein - That's why I'm here - it's fun to interact with you guys, plus, I always learn something.
Don't worry about anything - you aren't "forcing" me into anything. As paul pointed out, I have "strong" opinions. But, the point about reaching 3' is obviously valid and logic wins out. I was forcing too hard to get that gandy dancer in. It is a better layout now without it and it still meets all my original requirements.
Thanks to all of you guys.
Fun Senior Citizen Stein - Thanks for the reply. My thoughts - first the specs did come before the plan. (LOL)
Stein - Thanks for the reply. My thoughts - first the specs did come before the plan. (LOL)
Okay - sorry about me sort of implying otherwise.
Fun Senior Citizen Next - I totally understand this type of project not being fun for you, and that's fine. I'm not trying to create "work" for anyone, just discussing what I am trying to do.
Next - I totally understand this type of project not being fun for you, and that's fine. I'm not trying to create "work" for anyone, just discussing what I am trying to do.
Hey - no problem. I am not saying that I find your project painful to discuss - merely that I personally dislike trying to make track plans with sectional track - I find sectional too confining for my taste.
I used sectional when I was younger - German Märklin brand track - very robust and bullet proof, very few electrical issues - since they used studs along the track center and a pickup under the locomotive for one of the electrical feeds, and both rails as the other polarity - no challenges with reversing loops or having double ended sidings or anything, and tons of track plan books which listed what tracks you needed to build the various configurations, lots of accessories for automatic reversing, slowing down at stations and so on and so forth. And pretty much anything went around 14.75" curves, even in H0 scale. And stuff pretty much works after 20 years in storage - after doing a quick oil change and cleaning of gears. Sectional definitely has it's place.
If I hadn't found this discussion interesting, I wouldn't have taken place. So don't think about you creating work for me or anything like that - if anything, I am sorta jumping into your thread because I found the discussion interesting.
Fun Senior Citizen I appreciate what you've contributed so far. In fact, because of the responses here, I'm in the process of revision 6 gazillion and 2. I've eliminated the reverse tracks with the gandy dancer hand car. So far, I'm down to 5x8 and still trying to get a little more off.
I appreciate what you've contributed so far. In fact, because of the responses here, I'm in the process of revision 6 gazillion and 2. I've eliminated the reverse tracks with the gandy dancer hand car. So far, I'm down to 5x8 and still trying to get a little more off.
Not my intention to force you to change your layout - I just wanted to present some alternatives. If you find that you still prefer the original design, no problem - it is your layout, and it has to fit your preferences, not mine.
Fun Senior Citizen The scenario you created is really cool. Sounds a "little" over my head at this stage. Perhaps after I learn a little more, and better my finances a bit, I'll add a second 4-4-0 and try to automate a stop at the station for both east and west bounds at the same time.
The scenario you created is really cool. Sounds a "little" over my head at this stage. Perhaps after I learn a little more, and better my finances a bit, I'll add a second 4-4-0 and try to automate a stop at the station for both east and west bounds at the same time.
Well, automation is optional - can always be added later. I was just trying to point out that it might be interesting for a display layout (which is what it seems like you want to create) to have the DeWitt Clinton and the 4-4-0 interact in some way, and to include a way to hide some of the tracks.
Not a given that that idea would work better for you than your original idea, if your preference is to see the train loop and climb and cross over it's own track - i.e. to have multiple tracks through a scene and see the train wind its way here and there.
There are many ways of doing things - and you (as you no doubt understand) do not need to have my (or Paul's) permission or blessing to do things your way.
Paul -
You're absolutely correct about the name gandy dancer. My mistake for not using the full name as Stein mentioned.
I'm sorry my opinions came across too strong. I have been planning this for over a year now (started in November, 2010) and am finally getting close to start building. I understand my choices are completely remarkable to you (and most here). We're just coming from two different outlooks. And I assure you I'm not trying to end the discussion - on the contrary, I truly appreciate every bit of input.
I guess I should explain where I'm coming from with this plan. I've hesitated to, because I know a lot here won't take me seriously. But, at the risk of starting flaming posts, here's where I'm at.
I've been a collector of Department 56 villages for 18 years. All that while, I've had displays up, building and rebuilding the scenery, and updating with new buildings. I collect the Heritage Villages, which are different and smaller than the Snow Village commonly used with toy trains. I mostly have Dickens Village, and a few of the other villages under the Heritage Village banner, such as New England Village, Alpine Village, North Pole, etc. Hence the name Heritage Valley Railroad.
While I have an extensive building collection, I don't use any of their accessories, people etc. I like to keep everything in scale. That makes me "different" to other D56 collectors. This puts me in kind of a "no-man's land" of collecting now. For 18 years I've had displays without trains and have had no ambition to run operations. The trains are just another, and new, aspect of my display. But that doesn't mean I'm not taking it seriously. The fact that I've been planning for over a year to totally build a new display should say something about why I have opinions, needs, and wants, but above all, this is how I have MY fun.
I'm sorry you feel you should stay away from this thread, and feel others should also. This is probably just more ammunition for you, but I close by stating -
My name's Pops, and I'm a Model Railroader.
Stein - Thanks for the reply. My thoughts - first the specs did come before the plan. (LOL) Next - I totally understand this type of project not being fun for you, and that's fine. I'm not trying to create "work" for anyone, just discussing what I am trying to do. I appreciate what you've contributed so far. In fact, because of the responses here, I'm in the process of revision 6 gazillion and 2. I've eliminated the reverse tracks with the gandy dancer hand car. So far, I'm down to 5x8 and still trying to get a little more off.
As I finish this next draft, hopefully by tomorrow, I'll post it so all can see my changes.
Paulus Jas i thought a gandy dancer is a nickname for a track-worker on the railroad, not for the small piece of equipment used to facilitate their job.
i thought a gandy dancer is a nickname for a track-worker on the railroad, not for the small piece of equipment used to facilitate their job.
I suppose I could have called what I (and pops) was talking about by it's full name : "gandy dancer hand car" - ie an animated model of a one or two workers on a hand "pumped" car, where you see the workers pump up and down as the car moves:
watch?v=ABYUqIS lHk But most people call this accessory just "gandy dancer", since the main thing is the animated figures of track workers moving as the car moves along. Smile, Stein
hi gentlemen,
though i am not 100% sure, i thought a gandy dancer is a nickname for a track-worker on the railroad,
not for the small piece of equipment used to facilitate their job.
A few remarks about this thread so far:
for a newbie FunSC has very strong opinions. No problem for me at all, the problems arise when he might develop a different view a few months from now.
Your choice for a layout without turnouts and 3 completely different "loops" is remarkable. With a few turnouts you could connect the independent loops, which would make your plan much more versatile. Adding the possibilty only, to get a layout where some switching or dispatching still is an option in the future, is not a bad thought.
Your choice for a layout as small as possible is remarkable too, as if you do not like the building nor watching at your trains very much. The very same applies for your choice to have just one scene.
Your responses are very clear; almost as if you want to end a discussion before it even has started. Like : "it's my choice, period". IMHO the best reason to stay away from this thread.
I would like to see not only a plan for your tracks, but also how you envision your scenery; e.g. the placements of roads, streams, tunnels and buildings.
Wish you lots of fun with your empire
Paul
Fun Senior Citizen HO layout, no reverse loops, turn-outs, crosses etc, at one point two tracks need to be close and in opposite direction (on mine, it's the lower left corner) so the station can be placed inside the loop and the platform can be between the tracks to allow passenger travel in both directions, most of the curves should be 18" radius minimum, using EZ Track, the whole layout is one town, it should be as compact as possible (the smaller the better), try to have a little variety in outer perimeter as mentioned by Texas Zepher, include a single unconnected loop inside (can be 15" radius).
HO layout, no reverse loops, turn-outs, crosses etc, at one point two tracks need to be close and in opposite direction (on mine, it's the lower left corner) so the station can be placed inside the loop and the platform can be between the tracks to allow passenger travel in both directions, most of the curves should be 18" radius minimum, using EZ Track, the whole layout is one town, it should be as compact as possible (the smaller the better), try to have a little variety in outer perimeter as mentioned by Texas Zepher, include a single unconnected loop inside (can be 15" radius).
<LOL> What came first - the spec or the track plan? ;-)
Sorry - I don't do track planning with sectional track - it is just too limiting to be fun for me.
In principle, I would think that a plain double track loop on a 4.5 foot x 8 foot table would work. Small back drop 2 1/2 feet in to hide the rear of both loops.
Have one train run clockwise on one track, another run counterclockwise on the other track, with the station platform being where people transfer between the two trains.
Automate things, so the one train (say the DeWitt Clinton - the replica the NYC built in 1893, not the original scrapped in 1833) comes into the station and stop at the rear side of the platform. Then another train (the 4-4-0 pulling some passenger coaches) pulls into a track on the front of the platform. Hidden by the front train, a group of passengers appears on the platform (maybe the platform flips or something). Then the front train departs, runs behind the backdrop and stops.The crowd admires the DeWitt Clinton, before the DeWitt Clinton backs up around the curve (and in behind the backdrop). Then the DeWitt Clinton makes a new appearance, steaming past the platform and around the curve on the other side.
After a bit, a gandy dancer comes through the backdrop on a track on a bridge across part of the scene, and stops at the edge of the layout. After a short break, the gandy dancer moves back again across the bridge and through the backdrop. The 4-4-0 makes a new appearance, stops at the front of the platform, and hidden by the train, the crowd disappears. The 4-4-0 departs again.
Short break, new cycle starts. Sound effects can be from a speaker under the table.
For instance. Not a given that this idea will appeal to you at all.
Well, my layout plan made it in to the photo gallery. Guess I did it right after all.
Thanks - I'll definitely have short rolling stock. The 4-4-0s are short, as are the period passenger cars. The trains will only be 2 or 3 cars long. Should be OK (but I will test before anything final).
Given that you've created what you want, my only concern would be with the grades required. As long as you stick with short trains and have good vertical easements (ask if you don't know what that means), you shouldn't have much trouble. The problem is, EZ track makes it tough to get anything but an abrupt angle at the beginning / end of an incline.
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
To Ken, Stein, and others -
Thanks for your input and concerns. I'm not opposed to corrections in the layout as long as my requirements are covered. Any help would be greatly appreciated. My design was based on the following criteria:
If these can all be met in another design, I'd truly be grateful.
Any ideas???
Texas Zepher My only concern is how close some of the tracks are together running almost parallel but they are at different levels (ex the left hand side. There might be some "verticle" scenery issues there. I presume your gandy-dancer has an automatic reverse built into it and you won't have to manually be doing that.
My only concern is how close some of the tracks are together running almost parallel but they are at different levels (ex the left hand side. There might be some "verticle" scenery issues there.
I presume your gandy-dancer has an automatic reverse built into it and you won't have to manually be doing that.
Yes, they are close. I plan on an almost vertical cut with cut rock or stone wall sides. I feel pretty sure I've got that part covered. The gandy dancer will be on a Bachmann auto-reverse track set with delay at each end.
Thanks for your input.
For watching a train run, I have always liked the figure 8 so that one can see both sides of the train close up. I also like how you did not just make straight tracks running parallel to the edge of the layout and 90 degree and 180 degree curves. My only concern is how close some of the tracks are together running almost parallel but they are at different levels (ex the left hand side. I presume the outside track is flat and level while the inside figure 8 track is going pretty steeply up. ). There might be some "verticle" scenery issues there.
Pop's thought I chime in. While a modeler has to do what will make them happy, I have to agree with Stan on some of his points.
2 Long reaches will get to be a pain. I as well thought I could live with them, it has tuned out to be one of my biggest mistakes.
3 Seeing the train going around and around. Some view blocks do make the train seems like it is coming from somewhere and going somewhere. Maybe build a good sizes hill on the rear 1.5 feet of the bench? (top of plan)
Then there is the S Curves. In your plan I see around 8 of them. A S Curve is where you have 2 turns connected go different ways and it looks like a S. At slow speeds, you might get thought them. At little faster speeds they will cause derailments. You need between 3 to 5 inches of straight track between the turns. Ask me how I know!
Far as not having anything for your trains to do? I have around 50 turnouts and Engine House, Coal Mine, Grain Elevator, Passenger Station and a team track. I might use 4 of the turns outs maybe twice a week. I am more or a rail fan (watching the trains) than a switcher.
Have fun.
Cuda Ken
I hate Rust
Thanks for trying. It's a neat layout, but not quite for me.
Plus, I'm not looking for visually separate scenes, just one that all ties together.
Fair enough, pops :-)
Your layout, and it has to fit your preferences, not mine. I still think that if my goals had been yours (ie just watching a train run), and I could have freely used 10x10 feet in a corner of a larger room, I would still have considered some other form factors than multiple loops on a rectangular table. Say a water wing layout:
It has a duck-under access hole in the corner, which may be a no-no for you, but it would allow you to sit back and watch trains run (maybe from a recliner in the lower right hand corner, with a cold beverage in your hand), and it would have allowed several plausible looking visually separated scenes, whether you just wanted the train to run through them, or to stop to pick up cars or go into a siding to wait for another train or whatever.
Anyways - just wanted to introduce the concept - which you may have considered already and dismissed in favor of a table with a 2-foot (or wider) aisle on the backside for access to the rear end of the layout.
Thanks guys, I appreciate your time to respond.
Paul - sounds like you're having fun with your layout - awesome. I love "smoke and mirrors," too.
Stein - Wow, thanks for the help with the photo. I'm still hoping mine shows up in the gallery, but it was neat for you to go through the trouble of getting that up for me.
As for your layout thoughts - all valid, considered, and appreciated.
#1 - It's going to be in a corner of an 18x28 room, and we've checked that space won't be a problem. And, my preference is being able to be in one place and see the entire layout. I don't aspire to having a layout spread out all around the room, or hidden behind view blocks, etc. I think they're cool and great for operations, but just not what I want to build.
#2 - Yes, 3' is a long reach, but it seems do-able. The layout is low for various reasons, so that makes it easier. Plus, the track area is only 5' wide, so I have the option of eliminating an extra foot if I have to.
#3 - I agree with your premise, however, I have no desire to represent a real, working railroad, just create an image - kind of like a large diorama with moving parts.
#4 - And here we totally agree. There's not a lot to do with my train. Perfect! I don't want to have to do anything but watch it. No operations, no turn outs, no loading, unloading, changing cars, or anything. I'm sure that attitude is fairly unique here, but, the name of this game is "fun" and as you concluded, "If that is what you want, Then that is just fine."
I hope you'll be able to follow my progress and still give input. I have made many changes to the plan as I go along this journey, and will surely make a lot more based on newly acquired knowledge and suggestions.
Pops
Hi, Pops!
I'm currently using EZ track in my new layout, a rectangular 'ceiling train'. So, like you, basically no turnouts. But then there's the 'yard'...with a ladder, using the long #6 turnouts, to create 3 mains, a 4th with an inspection pit with overhead crane, & a backside or storage track...a liberal dusting of ballast over everything & enough scenery to divert a viewer's eye; most of my admirers know even less about the hobby than I do. So, a little smoke & mirrors, & everybody's happy.
And who was that, putting down the Hogwarts Express? I've found it a fun project, from fitting the cars with Rapido lighting to experimenting with old IHC interiors to get those Euro-style compartments...I'm even toying with painting a Walthers Skytop to the Hogwarts colours & putting a mini plasma ball in the end, as a crystal ball. And I got a scale diecast model of a Ford Anglia, which will 'fall' into a big old willow tree, as it goes by...it's MY hobby, after all...(I use short sections of the 33.5" radius curves to 'parallel' the #6's as they come out of the switch.) And you CAN join EZ track with flex; the bases from an old Girder & Panel set are practically the right height, off by only the thickness of a piece of 110lb cardstock...
Keep the faith!
Fun Senior Citizen If anyone finds it, let me know what you think.
If anyone finds it, let me know what you think.
It has several challenges.
1) It makes fairly inefficient use of floor space. You will need access corridors on at least three sides, so your 6x8 foot layout will bind up 10 x 10 feet of floor space in the room you have your layout - space which cannot easily be shared with other uses of the room (unlike what you can if you e.g. run a layout on a shelf along a wall, above your computer desk or TV or whatever and below your book shelves or storage shelves. Not a problem if you have that all floor space left over anyways, and have no use for extra storage, a spot for a work desk for your model railroading or anything like that.
2) Reach wise, three feet is long to reach in to the center, especially when you have scenery etc you are going to be leaning over
Access will be easier if you are tall and thin (so your hips can go right up to the edge without a belly crushing scenery), and the layout is at hip level instead of at chest level. That is a way to trade looks (you will be looking down on the layout instead of looking into a scene) for reach.
3) Scenery wise, it will probably look more like an amusement park ride - lots of track looping here and there, with it being fairly obvious that the train is running around on a closed loop, than look a railroad passing through one or two somewhat realistic scenes, where trains come from somewhere else and continue to somewhere else (or head back to where it came from).
Judicious use of scenery can perhaps hide some of the looping effect, but it is hard to make track configurations where the track crosses diagonally across the table in a figure-8 like way look plausible, especially if you need to keep the layout table low for reach (see point 2).
Scenery wise, it is easier to create 2.5D scenes (scenes showing just the front or just the front and a little of the sides of buildings, mountains or whatever) for something that is at chest level and where you don't see across the table to see the opposite side of the table.
4) There isn't a lot to do with your train. It can run around and around. You can stop at a station, and then continue looping. And that's about it.
In summary, this looks like a classical toy train table layout, which will be fun to build and experiment with scenery on, but probably pretty dull to run trains on. It is not an attempt to model a railroad, or create an impression of a scene from a real railroad.
And if that is what you want, then that is just fine.
Here is in principle how you post a picture:
1) Upload picture to some photo sharing service2) Get a URL that points directly to the image (not to the general gallery front page at the whistlepost)3) Use the "insert media" icon (looks like a film strip), paste URL into popup and post.
Done.
Here is a link directly to the page I assume you meant to show people (it also contains a description of your layout):http://www.thewhistlepost.com/forums/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/12068
Here is the png file displayed as an image (some older web browsers may not display png file):
Well, I've given up waiting to see if I posted it correctly or not.
Meantime, anyone who would like to check it out, can do it here -
http://www.thewhistlepost.com/forums/gallery/index.php