Newbridge & Lockport RR (was: Help with layout shape and plan, please!)

[Choops]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/r270/15875426_10210145517508748_465228777900503975_o.jpg?oh=40d2254d634eff0d284672c801b5b9c9&oe=58DC58C7

 

Consider using the space on the other side of the columns as an operator area.  You are gaining layout area without building into the space.

The above layout I envision a main yard along any of the three long runs.  There could be some staging below between A and A.  ho scale.  Easy access to electri panel.

Steve

[cuyama]

TrainzLuvr

My space seems incompatible with H0

It's compatible with HO -- with compromises. Smaller radii (and corresponding limitations on equipment) allow a walk-in lobed arrangment like the "G" to work. Donut-style layouts would allow larger radii, but have their own trade-offs.

Your photo shows some of the largest modern equipment. If you want to run that, then it places demands on the minimum radii that aren't so severe with other layout eras and concepts. And if you want it to be double-track; that uses more space, not just for the extra track, but for the crossovers needed to enter and leave yards, for example.

N scale offers much more flexibility in the same space, of course.

TrainzLuvr

If I was to build a "chainsaw" layout, what kind of a layout do I build, how big, what shape, scale? Do I just find a plan on the internet I like and dive into it?

Personally, I think the purpose of a chainsaw layout is to build experience and answer questions. What are the key questions you'd like to answer? If the key question is "Will I be happy with N scale?", then it should probably be an N scale layout. If the key question is, "Will I be happy with equipment restrictions that come with a 26” (or whatever) radius in HO?”, then it should be an HO layout.

As far as where it’s located, I'd suggest something that's non-inuitive. I might build it in an L-shape partially against the wall that in the future will be the 36” “keep clear” aisle. Then you can start construction of the later layout in the far corner and still have a path clear to the electrical box for a while before you must take down the chainsaw.

You have more space than many model railroaders will ever have the good luck to enjoy. You can build a lot of the things you want into that space – just not everything. Good luck with your layout.

[lifeontheranch]

cuyama

Personally, I think the purpose of a chainsaw layout is to build experience and answer questions. What are the key questions you'd like to answer? If the key question is "Will I be happy with N scale?", then it should probably be an N scale layout. If the key question is, "Will I be happy with equipment restrictions that come with a 26” (or whatever) radius in HO?”, then it should be an HO layout.

See where this is going? Do the soul searching first, then build a layout or a chainsaw. If you just dive in without knowing the "why" then you will likely spend a lot of time and money only to end up dissatisfied with the hobby. Nobody wants to see that happen. It truly is the World's Greatest Hobby if done for the right personal reason(s).

cuyama

You can build a lot of the things you want into that space – just not everything. Good luck with your layout.

Sage advice.

[rrebell]

Since you like modern equipment go n. Some of the stuff you showed looks best on 36" radius at least in HO which would be a more manigable 18" in N. Although  the size of the stuff maters when you get older, modern stuff tends to be much bigger than the stuff from my layout era the 1930's, like twice an long or bigger.

[TrainzLuvr]

Thank you all for your posts.

 

Choops,

That was one of the shapes I had on the B-line but I keep putting it aside because of that large empty area in the middle left. My partner keeps telling me that I'm like "go big or go home", trying to use every square inch of space.

Looking at it, I think I'm on my way to understanding the "quality" run part, because of a choice made not use every square inch of space in favour of a layout that works on more than one level (scenic, operational, etc).

 

cuyama,

To be fair, I only have those two autoracks because they are the most-extreme cases. I bought them for the exact reason of seeing what the largest equipment does to various curve radii. I do have a number of passenger cars that are about the same length but would probably work even in 24" radii, unlike the autoracks.

We had some discussions about "G" vs donut, and although my partner is kind of indifferent to either, we both like organic shapes better. Yes, that's neither here nor there when it comes to fitting track, so it's more of a curiosity.

 

lifeontheranch,

Soul searching for H0 vs N to me is probably the toughest decision I have to make. I still need to shake off the feeling of "hold me gently or I'll break" that N gives me. :)

 

rrebell,

I do not mind modern North American equipment, although to be honest it looks too plain and all the same to me, built for a single purpose - to maximize the capacity. I find older North American units, and especially European equipment much more pleasing, for many reasons.

And there lays the conundrum, H0 has the selection of equipment I like in abundance, yet N offers me better choices in overal track length and scenic possibilities in my space.

 

Now, my current equipment roster is perhaps 8 or so locomotives, 9 passenger and maybe two dozen or so freight cars in H0. Then 3 locomotives, couple of passenger and 20 or so freight cars in N.

I do have a dozen or so PECO c100 turnouts (mostly small and medium, a few large and curved) and Atlas straight and curved sectional track (15, 18, 22 deg). Nothing in N though.

My question for everyone is going back to "Will I be happy with N scale?" and "Will I be happy with equipment restrictions that come with a 26” (or whatever) radius in HO?”

Someone could be happy with anything (or the first thing). Build H0 and never really know fully about N, or vice-versa. Should've, could've, would've.

Do I investing into any more equipment to build a "chainsaw" layout for that scale (or both)? Furthermore, what type of a "chainsaw" layout(s) do I build, how much track, scenery, level of completion, etc. should it/they have?

I will obviously have to buy track to build, but if it's going to be torn down, is it worth investing any money to begin with?

Am I over-analyzing all this? I seem to only have more questions.

[hon30critter]

Trainzluvr:

It seems to me that you want to go HO scale despite the curve radii challenges. I'm basing that simply on the way that you talk about HO scale vs N scale. HO scale you speak of positively, but N scale you keep asking if you will be satisfied.

FWIW, when I look at N scale I say "nice, but not for me". It just doesn't appeal to me. I scratch build switching locomotives and railcars/trucks in HO and HOn30. Trying to do that in N scale would seem to me to be an exercise in frustration, but that's me and what interests me.

Here is a suggestion that might help you make the choice. Forget about the 'chainsaw' layout approach. Put some of your locomotives and rolling stock in front of you in both scales. Then ask yourself "which ones do I want to reach for first?", or, "which locomotive would I like to hug?". Yes, I'm serious about the 'hug' part! Which locomotive(s) do you really love?!?

Dave

[RRR_BethBr]

TrainzLuvr

RRR_BethBr,

I'm trying to understand your suggestions from the last two paragraphs regarding designing around G, but I'm having a hard time seeing it in my minds eye. Could you please elaborate on

I'd also be very tempted to use that extra linear run to create enough vertical separation to allow a sublevel for staging and a turnaround loop (or double ended staging) beneath the sceniced portion of the layout.

What exactly are you referring to, the linear stretch touching the two columns? Where would you start going into the sublevel and where would you emerge from it?

Yes, that's the area I'm talking about. Here's a rough sketch based on your plan #6:

The main yard would be on the upper (modeled) level, with realistic track work, etc, though I'd almost certainly try to discretely incorporate a reverse loop for continuous running. Leaving the yard, we'd start heading down a gentle, but constant, grade as the train winds its way through the modeled scenes of towns/industries. At the point I show the tracks passing through the backdrop at lower left, we're heading on to the staging sub-level, and the line turns grey to indicate that. I'd run staging under the main yard, and include another reverse loop to facilitate continuous running, where trains could come in from the stagin level, climb the grade through the railroad, and end in your yard.

With some real cleverness, it might even be possible to include a 'ramp' track back down to staging at the rear of the main (modeled) yard, so trains could 'continue on' beyond your railroad.

The other option I would consider, is to use the aisle you already have to leave for electric panel access as a place to put a 'fiddle yard' for staging, behind a full-height backdrop that would hide the train-building operations going on there. That would probably require you to turn the 'G' back around the other way though.

What side of the room would the fiddle yard be, along the far right wall, or? Would it connect through a swing out bridge of sort?

I was thinking along the right side of the layout, like this (even rougher) sketch:

[lifeontheranch]

You want a long run.... How about double decking the whole affair. Extend the upper right blob out to 5' so it is large enough to house a 30"r helix (orange line). Position a backdrop on the lower deck to hide staging (dk green line).

[riogrande5761]

Is the other side of the pillars the wife's forbidden zone? 

As the Brits say, you could always go "pear shaped" - j/k.

[TrainzLuvr]

Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions.

So the concensus for my space is the G shape, regardless of the scale used. I would like to avoid a helix in H0 as to me that is a space monster, which most people prefer to tuck away somewhere.

I wish I had a nook somewhere I could put the helix in, but the space I've shown is the final space. I can't go below the columns since that would block access to the rest of the basement (it was a challenge to get even this much approved by the "committee"...just kidding, of course :) ).

I did spend a lot of cycles contemplating H0 vs N, yet I feel I haven't reached the decision point yet. What I did accomplish is find a local MRR club really close to where I live, which I plan to visit in a week or so.

My "cunning" plan, if all goes well, is to get access to their H0 layout and hopefully be around like-minded people, while learning many MRR things hands-on. And perhaps they will benefit from my skills in the process as well.

But ultimately, it might quench my thirst for H0, let me run some of my equipment there, and free me of having to make a scale choice. Then I could model N at home and have access to H0 at the club. A potential win-win situation.

I'll post an update once I visit the club, and maybe I'll have a clear(er) direction what I'm doing in the space at home.

[TrainzLuvr]

I apologize for being absent for the last 3 months, though I kept busy during that time (while the dreaded Winter went on and on...)

I started hanging out at the near-by MRR club, and as it turns out, they organize model train flea markets, twice a year even!!!

Suffice to say, I partook in their Spring event and was overwhelmed by it. So many model trains in so little space...

Got a video from the flea market up on my YouTube channel:

Also, I bought couple of KATO N Scale Variation sets; a few Atlas locomotives and some rolling stock, then setup a small layout to test things out.

Overal, even N Scale takes space, granted less than H0, but now I can see the curves N needs to look nice. I like KATO turnouts as they are both manual and remote, all in one. And the track seems solid and foolproof with roadbed built in.

What I don't like are the whining, squealing, and grinding noises that these N SCale locos make:

Turns out replacing wheels on the Atlas locomotives with KATO ones reduces the grinding noise, but whining and squealing of the motors is still there, ugggh:

I find the noise of N Scale locos a bit irritating, and I wish to have sound in them, but with tiny spaces available inside, not all could accomodate for it. Plus I like steam locos, and it appears to me there's much less of those in N than H0.

My SO and I have also had a chance to go on our first ever layout tour (Doubleheaders MRR Tour) at the end of March. That turned out to be such a wonderful experience.

We visited 8 different layouts (2 club and 6 home ones), spoke to people there and took lots of photos and videos (I'll be posting layout videos on my YouTube channel, as I edit them).

The tour showed us that we could build in H0, as some layouts were in about the same space that we have. Others were just...HUGE, spanning an entire basement (George Watson's Bear Mountain Southern Pacific )

While my SO favours the N, she is really indifferent to the scale and just wants me to pick one so we can get going. But, I feel like I'm back to square one...

It has been suggested to us to do both - put H0 in-front and put N at the back, creating a false perspective and depth. Though it seems to me it might be twice as hard to pull that out of a hat.

So, that's my update. And, I'm still open to whatever words of wisdom anyone can impart. Thanks!

[cuyama]

Note that loose Unitrack on top of foam is about the noisiest combination possible, especially when running locos alone at high speeds.

TrainzLuvr

It has been suggested to us to do both - put H0 in-front and put N at the back, creating a false perspective and depth.

Hard to pull off successfully and thus rarely worth it.

TrainzLuvr

wants me to pick one so we can get going

Good advice.

Good luck with your layout.

[TrainzLuvr]

cuyama

Note that loose Unitrack on top of foam is about the noisiest combination possible, especially when running locos alone at high speeds.

That's good to know, thank you.

From your experience, what combination of materials works best with KATO Unitrack, when it comes to sound dampening?

Should I only use plywood as a surface, or do I combine it with rigid foam board, homasote, or something else? 

I've been trying to source homasote up here, but it does not seem to be a widely popular material, while a 2" rigid foam board is out of stock quite often at my local big-box hardware stores, not leaving me with much choice.

[DSchmitt]

For foamboard. Are there any  specilaist insulation dealers in your area.  The big box stores in my area don't have it, but tere is an insulation dealer in the "big" city about 50 miles away that does.

[TrainzLuvr]

DSchmitt

For foamboard. Are there any  specilaist insulation dealers in your area.  The big box stores in my area don't have it, but tere is an insulation dealer in the "big" city about 50 miles away that does.

There are suppliers of building materials in the area, but I believe they only sell to General Contractors and professional license holders. Not sure if they also have a minimum quantity orders, as well.

Come to think of it, I do have a GC friend, maybe I could "coerce" him to be a middeman for my hobb...err building needs. ;)

[DSchmitt]

TrainzLuvr

 

 

DSchmitt

For foamboard. Are there any  specilaist insulation dealers in your area.  The big box stores in my area don't have it, but tere is an insulation dealer in the "big" city about 50 miles away that does.

 

 

There are suppliers of building materials in the area, but I believe they only sell to General Contractors and professional license holders. Not sure if they also have a minimum quantity orders, as well.

Come to think of it, I do have a GC friend, maybe I could "coerce" him to be a middeman for my hobb...err building needs. ;)

 

You could ask. The company I am aware of actually at one time had an ad advertising the material to model railroaders.  I bought 3 or 4 sheets.  It was many years ago. 

[cuyama]

TrainzLuvr

From your experience, what combination of materials works best with KATO Unitrack, when it comes to sound dampening?

Extruded foam seems to me to always be a sounding board to some degree. Unsecured loose foam sheets like the video are the worst.

I saw a layout with a "soft" layer between the Unitrack and a plywood subroadbed that was very quiet. This was a thin, soft craft foam -- the Woodland Scenics roadbed is similar, but likely more expensive.

TrainzLuvr

I've been trying to source homasote up here

Homasote dealer finder. You are looking for "Homasote 440" But personally, I don't think Homasote adds anything when using Unitrack. It's great for handlaying or for flextrack with track nails.

There are also dealer finders for extruded foam. Call the dealers first before driving to find out the stocking situation and/or minimum order.

Byron

[rrinker]

 Somethign else to keep in mind, also more sage advice from John Armstrong - stack the loops.

 With the G shape, if there is enough space for a turnback curve, you don;t need to cut across the open side of the G with aa lift gate or other contraption for continuous run - you loop back and on the one biggest blob, stack loops above one another. If there is wnough room, the looops can be multi-track and also be the staging yards. The tail of the G with the turnback can be used to gain altitude to start a second deck, if there is enough distance around the G you can have level town areas plus still have enough room to gain reasonable clearances between decks without resorting to impossible grades. This is similar to how my plan is developing, although I have a double track main and will have a helix at the end of the first level to get me to the start of the second, and at the far end, two loops stacked over one another with multiple tracks to be the staging.

 On a single level this could also be implemented as a dog bone, a double track main for most of the run and then a loop on either end. For decent operation this would require with both loops to be extra wide, or some alternate form of staging, vs stacking the loops so that only one end needs an extra-wide loop.

                                               --Randy.

 

[TrainzLuvr]

Hi Randy,

Thanks for your suggestions, I'm just finding it hard to convert words into visualization in my mind. Could you quicky draw something up (perhaps over what was already posted earlier here to make it easier) or perhaps if you have a pre-made drawing?

[rrinker]

 This is to fit in my space, but it's the direction I've been going. Upper left is the lower level staging loop, below that in about the middle is the helix, second level is not shown, but it will go over top the lower level and there will be another loop on toop of the one shown in the upper left. Instead of a helix, that could also just be a turnback curve with the vertical seperation gained via "no-lix", grades along the run.

 

                --Randy

 

[rrebell]

The best bet for you in your space for the amount of cars you seem to want and action, is to limit yourself to an older era. Just taking boxcars in HO, 40' ones look great on 18" curves but go up to 50', even though they will still make it, the curve needs to be bigger to look great, like 22", go 60' and it goes up to 27" etc., basically 4.5" per 10'. I am sure N scale has a similar chart. Now you can go smaller curves and it will work but the visuals are not as good.

[TrainzLuvr]

Thanks Randy, I see what you mean now. Myself, I would prefer to do a no-lix as it saves space and could visually be made to look intersting (plus gives trains a longer run).

Speaking of a no-lix, I really liked how it was done on the Hillside Central Railway - here's a YouTube video showing the layout and the route trains take between levels:

I thought it was a great idea to make the trains run on the outside perimeter, then once enough clearance is achieved, go under the tabletop towards the back and then continue down until tracks merge with the lower level.

There are no cutouts in the tabletop, no worrying about clearing the framework or any supporting brackets holding that level, etc.

And yes, I would focus mostly on the transition era (I like steam locos) either in H0 or N. I feel today's railroading reduced all that variety down to a handful of monster size diesels, MUed and pulling never-ending autorack consists. Meh.

Sadly, the more I read about steam in N Scale, more disappointed I get. It seems the thin selection of the N(ot available) scale is even thinner once all the bad performers are removed. What's left is a handful of hard to find locomotives, at mid to high prices. And even among those, some need a bit of tweaking as well...

[rrinker]

 You have plenty of room for HO. You just have to realize that 50 car trains aren't going to cut it. Heck, our club layout stretches 160 feet long and while once in a while we drag out a 100+ car coal train, it severely clogs up the layout. Most trains run 15-20 cars.

 Steam locos in most scales need a bit of TLC to keep running smoothly, or at least a bit of tweaking. In my time period there was pretty much 3 different steam locos running, I have models of 2 of the three (one is a one-off, used only in the engine shops), one has been done in plastic for a couple of runs now, and the other is pretty much brass only (and I am pretty much not willing to pay what they usually go for). Most any diesel I need ia vailable in plastic, and if not factory painted, the paint scheme is simple enough - it's all one color, so painting my own is not a problem.

                                     --Randy

 

[TrainzLuvr]

Hello once again.

Sorry I've been MIA past couple of months - spent most of the time spinning in circles in my head between H0 and N (it is very exhausting).

Also, spent the time drawing more layout shapes (I'm getting better at it!) although none of them seem to lead me anywhere. Just not getting that "right" vibe from it.

Here is a selection - I'm up to #33 so far. You can see all of them from the folder.

I'm having a hard time imagining where things would fit in any of these shapes...

I sort of settled on H0, with N as a fall-back, only realizing that I need another 2-3' on top of the 12', to have a decent aisle space and a peninsula. Curse the 12' size, it's neither here nor there!

Even entertaining a helix idea and multi-deck setup, to extend the mainline run. Some people tell me that you could put a lot of railroading into 18" depth, but I'm not seeing it.

That's my update, all and any comments, ideas, critiques, etc. are welcome.

[richhotrain]

Wow, six months later and you still haven't decided on a scale or the shape of your layout.

I'll make it easy for you. Let me pick it. Go with HO scale and select the "G" as the shape.

Why? Simply because your heart is with HO scale and the "G" is an efficient use of available space. Resist the temptation to block off that electrical service panel. Not only does code require access, but in an emergency, you may need to get at it quickly.

Rich

[TrainzLuvr]

I know, I know...

The G that was discussed here does not give me wide enough aisles nor the longest main line, at the expense of a fairly complicated and narrow benchwork that needs to be self-supporting.

Two of my club members really drummed into my head that people tend to lean on the benchwork, which was even more exemplified by three of us leaning onto the club layout while having that conversation.

I did build some test benchwork, as seen at http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/263563.aspx, and realized that it needs to be much more sturdier than 2x3s in order to make sure it does not move when people lean on it.

[richhotrain]

I overdid it and built my framework completely out of 2x4s, but I can walk on it if need be.

Rich

[TrainzLuvr]

Is your framework connected to the walls though?

Mine needs to be free-standing, if possible, so I don't damage the walls. Plus, I don't have a wall on the opposite side making it kind of a bummer.
I was even considering framing a wall there, but that would probably be an overkill.

richhotrain

I overdid it and built my framework completely out of 2x4s, but I can walk on it if need be.

Rich

[richhotrain]

Mine is freestanding.

Rich

[TrainzLuvr]

What would you do different another time around, if not using 2x4s? Also, is it a multi-deck, and if so, what are the level depths and heights from the floor?