Thanks for all the comments, which I sincerely appreciate. I should have mentioned that I am a disabled veteran who is likely to become wheelchair bound in the not too distant future. So, my reach into the layout will be more limited than most experience. Also I would like a twice around design - I don't care if the plan is "honest" (a train moves through a scene only once), I'm more interested in a long run. I prefer HO over N because my proposed era is 1914 America. Not much available in N in that period. THere's a plan in 101 Track Plans (called for a square room) that I am interested in. However, I will not be able to reach into the deepest corner. Thanks
ChoopsWe are assuming HO scale. I would suggest n scale for a 10 x 10 room with scenery and running.
Good observation and suggestion. The OP never said he had already chosen HO. I agree that n would make much better use of the space.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
We are assuming HO scale. I would suggest n scale for a 10 x 10 room with scenery and running.
I would also suggest picking up 102 realistic track plans or 103 realistic track plans. These compile most of the layouts from model railroader in one place sorted by size. and also have articles on how to design a layout.
Steve
Now here's an idea for a modifcation of the one above - instead of the industries in front of the staging, how about a classification yard (assuming the top edge is against a wall. The backdrop between the staging and the visible yard would be removable for access to staging, and by having a yard in front of it, there would be no tall structures or scenery to reach over when leaning in to reach something stuck in staging. The long reach isn't ideal but by keeping flat stuff in front of it, the inconvenience is minimized. In the OP's plan of filling a 10x10 room, the outside edges surely will be all against walls, so while the narrow 12" sections of the HoG (Even if they were just 18" wide, most of those added triangles wouldn't be needed) are a bit contrived, going extra wide will also be a problem.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
rrinker I wouldn;t say it's gimmicky, it's got decent industries and even an interchange, in addition to just letting them roll 'round and 'round if you like. Plus it's 8x9, which means the OP can expand it 2' on one side and 1 foot on the other, putting more distance between groups of sidings. Also with more space any of the sides could be made closer to 24 inched wide instead of 18 inches, or up to 30" wide which is about the limit of a comfortable reach. Then the sidings wouldn;t have to always go parallel to the main and/or there would be more room for actual structures. --Randy
I wouldn;t say it's gimmicky, it's got decent industries and even an interchange, in addition to just letting them roll 'round and 'round if you like. Plus it's 8x9, which means the OP can expand it 2' on one side and 1 foot on the other, putting more distance between groups of sidings. Also with more space any of the sides could be made closer to 24 inched wide instead of 18 inches, or up to 30" wide which is about the limit of a comfortable reach. Then the sidings wouldn;t have to always go parallel to the main and/or there would be more room for actual structures.
By gimmicky I meant that the shelves were kept to only 12 inches wide just for keeping the layout within one sheet of plywood. I agree with your explaination of how to modify it. Its a nice basic plan.
- Douglas
From this thread http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/t/230519.aspx
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
The Heart of Georgia is a nice trackplan, but its a bit of a gimmick since it's designed to show what can be done with the single ubiquitous 4x8 sheet, going beyond the table top.
Check out MR contributor Tom Kilmoski's Georgia Northeastern layout. Its about 10 x 10. He's got lots of current videos if you search the net.
While most of us started out with continuous running on a simple loop, most of us got bored with that at some point. The proof is our need to add turnouts and sidings to that loop so that the trains can DO something. Although I have seen lots of layouts over the years that could host operations, I was unable to try my hand at actual operations until just a few years ago. Now I can't run a train without some level of realistic operation. Even if I'm just running a passenger train from point A to Point D, I have to include the station stops at Points B and C.
The Oakhurst Railroad track plan does include a continuous loop, but it is SOOOOooo much more enjoyable running it point-to-point making the trains haul empty/loaded log cars and other supplies between the logging camps, sawmill and town of Oakhurst. Since it takes so long for a logging train to travel the length of the layout, you still get to sit back and enjoy the train(s) running along the line. Best of all, it will keep the layout owner and a few friends busy for hours.
Hornblower
dfdf1995 A would like to build a round the room shelf layout in a small bedroom, 10' X 10'. Main interest continuous running to just see the trains run plus reasonable scenery. Suggestions to track plan sources please?
A would like to build a round the room shelf layout in a small bedroom, 10' X 10'. Main interest continuous running to just see the trains run plus reasonable scenery. Suggestions to track plan sources please?
hornblowerAs a member of the rather fortunate group that gets to operate it, you might consider building a version of the Oakhurst Railroad
Did you miss the part of the original post that said
dfdf1995Main interest continuous running to just see the trains run
It's amazing how many of us project our interests onto others. Not everybody is into "operating".
As a member of the rather fortunate group that gets to operate it, you might consider building a version of the Oakhurst Railroad (MR July 2016). This compact logging railroad is one of the most enjoyable layouts I've ever operated. The slow pace of the Shay, Heisler and Climax locos means that trains take a realistically long time to negotiate the layout and there is a real sense of accomplishment when operating this layout. Because it models a relatively small area, it is easy for operators to understand where trains are going as well as why they are going there. It all fits in a room with slightly smaller dimensions than your own room. Best of all, it is a walk-in design with no duck-unders. Visit the website at www.oakhurstrailroad.com and check out the Youtube video at www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W5MhqWKMmc.
The layout was built using Atlas sectional track and turnouts, and was originally wired for a two cab, cab-control power system using Atlas products. It was converted to DCC by replacing one DC power pack with a Digitrax DCC system and switching all of the DC blocks to connect to the DCC system. The remaining DC power pack is used to power the turntable (Atlas) and the switch motors. The layout has a two-level helix in one corner. The upper half of the helix connects the lower town/sawmill level of the layout to the upper logging camp level while the lower half of the helix allows for continuous loop operations (rarely used except for staging). You could simplify the track plan by eliminating the lower helix and replacing it with a hidden staging (balloon?) track. Operating sessions routinely see three trains running simultaneously without any problems working around each other. More bang for the buck/space than any layout I've operated!
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group