Working on my first ever layout and I'm looking for feedback on the track plan. I'm looking for basic operational interest, but more so interested in scenery. Let me know what you think.
to the forum. Your post got delayed in moderation. That goes away quickly if you post even halfway frequently.
Assuming each block represents 1 foot, reaching into the center of the layout is going to be difficult.
Personally I would prefer more switching opportunities, but some people prefer to watch their trains run. The stub sidings on the lower left and upper right don't have a lot of room for an adjacent industry.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I agree with Heney, reaching more than 30 inches, unless you are 6'8 or taller will be difficult. Use also need at least thirty inches on each side for a person to get by, and 36 is better.
You will learn much building your first layout, and most materials can be reused on a second or third, or fourth. Knowledge goes up.
Enjoy yourself. Ask questionsm someone here will know.
dboone Let me know what you think.
8' x 6', can you reach everything? For laying track, doing scenery and running trains? and to be able to get at any problems that need fixing?
I guess my thoughts are, I've done the island style, if given the chance, the next time will be around the room.
Mike.
My You Tube
Just a couple of questions.The short sidings would be a waste of space and turnouts for me. And if the X is all in the same level it looks like trouble with a capital T. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
The other thing is, the diagonal just provides a shortcut to the route around the outside. What's it there for? As in, what is the railroad explanation? Lower grade? If you leave all that off, you can put a small yard along the left side, and also make an area removable next to it for access/operating pit.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Lets hope that you have access around the entire layout, because a person generally cannot reach trackwork that is more than 30 inches away. As others have said, you wont be able to reach the middle spur regardless if you can walk around the layout. A better use of space would have scenery in the middle, maybe at a diagonal, or a simple viewblock/backdrop down the middle, cutting the layout into two separate scenes. Many people find that more desireable since it gives a sense of distance.
The double ended sidings are too short to be useful. Their purpose in operations is to allow one train to pass or run around a cut of cars. You only have length for one car, which you will find to be not very useful.
Here are some popular plans found on the internet that are about your same space. The first has an open pit, the second has a viewblock. Notice how they push the track more to the edges of the benchwork to provide reach, and notice how long the double ended sidings are.
This plan by a Forum member, Cuyama. You could add straight sections to increase the depth to 6 feet.
And here is a plan that uses buildings as sort of a view block, for more of an urban setting. Could be widened, but notice how the tracks are all kept within easy reach. The creators of this trackplan have many:
Model Trains and Model Railroads | Gateway NMRA | St. Louis Gateway to Model Railroading Fun
Good luck, and keep asking questions.
- Douglas
On my 1st layout, I had a duck-under. It was annoying crawling on the rug to reach the layout. The layout benefits greatly having folks get close to the entire operation.
Reach is another issue I had on the 1st layout. It was difficult using a stepladder to reach places. I spent time afterward picking up what my arm knocked over.
Both of these issues I avoided on my 2nd (and current) layout. Never regret having a point-to-point layout without a duck-under. Also, everything on the layout is 24" wide (the corners are about 30").
Hello All,
to the forums and seeking feedback on your track plan.
I too see many operational/practical problems with your initial thoughts.
The reach problem, in my opinion, will be your biggest problem, both in construction and operation.
Some questions:
A quote from John Allen, "The Wizzard of Monterey" on track planning:
"A model railroad should probably start with a concept. Why? Because much knowledge about railroading, experience in model railroading, and thought are required before a proper concept for a model railroad can be formed. These requirements are seldom possible on a first pike. Mine was no exception."
Thank you for offering up your track plan for feedback and questions.
Hope this helps.
"Uhh...I didn’t know it was 'impossible' I just made it work...sorry"
I like the over and under plan but your drawing is only understood once you blow it up.
You could keep the space but lengthen the problem (reach wize) by extending them. Run the one with the runaround nearer the left isle and the other loop down into the town at the bottom and move the screen more to the top. That would at least greatly reduce any turnouts out of reach leaving only a single track out of arms reach.
I had a 4X6 layout which was fine. When I got kicked out of that room by one of my boys, I moved to another room in the basement and opted for a around-the-room shelf layout, with a liftout. I never regretted that decision. You get more reach and more room for a mainline with such an arrangement. There is also more backdrop space for scenery. And the track plan can be super simple. Mine is a bit complicated, but it could be as simple as two parallel mainlines with a few sidings. If you stay within 18'', you can use metal supports screwed on your studs -- really easy. The liftout is the most complicated part to build - but it's actually not that hard if you follow some basic principles, the main one being that you need side braces at the receiving end to ensure that the liftout falls exactly where you want it, that is, to align with the track. If you use hinges above the liftout, elevate them by an inch using blocks. A power switch that shuts off the entire system when the liftout is "up" is also an important feature to prevent the trains from making the big leap if you forget to put the liftout back in place... There are threads on this forum that cover gates and liftouts very well. And duckunders are no fun when you need to carry things. They are also a back breaker and a knee bruiser!
Simon
If the section of track at the X is elevated the grades are pretty steep if they begin at the turnouts. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
RR_MelIf the section of track at the X is elevated the grades are pretty steep if they begin at the turnouts.
I didn't do the math but a 6.25% and an almost 7% grade, on curves too, seem unrealistic.
Eliminating the "top" turnouts on the "S" curve on the right and moving the turnout on the right "down" to the other turnout will lessen the grade but I don't know if it would be enough for reliable operation.
The more I study this plan the more questions I have about the entire elevated section and the track below it.
Not hearing back from the OP on the "whys" of his choices doesn't help either.
Some have mention duck unders/swing ups on a around the room layout.
I built mine with 1x4 lumber and 1/2 inch plywood, setting the top at 50 inches.
Using a duckunder to get in. Even my 6'6" friend at eighty years old had no problem.
Just a thought.;
Ya know going back over the responses I think everyone was thinking HO, if he is planning N the grades will drop into the 3½% range. I’m hoping he is still delayed under moderation and that we didn’t scare him off. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
RR_Mel Ya know going back over the responses I think everyone was thinking HO, if he is planning N the grades will drop into the 3½% range. I’m hoping he is still delayed under moderation and that we didn’t scare him off. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California Mel,
Ya know going back over the responses I think everyone was thinking HO, if he is planning N the grades will drop into the 3½% range. I’m hoping he is still delayed under moderation and that we didn’t scare him off. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California
Mel,
Yes, I too hope the OP took the comments as constructive. I appreciate everyone's suggestions. Part of the issue is some come here with grandiose plans only to realize that they might need to tone-down their expectations.
There's nothing wrong with starting small and building up. Heck, my 2nd (and present) layout is far more enjoyable after applying many, many lessons learned from the 1st one.
I'm positive it's HO. When you enlarge the plan, all of the track is Atlas, the 520 referes to Atlas code 83 9" straight track.
I didn't see his plan in any of the track plan packages.
Even with moderation, the OP is silent for a week. He went to the trouble of drawing up a track plan, which people who just want to stir the pot for the one and only post, don't do.
Still if he's lurking, he ought to step up. We can only talk to ourselves for so long
BigDaddy Even with moderation, the OP is silent for a week. He went to the trouble of drawing up a track plan, which people who just want to stir the pot for the one and only post, don't do. Still if he's lurking, he ought to step up. We can only talk to ourselves for so long
One comes to mind where we were helping a guy plan a yard and turntable tracks. I personally put a lot of time into it, modifying his proposed track plan several times. Haven't heard from him in six weeks or more. So, why do we bother?
Rich
Alton Junction