Hello all,
I have been following this forum for a while, but this is indeed my first post.
First of all a bit of background. When I was a teenager I had a basic 4x6ft layout: a double oval with a siding and a couple of spurs (nothing special). Since then ~25 years have passed and a few things have changed... I have inherited from my late grandfather a Rivarossi HO collection (known in the US as AHM-Rivarossi), after relocating to several different countries for work I have now moved to the US and I can now afford a bigger budget than when I was a teenager. Considering all this for the last year I have been considering getting back into the hobby.
After many conversations my partner she has agreed that at "Christmas time" I could setup a shelf layout on the fireplace mantels. I see this as a reasonable way to start getting back into the hobby: a modular shelf layout where I can work on the modules during the year and put them up at "Christmas time".
The space would therefore be the two mantels of a double sided fireplace. These are 73"x9" each and they are 31" apart. See drawing below.
The idea would be to have two 73"x9" (or maybe 73" x 12") shelf layouts connected by a 180deg ~18-20" curve.
I'm looking for plan ideas for the two shelf, but even looking for shelf layouts I can find very few that are as narrow as 9" or 12". In addition, most of the shelf layouts that I can find around this size are mostly switching layouts/puzzles. I'm not completely against the idea of having a plan that could allow some switching, however I would like some sort of end-to-end branch line plan with freight depot(s) / station(s) at least on one side, but potential on both shelves. With the idea of having the possibility in future to automate having trains go from one shelf (depot/station) to the other shelf (depot/station). And enjoy watching it from the living room when I don't want to manually operate the layout.
Does anybody have any suggestions for or examples of shelf plans that could fit in 73"x9" (or 73"x12") spaces that are not only switching layouts?
The most interesting material I have found so far is the Five five ideas for a shelf layout by Steven Otte. Or the Great Western Branch Line Termini book by Paul Karau, but prototypes in this case are very British.
I haven't set my mind yet on specific prototype and I'm open to ideas... I was thinking maybe of a V&T setting to run the 4-4-0s and the 2-4-0 from my grandfather's collection, while my partner was suggesting an Appalachian mountains line maybe with a coal tipple... Any other ideas?
ALn668Does anybody have any suggestions for or examples of shelf plans that could fit in 73"x9" (or 73"x12") spaces that are not only switching layouts?
Other than traction, no. That width is very limited.
I guess you could model an engine terminal on one side and a small yard on the other, but that would be switching I suppose.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
My only thought that came to mind is a commuter branch for automated back and forth. With one or two sidings at each end that compliment each other freight goes from one to the other. Coal car from coal load out to coal fuel dealer. maybe a suggestion of a harbor on one end to a couple industries on the other. For that Switching aspect. traction would be your best bet. Plus that has much tighter curves.
shane
A pessimist sees a dark tunnel
An optimist sees the light at the end of the tunnel
A realist sees a frieght train
An engineer sees three idiots standing on the tracks stairing blankly in space
My shelf layout is 12" deep, it can absolutely be done.
With two shelves, if you want two stations visited by a local, all you would need is a runaround at each end long enough to bring a loco around a short passenger or mixed train. Try not to cram too much in around it, but other trackage could include spurs to a small industry or two that would fit and that you are interested in operating-- team tracks and freighthouses would be appropriate near a passenger station. (Also, flats or partially-modeled buildings along the back of the layout can save a ton of space, as can imagined off-layout modeling in front, like putting a passenger platform along the edge but not including the depot.)
An 18" curve shouldn't be an issue if you're running your V&T 4-4-0/2-4-0 steamers with shorty passenger cars and 40' or smaller freight cars, which would all be appropriate for the era.
Phil
ALn668 Hello all, I have been following this forum for a while, but this is indeed my first post. First of all a bit of background. When I was a teenager I had a basic 4x6ft layout: a double oval with a siding and a couple of spurs (nothing special). Since then ~25 years have passed and a few things have changed... I have inherited from my late grandfather a Rivarossi HO collection (known in the US as AHM-Rivarossi), after relocating to several different countries for work I have now moved to the US and I can now afford a bigger budget than when I was a teenager. Considering all this for the last year I have been considering getting back into the hobby. After many conversations my partner she has agreed that at "Christmas time" I could setup a shelf layout on the fireplace mantels. I see this as a reasonable way to start getting back into the hobby: a modular shelf layout where I can work on the modules during the year and put them up at "Christmas time". The space would therefore be the two mantels of a double sided fireplace. These are 73"x9" each and they are 31" apart. See drawing below. The idea would be to have two 73"x9" (or maybe 73" x 12") shelf layouts connected by a 180deg ~18-20" curve. I'm looking for plan ideas for the two shelf, but even looking for shelf layouts I can find very few that are as narrow as 9" or 12". In addition, most of the shelf layouts that I can find around this size are mostly switching layouts/puzzles. I'm not completely against the idea of having a plan that could allow some switching, however I would like some sort of end-to-end branch line plan with freight depot(s) / station(s) at least on one side, but potential on both shelves. With the idea of having the possibility in future to automate having trains go from one shelf (depot/station) to the other shelf (depot/station). And enjoy watching it from the living room when I don't want to manually operate the layout. Does anybody have any suggestions for or examples of shelf plans that could fit in 73"x9" (or 73"x12") spaces that are not only switching layouts? The most interesting material I have found so far is the Five five ideas for a shelf layout by Steven Otte. Or the Great Western Branch Line Termini book by Paul Karau, but prototypes in this case are very British. I haven't set my mind yet on specific prototype and I'm open to ideas... I was thinking maybe of a V&T setting to run the 4-4-0s and the 2-4-0 from my grandfather's collection, while my partner was suggesting an Appalachian mountains line maybe with a coal tipple... Any other ideas?
If you have access to the Model Railroader track plan database, select the option for small layouts. There are multiple shelf layout plans in that size range that you can use for inspiration.
In the kalmbach book, "How to build small model railroads" page 62 has a 1 x 6 design. two of those with the connecting track in between might be what you seek. The book might be of use for more than just that as it does explain some basics of small layout design
First of all thank you all for the feedback!
@NVSRR thank you for the suggestion, I bought a copy of the Kalmbach's "How to build small model railroads"and I will start t read through it.
pt714 With two shelves, if you want two stations visited by a local, all you would need is a runaround at each end long enough to bring a loco around a short passenger or mixed train. Try not to cram too much in around it, but other trackage could include spurs to a small industry or two that would fit and that you are interested in operating-- team tracks and freighthouses would be appropriate near a passenger station. (Also, flats or partially-modeled buildings along the back of the layout can save a ton of space, as can imagined off-layout modeling in front, like putting a passenger platform along the edge but not including the depot.) An 18" curve shouldn't be an issue if you're running your V&T 4-4-0/2-4-0 steamers with shorty passenger cars and 40' or smaller freight cars, which would all be appropriate for the era. Phil
@pt714 there you wrote exactly what I have in mind: small passenger station with a run around, track team/freight house and maybe a spur.
I have been looking around for some prototype ideas and I'm really getting interested into the possibility of modeling the V&T. Or at least take some ideas from there.
I have found this website that has the maps of the original V&T and I have started to study them. On one of the shelves I'm thinking of trying to model the passenger and freight depots of Virginia City and the Ophir mine.
Now seems that the original passenger & freight depots in Virginia City had 5 tracks. For space reasons I'm currently thinking of modeling only the three most north ones with the passenger depot, the car shed, the freight depot and the Ophir Mine Company.
Below is a first draft I have made of the plan for the "Virginia City" shelf (rotated by 180deg):
The run around (tracks 1 & 2) are sufficient to go around 3x 50ft passenger cars or 4x 40ft freight cars. Or as passing side can hold a 4-4-0 with 2x 50ft passenger cars.
Track #3 can hold 2x 50ft passenger cars (outside the car shed) without blocking switch with track #2 or 2x 50ft passenger cars and a 4-4-0 without blocking the switch on the main (#1).
I was thinking of having the track inside the car shed (track #4) extend inside the freight depot. While this is not prototypical it would allow to hide a whole train composed of a 4-4-0 and 2x 50ft passenger car.
The team track (tarck #5) holds 3x 40ft freight cars.
The straight track in-front of Ophir mine should hold 4x 24ft ore hoppers.
What do you think? Could this be a reasonable layout for a 6ft shelf 9" wide (if needed I could make it 12' wide)? Do you see any flaws with this track plan? Anything you would change?
I have found the Western Nevada Historical Photo Collection website that seems to be a good source of pictures of the prototype. I will put here just a couple to give you an idea of the prototype.
Passenger depot, car shed and freight depot (behind the car shed)
Ophir Mine
Another write it and run?
Here in the U.K. there is the classic 'Minories' plan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minories_(model_railway)
The original and enlargement (if space available).
https://esngblog.com/2016/12/18/minories-1-the-original-design/
David
To the world you are someone. To someone you are the world
I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought
NVSRRAnother write it and run?
I can only imagine Kalmbach moderation didn't get around to approving that (10:17pm nominal) post until after you commented this morning, but talk about a need for immediate gratification!
ALn668 Below is a first draft I have made of the plan for the "Virginia City" shelf (rotated by 180deg):
This looks promising to me, I like the selective compression down to three tracks (which will already take up a lot of space on 12" depth) and I also like the idea of using the freighthouse hidden track for staging another train, that's a good use of space. Personally, I like to spread out operating elements whenever possible, and especially given the era and locale, I think you have enough going on in the half of the layout you've sketched here that you could probably spread some of it out onto the other side (for example, you could place the mine on the other half with another depot and perhaps a team track, and keep the depot, freighthouse and car shed in place on this one.) That would afford you some scenery room around where the trains are going.
As it is though, from an operating standpoint I would invert the crossover just above the car shed, so that a loco can escape on the outside track headed toward the mine-- you may want to have cars spotted at both the freighthouse and the mine, and there's much more room before you get to the mine to get a loco around. This would also lengthen the outside track of the runaround a bit, giving you more flexibility.
ALn668 Passenger depot, car shed and freight depot (behind the car shed)
In real life, I wonder if a train parked at the depot blocked the yard tracks, or if there was enough room to pull past? Either way, given your compression, that may create some operating interest.
@pt714 thank you for your feedback!
pt714In real life, I wonder if a train parked at the depot blocked the yard tracks, or if there was enough room to pull past? Either way, given your compression, that may create some operating interest.
I couldn't find any pictures of a train parked at the depot on the most north track (#3 in my plan). However, from this pictures it seems that a train with 3x cars and a 4-4-0 would block access to track #2 (even if it is a bit difficult to say because in the picture the train is parked on track #2). While with my comression I get the same effect (i.e. blocking access to track #2) with 2x car and a 4-4-0. So seem at the end my track #3 is ~50ft shorter (one car) than the prototype.
I think you have a good point regarding reversing the switches above the car shed. I will try to draft that and see how the lenghts of the tracks look like.
I will try to draft also the other shelf and then see how to spread out the operarional elements. Ideally it would get nice to have a mine on one shelf and a stamp mill on the other to generate the traffic.
I have spent some days refining the design of the "Virginia City" side of the plan. Here I inverted the crossovers as suggested by @pt714 and made some other smaller adjustments.
I have then spent some time looking at the maps of the original V&T and trying to decide what to model on ther shelf. This is a difficult choice and I'm not fully convinced yet. On one side as the space is very small I would have preferred a smaller town/depot from the prototype such as Gold Hill (that in the prototype was a siding with a couple of spurs and could be completely modeled) or Mound House (this was a bit more complex as in the prototype it was an interchange but could still be model let's say with selective compression at 50% ).
However, on the other side when thinking at traffic on the prototype my understanding is that the traffic from Virginia City would be directed mostly to Carson City. The ore from the mines in Virginia City will go to the mills outside Carson City. Freight trains would bring supplies from Carson City to the mines in Virginia City (maybe stopping in the towns in between). And passenger service would got from Carson City to Virginia City and back stopping in the towns in between. Now the challenge is that the prototype in Carson City was complex indeed, and to fit this tiny space a very high selective compression is needed.
Below is the original map of the V&T tracks in Carson city where I have highlighted in red the tracks that I'm thinking of keeping the selective compression (even if a bit re-arranged). These are pretty much the main tracks inside town that served the passenger depot and the freight depot. The two depots were a block away from each other.
With regards to be mills from what I found these were actually a bit outside Carson City.
Originally I tried to arrange the plan to have a mill in the part of the layout connecting the two shelves. But I had to give up on this idea as I couldn't find a way to make this fit given the radius of the turn.
Below is the current version of the plan have come with. What do you think? Any suggestions?
I like the fact that Virginia City has a track for each of the three types of operation: passenger, ore, and general freight.
The Carson City layout is visually appealing, and the diamonds suggest those found in the prototype yard. However, do you anticipate a passenger train parked at the station to interfere with ore traffic?
MidlandMike However, do you anticipate a passenger train parked at the station to interfere with ore traffic?
However, do you anticipate a passenger train parked at the station to interfere with ore traffic?
I have tried to space the switches to prevent this.
Track #10 is long enough for a 4-4-0 and two 50ft passenger cars.
Siding #7 and #8 are the same length of the Mill spur (#12) after the X crossing. So the ore train should be able to pull up into #7 or #8 and then reverse in #12.