Newbie's first try at a layout -- all advice appreciated

[Anonymous]

I hope this is the right place to post this sort of question. If not, forgive me and please direct me to the correct place.

Below is a proposed HO-scale layout on which I would really appreciate comments.

The layout is set in the mountains, and represents a small local line that ties in with the mains. The primary industry is coal and light manufacturing. Time period is ~1950 (steam - diesel transition). I'm trying to get a good balance of operations along with some mountainous scenery. My 11 yr. old likes tunnels and mountains, and so do I.

The layout starts with a basic level oval on a 4x8 base -- this is the mainline / connector route. There is a long siding at the bottom where groups of cars will wait for the mainline train and / or cars removed from the mainline will be put to keep the main clear.

Each end of the oval is covered by a mountain. There is a gap in the mountains at the upper center

The mess inside the oval is the short line. There are places for quite a few industry type places that will have to be served by cars coming off / going on to the mains. The central tracks are deliberately convoluted to look like tracks that were laid down after the shops were built, not the other way around.

On the inner right is a tight, steep curve that climbs along the side of the right mountain, across a long bridge over the mountain gap, and onto the side of the left mountain. At the end of that track will be some sort of coal loading facility.

Empty hopper cars will be pushed up one or maybe two at a time by a small engine -- docksider, saddle tank switcher, or the like, filled, then brought back down to be switched intro trains awaiting the mains.

The mainline will have limited passenger service -- it will be mostly freight. Some stuff coming in to the manufacturing shops, coal and manufactured goods going out. Most of the time, the main line will be a 2-6-0 or 2-6-2 -ish size engine, with maybe a slightly larger one for the occasional passenger trains.



It looks like the forum software scales images down, so it may be easier to see what I'm talking about on the original image at: http://www.linuxfoundary.com/images/das_track1.jpg

I hope that all makes sense. Like I said, any and all advice appreciated. I'd hate to get part way into it & discover that I messed up something obvious which makes the operating difficult or impossible.

thanks very much,
dave.

[selector]

A nice layout, and a pretty good start.

A couple of observations: your upper centred bridge seems hung out for no apparent reason in that its adjacent track doesn't have one. Presumably both should be on a bridge if the water obstacle warrants such a big one. The mountains are at the ends of the layout, so I'm guessing it will be a water obstacle, not a shale or skree re-entrant or a cliff.

I don't understand why there is a steep grade to the coaling station.

Just left of the bridge is a butt-end spur...in the water, water side, ...?

What will be in the middle, in what appears to be a yard or industrial area?

[SpaceMouse]

I like that the outer loops go underground. Ther are two things you did I don't understand. One is the spur that comes back off the yard in the upper right center. There doesn't seem to be any way to get a train in there.

The other is where you connect the inner main run to the spur coming up from the bottom. It's just a manuever that I don't think any train would make.

Just for laughs and giggles, what kind of space do you have in your layout room? Plywood is the cheapest part of building a layout and an around the wall layout would be a better use of space. Just asking in case it is possible.

[CNJ831]

Dave - A few points worth keeping in mind. Firstly, be sure to have access to the track inside the tunnels/mountains (leave the backs of the mountains open or provide access doors). You will need to clean the tracks periodically and rerail cars on occasion.

Secondly, appreciate that you won't be able to gain much elevation on that coal spur, about 4 inches being pretty much the absolute most you can expect. Also, the radius of this spur seems to be less than 18 inches, which is not really a good idea. Better to increase this radius while softening that S-curve leading into the central part of the layout.

Third, the tail of the switchback track arrangement in the upper center of the trackplan (just left of the word "bridge") looks to be too short to handle a loco plus a car. Try extending the tail track under the bridge.

CNJ831

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure I can explain what I'm thinking,and I draw worse than I write, but here goes...

The mountains stop about 3' in from each end of the board, so the center 2' doesn't have any mountains. the upper track, the one that is part of the oval, is flat on the base board all the way around. It exits one mountain, crosses across a couple ft of open board, then enters another tunnel into the other mountain.

In other words, then entire outer oval is flat on the board, and just going under the mountains via tunnels.

The coal mine is on top of the left-hand mountain. So to get there, the track starts from the center, curves up the inner face of the right-hand mountain, across a bridge over that 2' gap, and onto the other mountain.

The left hand mountain will be high enough that it'll be about a 6-7% grade to get up there. Combined with the 15" radius curves, that means a small engine and 1-2 small-ish hopper cars

The gap will probably be a dirt road leading into a mirror or backdrop. If that looks bad, it'll just be a gap in the mountains. No water for now -- I've had bad luck trying to make water look right in dioramas I've built.

There will be various buildings along the spurs -- I took them out for this drawing to make it less complicated.

Thanks,
dave.

[leighant]

dstrout-- you said quote "It looks like the forum software scales images down..." However, when I MOUSE-CLICK on your image, it blows it up. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. I haven't figured out yet why it does when it does.

Sometimes it helps to add a ".nr" to the img bracket code. Click on "forum code" to see how this works. I can't show you in this post because typing the letters correctly in the post will make them DO WHATEVER THE CODE ORDERS and disappears ijn the process, not letting you read how the code works.

I think I understand the bridge. The mainline has been kept at a relatively low level by expensive tunneling. The line up to the mine goes to a higher elevation and it is above the valley at the area the bridge crosses.

Selector/Crandell said "I don't understand why there is a steep grade to the coaling station." I think you used confusing terminology when with the term "coaling station". That usually means a place to service coal-burning steam locomotives, and it would be inappropriate to have a service facility at a hard to reach location. I understand the steep grade is there to reach a coal MINE. You have to locate the mine where the minerals are, even if it is a tough location. So the grade makes sense to me.

There is a problem with an industry like a coal mine at the stub end of a long single track. Railroads often put a runaround at the end of a branch-- a double-ended siding so a loco can get around the cars it has pulled into a dead-end. You can get around the runaround problem by pushing cars with the loco behind the cars. But if you push empties up to the mine for loading and there are already coal loads there, the empties block getting to the loads. You would have to make a long trip all the way up to the mine with just the loco, pull the loads from the mine and bring them downhill, set them somewhere to get out of the way. Then make another trip up the hill pushing empties to be loaded.
Where an industry spur or mine is close to the mainline, you can pull cars out of the industry or mine and set them momentarily on the main when placing cars going TO the mine or industry.
But where the industry or mine is on a long spur or branch off the main, you need at the minimum a switch and two tracks side by side. A runaround would be even better but not absoletely necessary.
You might have to reduce some of your other trackage "in the valley" to allow this.

I notice at least two switchbacks. ALL of the trackage in the middle of the layout including the line up to the mine is limited by the switchback off the main. It looks like it will allow one loco and car AT MOST to be handled at a time. Do you really want to be this limiting. ONE spur located on a hard-to-switch switchback is about enough for a layout this size.

[Anonymous]

Ha! You guys were posting while I was typing -- that's about as real-time as it gets :) Thanks for the comments, much appreciated. Let me try to answer:

-- Ack, you're both right about that little tail off of the spur in the right-center. That ought to be deleted.

-- Chip, you said "The other is where you connect the inner main run to the spur coming up from the bottom. It's just a maneuver that I don't think any train would make". I don't understand -- would you mind trying that again? Are you talking about that straight run of track across the very bottom?

As far as space, it's probably either a 4x8 or 2 doors in an L-shape, but that'll be a harder sell to the wife. Unless I get kicked out to the garage, in which case I have all the room in the world...

I'm trying to keep to something that has some continuous run capability. I'd be happy with a 2' deep switcher layout, but my son & granddaughter are going to want trains going in circles. :)

thanks much,
dave.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by leighant
I notice at least two switchbacks. ALL of the trackage in the middle of the layout including the line up to the mine is limited by the switchback off the main. It looks like it will allow one loco and car AT MOST to be handled at a time. Do you really want to be this limiting. ONE spur located on a hard-to-switch switchback is about enough for a layout this size.

You're right-- I didn't see that. I was trying to squeeze in one more siding, but there's probably a better way to do that.

I see what you mean about not having room at the top of the mountain. ( and yes, I meant mine, not station -- sorry about that). I could possibly fit a split into two very short spurs that would fit 1-2 short hopper cars ea. Then it would be "push an empty or two up onto one spur, then pull one or two full cars back down from the other spur, and alternate each trip".

thanks,
dave.

[ereimer]

sounds to me like gettiing "kicked out to the garage" wouldn't be the worst thing to happen [:)]

adding a second track at the mine would give space for empty and full cars , and you'd have to head up there sometime during your operation session to switch them ... sounds like fun

i think you might have a problem with the bridge , due to the shortness of the track leading up to it there won't be much elevation so a bridge might not look right there . then again selective compression is something you have to live with on any layout and a bridge is more fun than a fill

[SpaceMouse]

IF you use numbers going down the side and letters going across the top. the connection I'm taling about is in 4D it is coming off the yard entrance at 4F. Why wouldn't the railroad just connect directly to the main there instead of switching back.

[selector]

Dave, I see what Ed is saying. The birdge will look contrived, or fit-in just to get one in. You could improve it by building up your base with a couple of layers of 2" extruded foam, and then dig down under the bridge to make a deeper ravine or water course (a dry water course, like a gulch, with pebbles and rocks?) That way, your bridge will be more substantial and look like it was really a must-have.

[dehusman]

Change the siding on the bottom edge by reversing the crossovers so the track could actually be uses as a runaround.

Get rid of the switchback leadding at all the interior tracks, make it a simple spur. If you want to add a switchback make it a spur to an industry, gives you more bang for your buck.

(The combination of having both the runaround on a "switchback" as it is currently configured and almost all the industry on layout on a switchback is going to be a really bad operating plan.)

As previously mentioned, the tail track on the interior switchback is too short. Since you are going to all the trouble of elevating the coal mine lead, use it and run it over the main to gin a longer run or make a larger facility or put a switch up there to get two mines (or a mine and another track/industry) on the same branch.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

Thanks everybody -- I really appreciate all the advice.

dave.

[Anonymous]

Here's an idea:

Put a hidden siding in the right hand tunnel. This way you can hide a passenger or a fast freight. It wouldn't need to be a long passenger train, even an RDC would do. But it would make your operating sessions a bit more interesting if the local trains had to account for a priority train coming through while they are doing their switching.

[Texas Zepher]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dstrout
-- Ack, you're both right about that little tail off of the spur in the right-center. That ought to be deleted.

Or make the spur behind the turnout longer so it could be served. If that is really a bridge behind it, couldn't it go under the bridge?