Design comments

[bn7026]

Hi
I'm in the process of designing a new layout for the house my wife and I are building and am interested in peoples thoughts on the design.

You can find the plan at the attached link
http://members.iinet.net.au/~t.shenton/WoodinvilleSub.pdf

Basic information is follows:
Prototype - Burlington Northern Woodinville Subdivision (near Seattle)
Room Size - 5.0m x 6.1m
Scale - HO
Minimum Radius - 750mm (about 30")
Maximum grade - about 2%

Let me know what you think.

Regards

Tim

[selector]

Unfortunately, as it appears on my monitor, I cannot tell where your tracks lie in all places. You appear to have used overlying colours that confuse. Can you clear it up so that your main line and any spurs are more discernable?

[bn7026]

Thats propably the CAD program at fault. I Can increase the width of the line representing the main which would help a little. I set it up to print to an A3 sheet so you need to soom a little to see the lines. Will change the lines a little and reset it to A4 printout.

OK- Edited copy of drawg is now available - Same filename as before...
http://members.iinet.net.au/~t.shenton/WoodinvilleSub.pdf

Regards
Tim

[selector]

Okay, I now realize that I was presented your lower layer when I looked last time. Sorry for making you alter what you had. In any event, I like what I see. Some responders may encourage you to provide for more industrial stops along the way so that you have to drop off cars.

Your layout looks flat? I can see your grade at the right down to your staging? Is that correct?

You have a mountain at upper-left...appears to be portals high and low on that loop. That is fine. You might consider a grade at the top, outside existing main, and have it go around, or through, the mountain and then drop down again for variety, although that is all that it would offer,...no other advantage, just more work and expense.

You are modeling a water course, apparently a lake, in the lower loop. That is fine. Should be nice to have the train reflected in less rippled water near the shallows.

Will you have the diversion, an important addition for most modelers, of a service facility, and maybe a built-up area, like a village?

I'm asking a lot of questions, but I need to know how concrete your theme is in your mind.

Are you going to introduce yourself to DCC, if you are new to it?

What are the radii of your tightest curves?

What is the era?

[bn7026]

QUOTE: Originally posted by selector

Okay, I now realize that I was presented your lower layer when I looked last time. Sorry for making you alter what you had. In any event, I like what I see. Some responders may encourage you to provide for more industrial stops along the way so that you have to drop off cars.

Your layout looks flat? I can see your grade at the right down to your staging? Is that correct?

The layout rises 260mm about 10" from the staging up to the top end at Woodinville.

QUOTE: You have a mountain at upper-left...appears to be portals high and low on that loop. That is fine. You might consider a grade at the top, outside existing main, and have it go around, or through, the mountain and then drop down again for variety, although that is all that it would offer,...no other advantage, just more work and expense.

That's not a mountain at the upper left. I'm keeping the benchwork sections narrow in width so there will be a hole at this point. The section on page 3 of pdf file shows the way i'll construct it. This gives a shadowbox look.

QUOTE: You are modeling a water course, apparently a lake, in the lower loop. That is fine. Should be nice to have the train reflected in less rippled water near the shallows.

Will you have the diversion, an important addition for most modelers, of a service facility, and maybe a built-up area, like a village?

One of the elements used in a lot of layouts that I wont be using is a yard. I feel you need a big space to pull this off which I don't have. There might be minimal facility for servicing at Renton but the prototype didn't do much there. Most trains will originate/complete their runs in the staging yard.

QUOTE: I'm asking a lot of questions, but I need to know how concrete your theme is in your mind.

That's OK. The theme is fairly concrete. Ever since I discovered the Woodinville subdivision a couple of months ago I'm finding more interesting parts in it to model. It has it all: short trains, lots of bridges (including a big testle), some interesting train loads (those 737's fuselage's on flatcars will be an interesting exercise), street running and water line running.

QUOTE: Are you going to introduce yourself to DCC, if you are new to it?

I've been using DCC for about 6 years now - plan to use about 2 boosters on this layout along with accesory decoders driving tortoise switch machines.

QUOTE: What are the radii of your tightest curves?

750mm (30') on the main, with 600mm minium on sidings

QUOTE: What is the era?

My modelling ere is late '80's - I like the equipment variety BN had about then. Mind you I do have some older / newer equipment as well.

Regards
Tim

[selector]

I still need more orientation. Your thin red outline is the bench edge outline? What are the inner, straighter in places, thin, light blue lines? I thought it might be a canal system due to its straight edges.

I don't understand the schematic of the upper left loop. Why the dotted line?

I think your resolve to model a specific area is laudable, and could, depending on your willingness and committment, take years to do well. If you rather hope to be running trains on a completed model within a year, though, you may have to adjust your concept a bit. I say this because most modelers who are not ultra-detailers, who take years to complete their pike, will find themselves stuck with what they built in haste...what they idealized in haste! The greatest pitfall is not enough to keep the layout interesting.

A layout has to have what I call "legs"; it must provide a wise mixture of planning, resourcing, construction, and diverse operational capacity. These all lead to long-term appeal. Most find that running trains around a loop gets old after a while, and they look for an intersting diversion (yard work, servicing, saw-by's on the main, etc.) So, your plan at the moment suggests to me that, because of what you have already experienced (knows DCC, has some equipment, has run trains, etc), you must prefer long sweeping vistas with long runs of track. This is what I see from your schematic. If you know this to be solidly true, and not likely to change, then your plan seems wonderful to me. If you change your mind and want more variety later, you could always use some of the space in that upper loop for a service facility....if it fits into the theme setting there.

I don't know if I am being of any use to you, but I am willing to keep offering some feedback if you think it would help.

[dgwinup]

Crandell,

He has a reverse loop -to- reverse loop layout, with the high reverse loop to the left of Woodinville, traveling all around the layout and down to the second combination reverse loop/staging/storage yard beneath Woodinville.

Tim:
I like the track plan because I like running long trains through scenery. I agree with Crandell, though, that more sidings would add operational interest to the layout.

When I went through this layout, my first thought was why build it an an island shape? I would think that with a little modification, the layout could be stretched to around the walls which would provide even longer mainline runs. In addition, the stacked loops in the upper left corner could be brought down, allowing the loops to have a larger radius. Just my thought on this. The loop at the bottom could also have a larger radius. It would take a little re-designing, but I think it would add tremendously to the layout.

Darrell, quiet...for now

[Tim_Seawel]

Tim, I have lived and worked around the area you are modelling for 40 some years. How is it that someone from Perth, AU has come to model such a specific area of Washington State. It is a pretty cool branch to model I might add. I too am modelling the BNSF but in another part of the state in the present era.

Tim[8D]
Oh I do think you have a very good track plan representing the line from Renton to Woodinville.

[bn7026]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dgwinup


Tim:
I like the track plan because I like running long trains through scenery. I agree with Crandell, though, that more sidings would add operational interest to the layout.

Yes i'd aggree about more sidings - over the next few months until I start construction i'll probably do many revisions. This latest plan is about no.50 in the design series..

QUOTE: When I went through this layout, my first thought was why build it an an island shape? I would think that with a little modification, the layout could be stretched to around the walls which would provide even longer mainline runs. In addition, the stacked loops in the upper left corner could be brought down, allowing the loops to have a larger radius. Just my thought on this. The loop at the bottom could also have a larger radius. It would take a little re-designing, but I think it would add tremendously to the layout.

The design revision before the current one actually went around the room walls. I found I lost about 1m of mainline run with the latest plan but there was a big increase in the walk of an operator following a train from Renton to Woodinville.

[bn7026]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tim_Seawel

Tim, I have lived and worked around the area you are modelling for 40 some years. How is it that someone from Perth, AU has come to model such a specific area of Washington State. It is a pretty cool branch to model I might add. I too am modelling the BNSF but in another part of the state in the present era.

Well i've been modelling BN for about 20 years or more and since I visited NW USA in 2002 I've been wanting to do a model of a line somewhere in Washington State.
Trouble was most lines had too much traffic, trains were too long, not enough switching interest, etc. I was almost this close to doing a model of some of the area near the Seattle King St Station.

What brought me to this line was a picture on another web site showing a BNSF running down a street in Renton. I fired up Google Earth and started to explore the line. The more I saw, the more I liked.

BTW - I'd still like to get some photos and more information of some of the industries around there. It's a little hard to judge this from aerial photo's...

Tim

[SpaceMouse]

HI,

I like that you have a clear focus on what you are doing.

I have a couple questions. What do the blue lines represent?

Since you have staging you obviously have thought about operating. AT each of the towns you have a multiple sidings and spurs. Can you describe what might happen at one of those towns in term of operation? So you have a way freight that pulls in to the siding. What happens next?

[bn7026]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse


I have a couple questions. What do the blue lines represent?

Since you have staging you obviously have thought about operating. AT each of the towns you have a multiple sidings and spurs. Can you describe what might happen at one of those towns in term of operation? So you have a way freight that pulls in to the siding. What happens next?

Hi Chip
The blue lines actually represent the lines of the backdrop. I'm planning to model 5 seperate scenes along the line in a shadowbox manner.

The layout of the industrial sidings is based on what the prototype has at these locations (with minor changes to suit my space). Local freights would come out to do a turn up to Woodinville switching locations as necessary. In addition we would have a train delivering 737 fuselage's to the Boeing plant in Renton.

From my research so far there is not any through traffic on this line though I don't think there is anything stopping me from running an occasional train being diverted to avoid a problem in central Seattle.

Tim

[SpaceMouse]

Okay, concerning the backdrops. With out knowing your topography, it seems you can get a little more industrial switching in Bellvue is you did not hold the backdrop do tight.

Likewise in the area to the helix, if you straightened the backdrop, you wouldn't have you sidings disappearing. That will be a PITA if you have a derail problem. (and I speak form experience on this one.)

do the prototypes allow for more industries in these area?