Coming Up With A Layout Theme (Or The Men In White Coats Are Coming)

[andrechapelon]

Anyone else want to chime in on the process of coming up with a layout concept based on their personal operational preferences? Mine are passenger train switching, helper operation and local freight switching. I'm trying to come up with a satisfying theme that will be fun to build and operate and will sustain interest over time. Any layout concept I could come up with that would interest me would essentially be a variation on one of the following 3 themes even if it were a branch line operation. I'm also trying to keep it simple (relatively) and create a concept for a layout that can be operated solo if necessary. A branch line is an obvious candidate for solo operation. However, I'm trying to come up with a concept for a main line based layout that is capable of being operated solo in a pinch.

This essentially is a process of thinking out loud and hoping someone might chime in with a good idea or two. All the below are based on the Southern Pacific in California. In truth, any of these themes could be used by any of a number of prototypes in different locations (or even a free-lanced pike). Instead of Salinas and perishables, it could be some town in Kansas and wheat. Instead of San Luis Obispo to Santa Margarita, it could be the Maine Central from Barrett, NH to Crawford Notch, NH. Instead of San Jose, CA, it could be New Haven, CT or Worcester, MA.

1. Salinas, CA, in 1952 – Operational emphasis on handling the lettuce crop. Lots of switching at packing houses. Requires large number of refrigerator cars. Through freights and passenger trains act as a foil for the main show, which is getting empty reefers in and iced and loaded reefers out. While there was no engine terminal at Salinas, there was a small turntable. Engines come down from Watsonville Jct. (staging) to pick up originating trains for outbound movement.

Very easy to build as Salinas Valley is FLAT. Would probably be best built as a simple oval with staging on one side representing Watsonville Jct/San Luis Obispo.

Operable by one person? Possibly, if layout constructed to focus on one packing area. However, switching would have to come to a halt in order to bring in through freight, passenger train or “hauler” with fresh supply of empty reefers. Same applies for dispatching loaded reefers out of town. Probably best operated (especially by one person) in real time rather than using fast clock. Reefers can cycle back and forth between staging.

Passenger train switching? Yes. “Coast Mail” can pick up express reefers (early crop strawberries) for destinations either north or south. Empty express reefers dropped off by freight trains.

Helper operation? No.

Local freight/switching? Yes. Essentially the core theme of layout. Additional operational goodies include SP “Overnight” LCL freight and sugar beet trains.

Will layout be sufficiently interesting to sustain long term interest? Yes. However, non-perishable traffic (lumber, oil, machinery, etc.) will have to be of sufficient volume to add variety.


2. San Luis Obispo in 1954 – Operational emphasis on helper operations over Cuesta Grade. Would require engine terminal for turning helpers in SLO, wye for turning cab forwards (south of. roundhouse). Would also need wye at Santa Margarita for turning helpers.

Considerably more complicated to construct than Salinas. Partially double decked (Santa Margarita above SLO). Two wyes, a turntable and roundhouse also complicate things as well as taking space. If built as point to point, would require at least 2 complete sets of “Daylight” and “Coast Mail” trains for daytime operation. Add 2 complete “Larks” for 24 hour operations. “Starlight” trains could be operated using “Daylight” consists with the addition of a couple of sleepers on rear of train, however, that would require active staging to turn the consists on a point to point layout. Need for multiple passenger train consists of same train could be fudged with a loop to loop, but multiple track reverse loops take lots of space.

Operable by one person? Possibly, if run in real time, but again, as with Salinas, switching would have to come to a halt for through trains if operated solo.

Passenger train switching? Unknown at this time (more research required) whether “Coast Mail” prototypically had any cars added/deleted from consist at SLO. However, can probably invent reason for it to have some switching.

Local freight operations? Not really. However, King City local was dispatched out of SLO and cars were added to/removed from SP “Overnight” merchandise train.

Helper operations? Well duh, dude, that’s what this one is all about.

Will layout be sufficiently interesting to sustain long term interest? Yes. While local switching will be minimal, helper operation will provide plenty of action.

3. San Jose, CA, late 1956. Cahill Street Station. Operational emphasis on passenger train makeup (commuter trains) and switching as “Daylight”, Coast Mail and “Lark” had cars added and removed at San Jose. Freights, both local and thorough would essentially have “walk on” parts. The overwhelming emphasis would be on getting the commuters in and out of San Jose and switching the through passenger trains, with intense passenger switching taking the place of local freight switching. Most trains by now would be dieselized with the commuters powered by a mix of diesels and the last steam holdouts (GS-4’s, MT’s). Late 1956 chosen to allow use of Atlas’s new FM Trainmasters (DCC and sound equipped of course) and Walther’s new SP style bi-level commute coaches while still operating steam.

This layout would require more effort to build and operate than Salinas, but less to effort to build and more effort to operate than SLO. Would probably require powered turnouts vs. hand thrown (Salinas & SLO). By concentrating on the station area and using staging to represent Lenzen Avenue engine facility and Newhall yard, station area could be modeled with minimal compression. The station building is in a unique yellow brick with Italianate lines and would have to be scratch built. But then, so would the Salinas station or the SLO station. This layout would work best as a loop to loop layout. However, it could be built as a simple loop if the staging yard were an active rather than passive yard. Unfortunately, active staging probably requires multiple operators.

Operable by one person? That’s a tricky question as during the commute rush, getting trains made up while locomotives arrive to couple up to trains requires a lot of coordinated effort.

Passenger train switching? That’s the operational theme of the layout.

Helper operation? No.

Local freight switching? Not unless some of the fruit canneries and packing houses that used to define the Santa Clara Valley can be included.

Will layout be sufficiently interesting to sustain long term interest? Yes, especially if one or two of the canneries can be included to allow at least some local freight switching.

I'm probably going to drive myself crazy doing this, but I think the effort is worth it. It's a lot better to try and figure out what you can fit into a given space rather than dreaming about what you would do if you had the space.

Andre

[Pruitt]

You might want to join the Layout Design Special Interest Group (LDSIG) group on Yahoo!. Their whole reason for existence is layout design, and developing a concept around which to design a layout is right up their alley.

The url is:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ldsig/

There is no cost to join, nor do you have to be a member of the NMRA.

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Brunton

You might want to join the Layout Design Special Interest Group (LDSIG) group on Yahoo!. Their whole reason for existence is layout design, and developing a concept around which to design a layout is right up their alley.

The url is:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ldsig/

There is no cost to join, nor do you have to be a member of the NMRA.

Thanks. I've been aware of the LDSIG for some time, but it never occurred for me to join it. Why, I don't know. Obviously it's a "club" for geeks like me who get a great deal of enjoyment brainstorming layout concepts so perhaps I will.

Actually, there is a cost to join ($15), but it is nominal.


Andre

[dehusman]

There is no cost to join the Yahoo group. The only cost is the join the LDSIG and get the Layout Design Journal.

Dave H.

[dehusman]

Since any one of the scenarios are viable on at least some of your goals, the choice then becomes your own personal preference. YOU have to make that choice.

Dave H.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Andre, that's an interesting list of desires, especially the passenger switching. Helpers and local switching are much easier to combine. You may be tying your hands a little too tightly by trying to find a prototype to incorporate all of those elements. Maybe throwing a couple of "what ifs" into a prototype situation, you could find the balance that you want.

If I remember correctly, you are trying to plan for a fairly large space. Sometimes it is easier to look at your benchwork options. That's kind of what I did to come up with my plan. I knew that I wanted a long mainline, with switching, and interchange posibilities.

I filled the space (on paper first) with a comfortable amount of benchwork, then drew in my long main. Not all of the details are set in concrete, some are set in clay. As the construction progersses along the mainline, a clearer picture will emerge.

My layout is prototype based, and modern, which makes research a piece of cake. For you this element may be more difficult, though it sounds like you have some pretty clear ideas of how things were on the prototypes that interest you.

Just remember, whenever you think you are in trouble, reach for that modeler's license!!! That's what it is there for.[swg]

[andrechapelon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

Andre, that's an interesting list of desires, especially the passenger switching. Helpers and local switching are much easier to combine. You may be tying your hands a little too tightly by trying to find a prototype to incorporate all of those elements. Maybe throwing a couple of "what ifs" into a prototype situation, you could find the balance that you want.

If I remember correctly, you are trying to plan for a fairly large space. Sometimes it is easier to look at your benchwork options. That's kind of what I did to come up with my plan. I knew that I wanted a long mainline, with switching, and interchange posibilities.

I filled the space (on paper first) with a comfortable amount of benchwork, then drew in my long main. Not all of the details are set in concrete, some are set in clay. As the construction progersses along the mainline, a clearer picture will emerge.

My layout is prototype based, and modern, which makes research a piece of cake. For you this element may be more difficult, though it sounds like you have some pretty clear ideas of how things were on the prototypes that interest you.

Just remember, whenever you think you are in trouble, reach for that modeler's license!!! That's what it is there for.[swg]

Actually, I'm not trying to have all three elements in a single layout. Two out of three I figure is as good as it's going to get and one out of three is OK if there's even a small modicum of one of the other "Druthers" (e.g. adding express reefers to the "Coast Mail" at Salinas). Any of the 3 layout concepts I mentioned in my original post would be OK with me. From a construction/operational standpoint the Salinas concept seems to me to be the most practical. It's also appealing. But then, so is the idea of doing a passenger oriented pike based on San Jose. Actually, I think San Jose in the 50's would make a good subject for a club layout if enough SP freaks could be found to do it up right (i.e. include the Lenzen Avenue engine facility, the Newhall St. yard in Santa Clara and maybe even the Los Gatos branch).

As far as a prototype goes, I've thought of a a number that would satisfy me. Maine Central's climb over the White Mountains in New Hampshire, for instance. Or the Monterey Branch of the SP in the 50's (the "Del Monte" was something more than just a branch line accommodation train). It even occurred to me that extending SP subsidiary Northwestern Pacific to a connection with SP at Ashland, OR would be a good concept for a quasi free-lanced layout which would allow bigger power than normally seen on the NWP. In that case, Willits would be the focal point and instead of lettuce and other produce, the emphasis would be on lumber.

While I've considered many prototypes, most of the ones that interest me from an operational standpoint would just be variations on the three I mentioned earlier. Doing a Santa Fe layout based on the citrus industry would just be a variation of Salinas. For that matter, modeling LA Union Passenger Terminal would essentially be a variation on San Jose, except that the station is stub ended, and there was no commuter service. OTOH, three railroads dispatched some great name trains out of LAUPT (say, in 1947) and there would be passenger train switching galore, not to mention 3 of the greatest classes of 4-8-4's ever built.

It's a process of winnowing down the options. Despite an interest in other prototypes, I have a feeling that the ultimate result will be based on the SP in the late steam era and probably some location on the Coast Division. No matter how much other railroads fascinate me with some aspect of their operations, the fact is that the SP is my first love. I know more about the SP than about any other railroad. More than half the railroad books I own are SP related. Furthermore, I've lived in SP served towns most of my life. It's a natural. I'm fighting it, but it's a natural.

'Course now I wish I hadn't sold off those dozen SP brass engines like I did in the late 90's.

Oh well, at least I have the first brass engine I ever bought (and the only one I own), the ex-Cotton Belt GS-8.

BTW, don't let anyone else know this, but even though I'm an SP fan, I don't really care for the Daylight paint scheme, preferring instead the Lark and Sunset Limited schemes. Yeah, I know it's heresy, but so what? [}:)]

Andre