Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Yeah or nay?????

4646 views
24 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2007
  • From: Troy, Tx
  • 36 posts
Yeah or nay?????
Posted by SOO_N Scaler on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:24 PM

  Is'nt this what all MRR's want,, a bunch of space!!!!!??????. Becareful what you wish for, you just might get it. So here goes.

 The drawings are for a N scale railroad patterned off the SOO and Milwaukee Road along with the other railroads in and around Wisconsin thrown in during the 80's to early 90's era.. They are done by Mike Collier, a freind I have made off another MRR forum. So there for  I can not  take credit for those. But the ideas are a joint venture between Mike and I.

  A little backround..... Finally the land manager, gave me right to the complete garage, as before it was half or maybe even less. But I digress. Through E-mails and instant messaging Mike and I conversed and what you see here is the result.

  The order is staging level bottom,,, then the second level,, then the top of course!!!!   614 pieces of flex and 140 turnouts, the track will be laid.  The Helices and staging take 332 pieces of flex, that leaves 282 pieces of cd 55 flex needed for visable trackage..

  AM I CRAZY!!!!!!!

  Well here are the drawings, see anything you don't like,,, or could use a different idea,,, speak up.  The dimensions are 17' along the top wall,, 20'-6" down the side and 18' along the bottom.

  Couple of questions,.,,,, what should be the distance between levels?? Also what is everyone's prefrence as to the height of the top level??

   As you can tell that is the staging level in the pic below. I might just make it parralell the wall instead of going in the penisula.


 
Here we have the first level of ops, or the second level. How ever you look at it. I love how Mike has added working live interchanges and junctions. I think he has a special touch for that.

  And last we have the top level,,, with what Mike and I call the M.O.A.E.,,,Mother of all elevators,,,,,,Suffice to say the yard at the bottom of the drawing will hold 140 plus covered hoppers.. After all the SOO owned a fleet of 66,000 covered hoppers.

  So right now I need to get a storage shed for the back yard, so I get all non train related junk out of the garage!!! LOLOLOL ( insert favorite evil sinister laugh)

  Any input,,, and offers to help would be great!!!

 Adios Wyatt

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:35 PM
The budget is going to be awesome big on this project.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:50 PM

One of the things that Iain rice impressed upon me is that there is a relationship between space/money/time that every modeler must come in tune with.

Large layouts are often doomed to failure because of the time or cost involved. It is simply too easy to become discouraged that when you have been working on a layout for two years and it is only marginally functional.  

You can always build in phases. Plan for expansion, but make each phase operationally self-sufficient in the context with the rest of the layout.  

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Christiana, TN
  • 2,134 posts
Posted by CSX Robert on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:08 PM
If you did make the staging level parallel the wall instead of going on the peninsula, you could stager the staging yards so that you could have easier access to the yard in the back.  The drawback to this arrangement is that you could not access both staging yards from the same location.  No, your not crazy, just really lucky.  Looks like a lot of fun!
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: East central Illinois
  • 2,576 posts
Posted by Cox 47 on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:34 PM
Go for it....Cox 47
ILLinois and Southern...Serving the Coal belt of southern Illinois with a Smile...
  • Member since
    March 2005
  • From: New Brighton, MN
  • 4,393 posts
Posted by ARTHILL on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:35 PM
I am with Spacemouse on this one, unless you have a lot of people helping you, just laying that much track and getting it running, and that many turnouts and getting controls to them and doing two helixes: that is years of work. In a garage in Texas? unless it is climate controled, that is a lot of woodwork to keep from twisting. If you have that much time and money, why not a better location than a garage?
If you think you have it right, your standards are too low. my photos http://s12.photobucket.com/albums/a235/ARTHILL/ Art
  • Member since
    May 2007
  • From: Troy, Tx
  • 36 posts
Posted by SOO_N Scaler on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 2:45 PM

  Well thanx for the replies.

  Chip, as for time and money,,,,I have more time than money. But after dicussing it with my family.... we are setting a fixed train budget per month. I can get a box of cd 55 flex fer 198$.

  But I do see where you are coming from about working in sections/phases. I had a 17 x 12 N scale layout, 1/4 sceniced and all the track in a year and half,,, and that when I was working 5 days a week, if not more.

   There are some times that I work on the layout/trains for 14-16 hours a shot.

 Art,,, I know this project will take years,,, rome was not built a day,lol and all great works of art are not done over night.LOL  As for the garage,,,, walls have insulation in them as does the ceiling. I just recently purchased a portable A/C-Heater unit for the space.

  Another idea I had was to use one level fer ops and just make visable staging across the garage on a shelf.  I do plan on hand laying the turnouts.

  If any thing changes,,, I will keep posting progress or regresss.

 

  Adios Wyatt

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 3:18 PM

When figuring a budget for HO scale you figure between $50-100 per square foot. It will be more for N scale.

Calculate 50 hours/square foot. 

You have aproximately 400 square feet so figure $40,000 and 20,000 hours. At 20 hours a week that works out to 1000 weeks or 19.25 years.

Can you do 20 hours a week for 19.25 years?

Okay, lets say you are a speed demon. What is you life going to be like in 10 years?

 

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Lewiston ID
  • 1,710 posts
Posted by reklein on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:12 PM

I'm not so sure I'd discourage SooNScaler. Some guys really fly at it. Look at Alan B and all hes accomplished in under a yar I think. Malcom Furlow could really get things done too. I have  freind who has rebuilt a Piper Tripacer including scratch building the wings, bought and refinished two 80's Corvettes and built a hotrod Ford model A. I have other freinds who"ve had similar projects laying around for years. One guy has about 15 VWs that hes had for over 20.     " Nope can't sell em, gonna rebuild at least one and I need the parts."

So anyways SooNScaler if you lived closer I'd come over and help.Cowboy [C):-)]

In Lewiston Idaho,where they filmed Breakheart pass.
  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:34 PM
 reklein wrote:

I'm not so sure I'd discourage SooNScaler. Some guys really fly at it. Look at Alan B and all hes accomplished in under a yar I think. Malcom Furlow could really get things done too. I have  freind who has rebuilt a Piper Tripacer including scratch building the wings, bought and refinished two 80's Corvettes and built a hotrod Ford model A. I have other freinds who"ve had similar projects laying around for years. One guy has about 15 VWs that hes had for over 20.     " Nope can't sell em, gonna rebuild at least one and I need the parts."

So anyways SooNScaler if you lived closer I'd come over and help.Cowboy [C):-)]

I'm not sure I'm discouragaing rather playing devil's advocate and throwing the numbers out there. I have freind who has a large layout and it took 5 years of 5 people working to get it to the point they could run ops.

And using Furlow and Alan B as examples doen't quite cut it. Their layouts are 1/10 this size. So if you use this analogy, he should be at Alan's point in 10 years (and he plulled a lot from his old layout.)

I have no qualms about building a lifetime project. I just think it is more sensitible to build in phases and expand.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:35 PM

As the proud owner of a multi-level double-garage-filler (in twice-N scale: 1:80, aka HOj,) I have discovered two main ways to combat discouragement:

  1. Be aware that building a garage-filler is an exercise in forest management, not a quick-shot all-annuals flower garden.  You are looking at years (decades) of construction and detailing.  If you are mentally prepared for that fact, it ceases to be a source of anxiety.
  2. Get some wheels rolling, even if it's just a single unit and a caboose on one length of flex.  That also gives an incentive to do the electricals, get control panels built and test-run all the trackage as soon as the flex is anchored to the roadbed.

One trap to avoid is to do all of one thing before starting the next.  For example, if your lowest-level staging isn't going to use that peninsula, don't build the peninsula benchwork until it's actually needed.  Not only do you not spend the time and money, but it will make getting around easier during the early phases of construction.

[At present, after 19 months of construction, I estimate my benchwork is 30% complete, my trackwork is approaching 10%, my electricals are about 5%, my scenery is zero (everything I've built so far is hidden trackage,) my % of built to operational trackage is 98% and my level of satisfaction is 100%.  And, yes, trains are rolling!]

Chuck [modeling (the netherworld of) Central Japan in September, 1964)

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:47 PM

Thanks Chuck,

That puts it in perspective.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 6:56 PM
 SpaceMouse wrote:
 reklein wrote:

I'm not so sure I'd discourage SooNScaler. Some guys really fly at it. Look at Alan B and all hes accomplished in under a yar I think. Malcom Furlow could really get things done too. I have  freind who has rebuilt a Piper Tripacer including scratch building the wings, bought and refinished two 80's Corvettes and built a hotrod Ford model A. I have other freinds who"ve had similar projects laying around for years. One guy has about 15 VWs that hes had for over 20.     " Nope can't sell em, gonna rebuild at least one and I need the parts."

So anyways SooNScaler if you lived closer I'd come over and help.Cowboy [C):-)]

I'm not sure I'm discouragaing rather playing devil's advocate and throwing the numbers out there. I have freind who has a large layout and it took 5 years of 5 people working to get it to the point they could run ops.

And using Furlow and Alan B as examples doen't quite cut it. Their layouts are 1/10 this size. So if you use this analogy, he should be at Alan's point in 10 years (and he plulled a lot from his old layout.)

I have no qualms about building a lifetime project. I just think it is more sensitible to build in phases and expand.

Since my name has come up:

My layout has 1/6 of the track and 1/7 of the turnouts in this large layout.  All of my bench work, track and turnouts were done in about one month ( 7/28 to 9/04/06).  Most of the buildings (left over from prior layout) were in place and basic landscape work was done in (one of - EDIT) the two "major" towns.  In other words, the layout was sparse, but fully operational.  By 11/03/06, 50 pounds of plaster was used to form the mountains (all of the hidden track was in fact hidden).  During this time period (three months), I probably (did not punch a time clock) averaged 4-6 hours per day on layout construction.  Since then, I have been plugging away; but mostly operating instead of constructing.

What we don't know, is how much time this person has to actually work on the layout or how much "help" is available.  It is a very large layout and will require a lot of work.  If the desire and hours per day are available; this would be a fun layout for a "retired" guy (or small group of guys) to build.  It "could" become an operational plywood empire in a few months with a lifetime of scenery and structure work left over (no layout is really finished).

If the desire, time and money are there; go for it !  Otherwise scale back or build it in operational stages so that construction does not take years before any "real" operations are possible.

 

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Texas
  • 2,934 posts
Posted by C&O Fan on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 7:00 PM

My friend Art Started his 20X30 2 level Layout in 2000

The double track 250 ft hand laid main lines were just completed last year

It took 3 of us 4 months working one night a week to complete a 20 foot fully scenicked

section

TerryinTexas

See my Web Site Here

http://conewriversubdivision.yolasite.com/

 

 

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Lewiston ID
  • 1,710 posts
Posted by reklein on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 7:19 PM
C&O fan wrote that it took three persons working 4 mo. 1 night a week,thats about 192 man hours figuring 4 hr. work session. Or one guy working 8 hrs a day for 4.8 weeks. And your talking handlaid track too. WOW! A lot of work. I don't think any individual would work that hard at a hobby, but just consider a job and the production you get from that. How 'bout these guys who pay a person to build their layouts. Are those guys production motivated. OK,OK I got carried away ,and I too just like the rest of you suffer from burnout, sometimes for months at a time. But some of us are motivated differently. I think another example of high motivation would be Bruce Chubbs layout, granted he had a crew of motivated folks, but it seems like his huge layout came together in remarkable time.
In Lewiston Idaho,where they filmed Breakheart pass.
PFS
  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Detroit
  • 105 posts
Posted by PFS on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:38 PM

I wish you godspeed in your endevor.

 

A bit OT, but, threads like this and a desire for a big layout/long trains has me thinking when the time/house comes, I am going to build NTRAK modules. Actually, I am thinking I can just start making modules anytime.

 

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:52 PM

Money seems to be the one item no one wants to talk about in the hobby. We have no problem filling in space large or small but I wonder sometimes if a person who wants a railroad really comprehends the large amounts of time it takes to build one.

Sure, i could slap a 4x8 together in one day and have it running the next but it will take 10 years to finish it all.

One layout we built at the LHS took about 3 years give or take a few months to reach a state of completion. I think it was a 4x8 and it took 4-10 of us several saturdays every few weeks slowly proceeding on that one road.

I have a photograh series of a modular club here over the last few years where each year at the show, I would photo graph a module and it gets a little bit better each year.. little by little.

Im fully convinced that one should be careful to plan and build what they can handle.

  • Member since
    May 2007
  • From: Troy, Tx
  • 36 posts
Posted by SOO_N Scaler on Thursday, July 12, 2007 7:48 AM

  I agree with the money never being talked about. I did not realize that this would be a hornets nest.

  I really appriciate all the input. Really do. Everyone has great points. I really do not know how to reply, but I will just say,,,,we will try and see.

  Once again thanx for the help,,,,, I do have flame suits available if needed.LOL

Adios Wyatt

  • Member since
    July 2005
  • 535 posts
Posted by nucat78 on Thursday, July 12, 2007 8:46 AM
 SpaceMouse wrote:

I have no qualms about building a lifetime project. I just think it is more sensitible to build in phases and expand.

I agree.  You might want to consider going at least partly modular and use one or two reverse loop or turnback modules at the ends of finished sections so you can do some operating as you expand.

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Christiana, TN
  • 2,134 posts
Posted by CSX Robert on Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:34 AM
 SpaceMouse wrote:


When figuring a budget for HO scale you figure between $50-100 per square foot. It will be more for N scale.

Calculate 50 hours/square foot.

You have aproximately 400 square feet so figure $40,000 and 20,000 hours. At 20 hours a week that works out to 1000 weeks or 19.25 years.

Can you do 20 hours a week for 19.25 years?

Okay, lets say you are a speed demon. What is you life going to be like in 10 years?




First of all, he has approximately 400 square feet of space, but the layout is much less than that, I did a quick estimate and came up with about 120 square feet. Also, while I don't have any figures to back this up, I believe that bigger layouts tend to cost less per square foot to build. The economy of scale helps some e.g., buying flex track 100 pieces at a time instead of 10 pieces at a time, but the biggest difference is that people just don't try to squeeze in as much stuff per square foot. If someone has a certain amount of space to build a layout and that space is suddenly double, the first thing many people will do is lengthen their yards and passing sidings and the distance between towns. While that doesn't affect the cost of the benchwork and base scenery, it does affect the cost of the track and buildings and additional details. I also believe larger layouts tend to take less time per square foot to build, for basically the same reasons.
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Elgin, IL
  • 3,677 posts
Posted by orsonroy on Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:03 AM

 CSX Robert wrote:


First of all, he has approximately 400 square feet of space, but the layout is much less than that, I did a quick estimate and came up with about 120 square feet. Also, while I don't have any figures to back this up, I believe that bigger layouts tend to cost less per square foot to build. The economy of scale helps some e.g., buying flex track 100 pieces at a time instead of 10 pieces at a time, but the biggest difference is that people just don't try to squeeze in as much stuff per square foot. While that doesn't affect the cost of the benchwork and base scenery, it does affect the cost of the track and buildings and additional details. I also believe larger layouts tend to take less time per square foot to build, for basically the same reasons.

Robert's right: larger layouts DO tend to be cheaper per square foot. My last layout was a triple deck monster that took up my basement, which was approximately 325 square feet including staging yards. Since I only modeled one small online yard and one large online city (and seven small ones) my cost per square foot for base benchwork was only about $2 a square foot. That included steel shelf brackets, 1/4" ply, 2x2s, 2" foam, 1.2" foam, Peco code 75 flex, caulk, latex paint, and basic ground foam base scenery. That's "only" $650 or so for a four and a half scale mile long mainline.

It's what you put onto a layout AFTER that that jacks the price up. If you include rolling stock, engines, structure, trees, details and lots and lots of turnouts, then the price skyrockets. I have absolutely no idea what my total cost per square foot was, but if I include my 70+ steamers (including brass) the price would probably make me choke!

But I generally DON'T include rolling stock and engines into the equation, simply because they're not fixed to the layout. and there are ways to greatly reduce the cost per square foot. For example: switch to code 80 N scale track instead of code 55; the savings on flextrack alone will be in the hundreds of dollars.

And large layouts CAN be built quickly, and without a tean of dedicated modelers working around the clock. Here's an overview shot of my old layout:

I bought this house in June, 2001, had the basement finished by March, 2002, and moved in August, 2005. Everything but the west end yard was in, and the layout was completely operational with all online towns and sidings in place. I laid ALL of the track and did ALL of the scenery work myself. It's not impossible.

Ray Breyer

Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Rimrock, Arizona
  • 11,251 posts
Posted by SpaceMouse on Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:22 AM

 CSX Robert wrote:
 SpaceMouse wrote:


When figuring a budget for HO scale you figure between $50-100 per square foot. It will be more for N scale.

Calculate 50 hours/square foot.

You have aproximately 400 square feet so figure $40,000 and 20,000 hours. At 20 hours a week that works out to 1000 weeks or 19.25 years.

Can you do 20 hours a week for 19.25 years?

Okay, lets say you are a speed demon. What is you life going to be like in 10 years?




First of all, he has approximately 400 square feet of space, but the layout is much less than that, I did a quick estimate and came up with about 120 square feet. Also, while I don't have any figures to back this up, I believe that bigger layouts tend to cost less per square foot to build. The economy of scale helps some e.g., buying flex track 100 pieces at a time instead of 10 pieces at a time, but the biggest difference is that people just don't try to squeeze in as much stuff per square foot. If someone has a certain amount of space to build a layout and that space is suddenly double, the first thing many people will do is lengthen their yards and passing sidings and the distance between towns. While that doesn't affect the cost of the benchwork and base scenery, it does affect the cost of the track and buildings and additional details. I also believe larger layouts tend to take less time per square foot to build, for basically the same reasons.

But he has three levels.

Chip

Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Christiana, TN
  • 2,134 posts
Posted by CSX Robert on Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:43 AM
 SpaceMouse wrote:


But he has three levels.




The staging level could be built for not much more than the cost of the track alone i.e., no scenery, no buildings, the benchwork could be built as part of the benchwork for the second level. I did, however, completely forget about the third level. If I was building this layout, while I might have a plan for the third level, I would not do any contruction on it until I had the second level operational and knew how much time and money it took to get to that point before making a final decision on a third level.
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Lewiston ID
  • 1,710 posts
Posted by reklein on Thursday, July 12, 2007 10:51 AM

First off I hope my comments are not being taken as flaming but an effort to promote discussion and ideas. Sometimes I come off as brusque and sarcastic but actually I'm just socially inept.

Orsonroy has three levels and in a relatively short time. As far as cost goes Mr. SooNScaler already has a collection of rolling stock,buildings and some track from his previuos layout. He also has the experience from that layout to build on. Electrolove has a similar discussion on the general forum which parallels this one an addresses similar issues.

Its true that benchwork goes in fast, trackwork a little slower ,specially if you start changing things as you go. I can never stick to a trackplan,switches don't fit, the sidings not long enough,etc. Basic scenery goes fairly fast and isn't expensive if youstay away from the plaster cloth. Foam scenery is also slower than the conventional plaster towels over cardboard grid. Cardboard grid can be had for nothing. Just go to an appliance dealer and ask for a refridgerator box. Lay it out on a shet of scrap plywood and go at it with a Stanley knife til its stips and you got grid till the cows come home. Use hot glue to build the grid, anyway you get the picture. People these days think you have to buy everything. Its no big deal, just have fun.SoapBox [soapbox]

In Lewiston Idaho,where they filmed Breakheart pass.
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Elgin, IL
  • 3,677 posts
Posted by orsonroy on Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:59 PM

 CSX Robert wrote:


If I was building this layout, while I might have a plan for the third level, I would not do any contruction on it until I had the second level operational and knew how much time and money it took to get to that point before making a final decision on a third level.

I actually went a different route with my old layout, and will be taking a similar one with my latest. I built ALL of the base benchwork first, and then drew out my basic plan on top of it (easy with a foam-based layout), and laid the mainlines (with switches off the main).

It's the detail work, industrial trackwork and scenery that takes the most time on a layout, and building the benchwork and getting the mainline laid fast was a good way to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Having a complete mainline laid allowed me to run trains and keep my interest levels up; I could wander downstairs and either run trains or work on scenery as I liked (and usually, both at once!). Having the main in place allowed me to have an operating layout and "chew on" my town site trackplans a bit. On larger layouts, it's sometime difficult to completely visualize how successful the final design will be, so having the bulk of it in place before it's "finished" allows you to rethink things.

In N scale I find that long, boring mainlines without a lot of track are one of the more appealing things about the scale (the whole trains to scenery ratio thing). The builder of this layout may feel the same way after a while, and may further reduce costs by eliminating lots of trackwork (I'd personally reduce the length of the main onstage yard by 1/3 to 1/2, but I like mainlines more than yards)

Ray Breyer

Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!