Has anybody ever built a layout without a plan,just going by the room that you have,removing anything that is in the way and build the table.And when it comes to the track plan just lay the track and go from their.That is what i am doing and so far everything is ok,maby redoing a spur or two.
Russell
Don Spiro wrote a series of articles on that general method in the Sept., Oct., and Nov. RMC.
I built my current shelf layout without a plan. I knew how deep the shelf could be; how much "space" could be allotted in the room for the layout. I knew that the size of the layout couldn't be expanded, so I built the shelf and then started the real planning from there. I had a turntable and roundhouse sub-assembly cut from the earlier layout and I just sat that atop the shelf in a couple different positions for a few days at a time while I considered how things would flow from there... eventually cutting into the new shelf to allow the roundhouse sub-assembly to drop in. I then sat the turnouts onto the new shelf in various combinations, again allowing several days to consider alternatives before spiking anything down. It has worked well for me in that situation where the size of the layout was fixed in advance
I think it would still be very important to complete your list of "givens 'n druthers". Setting the era and type of layout is still crucial in terms of deciding things such as length of sidings.
Bill
Ooops... That was the Sept. thru Nov. RMC for year 2005!
Sorry I left that out. Bill
Depends on what you mean by "plan." My current layout didn't have a "plan" in the sense that most people mean. I had a concept for what I wanted to operate and a fixed shelf area to work in. The concept was well defined in terms of era, locale, industries, etc. Then I've worked to fit everything in. In the space I have, I don't think a formal plan would have helped, because I've let the interplay of structures, track, and scenes dictate the final arrangement. I actually used a lot of paper mockups of structures, iterating back and forth between track plan and structure until I reached the final configuration. I'm now replacing my paper structures with real ones.
One lesson is what looks good on paper, or even just as track on the shelf, doesn't always work that way when operating. An advantage to iterating the way I did was I learned that some tracks wouldn't work in the operating scheme because of reach and access around structures or the structures had to change. The final layout has about one half the sidings I started with. Unless one is modeling a yard or complex interlocking, there is probably a maximum ratio of switches per square foot that becomes un-operable.
My current one started without a track plan. I knew I wanted a harbor, refinery and a town. That was it. I knew what space I had. Just threw out some track in a dogbone loop, then I had some photocopied pieces of track that I put out to simulate turnouts and other track. I modified this mockup several times until I found a happy medium between track and empty space. Took about a month. Then I went out and bought the track and built it. Another month or 2. Wired it and started running trains. I did this to ensure I had a workable track plan and now track issues. I am now in the process of building the docks and laying out structures in the town. The refinery is currently represented by a small kit I bought at a swap meet and a tank. That will probably be modified and adjusted over time. The town, dock structures and especially the refinery will be seriously dictated by space issues left from the track layout. I have even managed to find space that might be a lumber yard, or some other business, maybe just a plain warehouse that can house anything and everything. I'm not much of a written down planner. I had a vague idea in my head, and experimented until I found something to work. So far I am very satisfied.
Two years ago, I planned a small layout and tried to build it. The planning was good, but as pointed out, reality is quite different. So I took the pieces of track and rearranged the in a more pleasing way (operational too). It was a short experiment, but I learned a lot from it. Doing mock ups in real time give you the opportunity to try out different options. You can also work on interesting perspectives and interaction between buildings, which is almost impossible in 2D plan.
Matt
Proudly modelling the Quebec Railway Light & Power Co since 1997.
http://www.hedley-junction.blogspot.com
http://www.harlem-station.blogspot.com
I kinda sorta did. My current layout under constuction was based on a track plan from one of Kalmbach's book track plans. However, I build the benchwork, put down pieces of track to get an idea of what it would like and changed the whole plan while doing this. The only thing original from the plan is the main line,everything else has been changed with my plan in my mind,not on paper and thats subject to change without notice.
That is what I generally do when I have a room to build in. Wing it that is.
A railroad links towns and cities together. Within those towns and cities are industries. Thus a RR goes from town to town, by single track or double track. So the over-all plan is simple. Its the track work within the towns and cities that can be complicated. For that, I look at plans for modules and switching layouts. I then use them for my towns and cities and place them at different parts of the layouts mainline.
Elmer.
The above is my opinion, from an active and experienced Model Railroader in N scale and HO since 1961.
(Modeling Freelance, Eastern US, HO scale, in 1962, with NCE DCC for locomotive control and a stand alone LocoNet for block detection and signals.) http://waynes-trains.com/ at home, and N scale at the Club.
well, i thought about it in a short process, went out and bought materials, started at it! had to stop thinking about it because i ran out of space! but finished it in 2 days! and very pleased on how it turned out! haha!
Hi!
To me, "building a layout without a plan" - and I'm taking that literally - reminds me of when I was 9 or 10 and would get out the Marx set and do what I could do on the living room rug.
Of course you probably don't mean it that way, for you surely have some physical constraints (like room or table size) or various track pieces you want to get into play or something else along those lines.
I am not telling you that building a plan will NOT work, but I will say that you will tend to do a much better job of it, and enjoy it a whole lot more for a longer period of time, if you do upfront planning.
By "planning", I mean determining the exact space you have available, the kind of layout you want (i.e. shortline, mainline, mountain, plaines, narrow gauge, etc.), the features you are after (i.e. yard, turntable, long runs, industry, city, etc.), and then put it down on paper - in SCALE (and don't cheat, for it will bite you later).
Of course before you put in that first piece of 1x2 or plywood or foam, examine your pocketbook. If you can only afford a 4x8, then do that. If you can afford a 20x30, then go for it. But trying to build a layout that will be beyond your means or take away from life's necessities will ultimately give you grief.
In short, IMHO, planning is the best thing you can do for that future layout.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
I have done final planning with actual track pieces. But I had a rough idea of what I wanted when I built the bench work. Then I laid out the track loosely and rearranged the pieces until everything fit and I liked the arrangement. That was my last layout which was 2/3rds wired when I moved.
Enjoy
Paul
How many of us started with the un-planned dept-store train sets?
My first train in grade school was an A.C. Gilbert American Flyer (S Scale) before graduating in Jr. High to an Athearn HO Scale train set with the high-tech Figure-8 + powerpack included!
And manufacturers like Tyco & Bachmann came along with add-ons like Plasticville. The only add-on F7 diesel you found was a silver Santa Fe war-bonnet + matching caboose at a still-in-business hobby store, or family-owned hardware store.
If you had a train set -- You started with an un-planned layout -- Until you put that train set on a table, and discovered what you could do by adding Atlas sectional track, turnouts, and advanced Atlas electrical devices like Switch Control Box, Connecter, Twin, Selector, and Controller.
Things got better when you could find a Southern Pacific SW1500 -- or Plymouth industrial switcher => Ideal for drag-racing on that continuous oval inside the other continuous oval. Both ovals were connected by a crossover using 4 of those new Atlas turnouts + new-fangled Switch Control Box.
P.S.: And don't forget the advanced-tech rubber-band-drive engines -- Never again a replacement malfunction once you got your teeth braces.
And the rest is history! ...for how many of us?
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
csxns Has anybody ever built a layout without a plan,just going by the room that you have,removing anything that is in the way and build the table.And when it comes to the track plan just lay the track and go from their.That is what i am doing and so far everything is ok,maby redoing a spur or two.
The concept of just fitting track works well when the space is linear, and is not cramped for what you want to fit into the space.
The concept of just fitting track works well with sectional track and commercial turnouts. It's a lot tougher to use flex track without at least planning the major curves in advance full size on the benchwork. It's almost impossible to hand lay track without at least penciling in where the track should go in advance.
Thus, for me the minimum planning becomes drawing the tentative track locations out on the Homasote before I start laying track.
My preferred amount of planning is laying out what is in my mind in software for a reasonable fit check. I don't need every piece of track, or everything connected, but I do need to fit check the critical areas where there are several turnouts and any curves that turn 60 degrees or more. I also put in structure footprints to make sure I haven't over-crowded things.
Then, if not using sectional track, draw out the plan full size on the Homasote - knowing that some changes will probably be made.
Just fitting track also assumes you have a flat top surface to start with. Those who prefer spline subroadbed or roadbed have to do most of the planning in advance.
Which brings me back to one of my favorite points - the specifications and methods you use tend to drive the type of layout you end up with. The type of benchwork, track, control system, coupling and uncoupling methods, scenery materials, etc., should be chosen to best suit the type of layout you want, rather than let them drive the layout you will end up with. I've let my choice of foam benchwork lead me into a rather conventional Pink (or Blue) Pacific Plains RR when my vision was for Oregon coastal mountains with track at a variety of levels. I have let my laziness at not pre-planning under the track uncouplers lead to shirt sleeves catching on scenery and structures mounted in front of the track when my real goal was to force seeing the trains through the scenery.
Some types of layouts require more extensive preplanning than others.
just my thoughts and experiences
Fred W
Because of one basic truism, all but a microscopic number of model railroads are, to one extent or another, unplanned:
No detailed track plan has ever survived the first contact between ties and roadbed.
In my case, the operating scheme and geographical area being modeled are pretty much set in concrete. The size and shape of the room (double garage) and the obstructions therein (water heater, doors...) are inflexible. The desired track schematic for any given location is set in un-hardened Jell-o. Even the final shape of the second peninsula is still subject to negotiation. The track plan for the part of the layout that has been 'finished' wasn't settled until I put the spiking pliers aside and ran the designated derailment checker over the newly-laid rails. There's still a lot of rail to lay, and several key places where the 'track plan' is a blob and a few notes.
About the only 'fully planned' model empires are those taken from the plan books of the several sectional track manufacturers - and even those are subject to un-planned change.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - winging it)
When I started on my current layout, the last of a total of 5, I knew what I wanted, I knew the space/size available, I knew I was modeling the Oklahoma grain belt set in 1989, I knew my end points, I knew it would be three decks when done, about it. That layout was started in 1984, and is completed and running quite well with very few changes in concept over the years.
Bob
My first layout was built and completed with out any plans what so ever. I built bench work that best fit in a 16'x24' room first. It was a walk in type layout in the shape of the letter "G" but much more of a rectangle around the walls. once the bench work was done I just started to lay track that best fit the bench work. then I started with the scenery and it all came out pretty well. Most all my visitors could not believe that I have completed that layout with out any pre- planing.That layout took me 15 years. I am now building my 2nd layout and am doing pretty much the same thing. I am about 6 months into it and so far so good.
Sam
I think it far more important to have a concept of operation and a "historical background" to a model railroad than have a detailed track plan. In much the same way a real railroad was built, a model railroad can evolve along the same lines of need. A real railroad has to deal with first deciding if it is worth building a track to a town or industry, then once that decision is made it must decide how to overcome obstacles in the way. Over time railroads add additional trackage, remove old unused sections, build yards, abandon yards, and generaly morph and change along the way.
Building a model railroad without a finished track plan is not a bad thing, building one without any ideas is.
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
Not yet, but that's the way I'm going.
I've a fixed amount of space for benchwork and I'm "borrowing" a layout idea from MRP 2010, adapting and amending it to the space I have. I'm not good at visualising so it won't be until the benchwork is done and I can drop turnouts and track onto the foam that I really start to see what room there is and what it will be like.
Even if you don't have a definite plan, some broad concepts are necessary, Typically I get my inspiration of what's feasible from looking at the work of others.
What I wouldn't advocate is following a guy I read about once. He an N-scaler and builds all his benchwork and fully scenics it before putting down any track, buildings etc. His argument is that the raw landscape was there before the railroad came along and he's emulating the prototype by adding infrastructure to the natural world, rather than what most of us do which is the other way round.
Ian
Thats what I'm doing on my HO scale Turtle Creek Central. It's nice to have a general idea of what you're going to have on the layout. Some buildings should be built before the track is laid.
The Lone Geep
Lone Geep
\
My current layout was just "I want to go around the room, double line main and no more than 24 inches wide, a bridge over a river and have a loop climb up in elevation, " as I had to clear a cubby hole door. The only software planning I did was on the loop so I could get an idea of how much track I needed/ radius that would work. Everything else I laid out and then where I found room I would add in a siding for industry. I found on my first "training" layout that using track planning software I would have a great plan but when laying out a section all the spurs would really be way to crowded. I guess I am a less is more person. I did go a little wider than 24 inches for my rail yard.
Though I had a concept for the present Yuba River Sub when I began building it 10 years ago, I did not have a detailed track plan. I only knew that I had a 24x24' area in my California Basement (garage) to work with. I knew that I wanted large radius curves--34-36" for my big steamers, and interrupted grades not exceeding 2.4%.
The idea was that of a non-parallel double track mainline similar to SP's Donner Pass route, and I wanted a total rise of 18-20 inches from "0" elevation in the main yard to the summit of Yuba Pass. So I built the framework, installed the foam baseboard, got my WS 2% risers and went to work. There were a few 'trial and error' incidents during the building, but all in all, it turned out to be ;very much what I had envisioned.
I'm happy with it, so far. The only thing I didn't envision was enough staging area, but that's being taken care of this summer when I get back to work on it.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
I will also be working with out a formal track plan, but pretty much everything else will be planned. Era, setting, time, railroad, layout size, layout construction, control, track etc. However, as the OP and a few others, I will more or less lay the track however looks good, flows well, and leads to good operation. Some track items will be pre-planned, such as main rail area in town consisting of the main line and siding with dead-end spurs at each end. One spur will hand the team track, the other spur will handle the coal & lumber supply, and between the two on the opposite side of the main line is the passenger depot/freight house.