Instead of making another blob, can you take the bottom one and snake it over to the right and up? Put it in the space where you had the cement plant blob before when it was on the branch.
Don't be concerned about the every-other town thing when operating. You will be watching your train when it's moving rather than the 'other' track.
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.
I've been doodling options like this for a while now, and I just can't get my hed around how it will work, or even if it will work.
Let's say I still run the staging into the laundry, so starting on the South side of the basement and looping all the way around and back to a second blob that ends in the middle of the south room. Long run. If I alternate the lines being visible at every other town, going arounf the room clockwise I may be tows 1-6. 1, 3, and 5 hav visible track from track 1. 2, 4, and 6 have track 2 visible. So as my train runs clockwise around the room, is passes through 1, 3, and 5. Let's call that eastbound. As it heads back, now goin westbound, passes through 6, 4, and 2. Now, the track going the wrong way is hidden, but I can;t hide whole towns, so as I run a train along, I pass through town 1, then I see town 2 but my train runs along in the far back, or across an overhead viaduct, then it becomes visible and passes through town 3, etc. It just seems very distracting and not alittle bit cumbersome "Yes, that is the next town over, but we only hit that one westbound"
So how do I handle this? I like the completely middle of the room idea for ease of access and the really long run it nets me without double decking the whole thing. But the way to arrange the towns is totally bugging me. The way I last drew it with the fully around the walls, once liftgate for entry, gets me a true linear design where the towns are in order, and traveling the opposite direction, the towns are in simple reverse order.
Clearly I am missing something here, I have seen other layout manage. Probably one thing I'm overlooking that would make this all flow together.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Just some more thinking out loud ....
The green track is benchwork height. The blue tracks are transition level tracks up to a second deck, the pink track. Your double decking would only be on the south, east and north wall. I haven't worked out any math regarding grades and / or deck separation (just thoughts). There's still plenty of length to extend the transition distance to gain deck separation.
(Edit) - Rough guesstimationion using your grid and a 2% grade, would net you about a ten inch separation between the two decks. That's not too bad considering how narrow the shelves are for the double decked area. That's also taking a longer distance than the blue as indicated - more green on bottom left and more pink on top.
Mark.
¡ uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ 'dlǝɥ
I had gone the other way and made the lower blob extend up to where the upper blob is, but this way allows for grades out of the staging area on the upper blob. Hmm, back to a true double-deck, with no helix. I might be able to squeeze a branch in along the south wall with my cement plant in the middle of the upper blob, and also extend the branch over to the East wall. Or maybe keep the connection at the diagonal by the furnace room and have the branch run all the way over to the top blob. Main yard still on the South wall lower level. I'll have to test it out, I'm not so sure there's enough track on the lower blob around to the South wall got get 10" clearance in a 2% grade.
Definitely eliminates going back and forth through the same scenes.
Are you attempting a "nolix" climb to a true 2nd level w/ 2 level staging. From the plan, it appears to have track (increase to a raised grade and return back decending to the staging. If decending to one level of staging, add a "Y" (just outside the staging/ yard lead) which also would allow continuous running. If seems w/ so much space, far more could be done.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
*I'M* not attempting anything, yet. These are suggestions from others - the first post in this thread was my latest plan with everything but the main yard and industry sites plotted out. First came a variation with effectively a dogbone to eliminate the lift up entryway my original thinking required. Problem witht hat is a) I don;t really want a double track railroad and b) attempts to make the two tracks alternate have me skipping every other town which seems really odd (see my previous post on that). This latest idea from Mark returns to an earlier idea I had about building a double deck layout, although with a helix. Now, no helix, and there's still room to build a branch line.
One thing I do not want - East direction being to the left on one deck, and to the right on the other deck, if I end up doing double deck. I'm still leaning towards keeping it simple with a single deck, though my last full design had staging underneath. That plan I think had quite a bit of railroad in the space, a main line plus TWO branches. An initial try at doing the dogbone style though yielded a significantly longer mainline run, plus no liftup to build. Less room for a branch though.
It LOOKS like a lot of space - until you start witht he 30" radius curves and avoid any point having those annoyingly tight 24" aisles. I've noticed in a lot of published plans, assuming the MR art staff is doing them to proper scale, have many places with 2 foot wide aisles. That's not for me. I've been sticking with 3 foot minimum and larger in many places. Any one part of my space is just a little too narrow for blobs along the main - I need at least 14 feet of width for that and each half of the basement is only 13 feet wide. It worked for the branch because while I want 30" curves on the main, on the branch, 24" minimum is fine, so I was able to run the branch around a blob to gain vertical clearance to cross over itself in the plan in the first post of this thread. That plan does have a long penninsula on the main in the lower left side, but that's because I angled the blob up since as far as I extended it, there's no layout to the immediate south of the blob, so I can maintain the aisle even though the total width of the space is insufficient.
NP 2626 "Northern Pacific, really terrific"
Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association: http://www.nprha.org/
I tend to agree with NP2626 here.
In the few instances where I have asked for layout ideas, I tended not to like the suggestions and then regretted asking for them. People tend to give ideas based upon their own preferences and biases. Those preferences and biases may not match your own preferences and biases. In my view, it would be better for someone to design his own layout and then, if he is not thin skinned, invite critique. Same applies to landscaping, ballasting, back drops, structures, you name it. Just my thoughts.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrainIn the few instances where I have asked for layout ideas, I tended not to like the suggestions and then regretted asking for them.
Even suggestions that reflect the preferences and ideas of others that you may not like, can be useful. Just as a detective eliminates suspects as part of the process to find the truth, every layout idea considered and eliminated improves your confidence that you have found your own "truth" in a layout plan.
It is evident from the posts in these threads that while Randy is an expert in many aspects of the hobby, track planning is not his strongest suit. Developing the plan in public is a reasonable attempt to supplement his skills with the skills of others.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
carl425 richhotrain In the few instances where I have asked for layout ideas, I tended not to like the suggestions and then regretted asking for them. Even bad ideas can be useful. Just as a detective eliminates suspects as part of the process to find the truth, every layout idea considered and eliminated improves your confidence that you have found your own "truth" in a layout plan.
richhotrain In the few instances where I have asked for layout ideas, I tended not to like the suggestions and then regretted asking for them.
Even bad ideas can be useful. Just as a detective eliminates suspects as part of the process to find the truth, every layout idea considered and eliminated improves your confidence that you have found your own "truth" in a layout plan.
richhotrainCarl, please take note that I did not say that others ideas were bad ideas.
OK, I'll rephrase.
Even suggestions that reflect the preferences and ideas of others that you may not like, can be useful.
carl425 richhotrain Carl, please take note that I did not say that others ideas were bad ideas. Even suggestions that reflect the preferences and ideas of others that you may not like, can be useful.
richhotrain Carl, please take note that I did not say that others ideas were bad ideas.
richhotrainAgreed, but you are missing my point. While I am fairly certain that Randy welcomes these ideas, I sense a bit of push back, thus, my comments about being careful what you wish for (or ask for). You may get it and not like it.
You are correct. I did not get that point at all from your post.
[Post edited by admin]
*DING DING*
All right, fellows, round's over. Go to your corners.
This thread has been cleaned up. Keep it civil and friendly, or you'll answer to the ref.
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Thank you for stepping in Mr. Otte, much appreciated!
Here's the thing - it IS my railroad, my givens and druthers (one of my earlier posts, I stated them). While I suppose that if someone just threw up a scribble that clearly wouldn't fit, I might be tempted to say "why?", that hasn't been the case so far, which is why I keep at it. If you go back, you'll note we've come almost full circle from my initial attempts - my early designs were more similar to the latest proposals compared to the one I posted to start this particular thread. Originally looking at my space, I figured I would almost have to have a double deck to get the kind of running I wanted. The version of my plan that started this thread was the result of going outside the box (and here's why I post these theads - once you start concentrating on one way of doing things, you may entirely overlook another, whereas an outsider may see that alternative. At the same time, I reserve the right to say "thanks, but that doesn't work for what I want") and trying a different way of doing things. I am still leaning mostly toawrds that style, even if it does mean I will need to built a liftup for the entrance.
The other thing not seen in just these postings is, I am using CAD, as it is fairly obvious that most of the alternate suggestions are. SO when someone posts their idea, I can quickly work up a rough outline of theidea in my actual space (using a different layer so I am not modifying or deleting my previous design) and figure out if it will fit, and if I still have room for what I want. Yes, it takes some time, but for hobby time, I have nothing better to do at the moment. It's too darn cold out to empty the basement and start ripping out the walls and carpet and ceiling.
If I was more or less just hoping for the best, I would contract a pro designer and send them my space and list of givens and drutehrs and hope what they came up with was what I wanted. I may do that, but as a sanity chaeck AFTER I have what I consider my best effort - yes, with input from others who may have insights that I don't have, but what I want to be able to say is, here is what I wanted, here is the plan I THINK accomplishes those goals - but does it, really? I fully expect to modify as I go - I never build exactly to my plans anyway, they are more of a guideline so I know what will fit in a given space. I may lay out and build exactly to plan for some tricky section of complex trackwork, but the in between spaces, I just free form most of it.
Randy, I have no problem with you doing things your way and never did! I only meant that I would not do it that way. Like the fact that I still love to build the models used on my layout, the fact that the layout was designed and built by myself is a source of pride for me. I don't care that my layout hasn't made use of the latest and greatest ideas from the people who frequent these forums.
I'm only talking about two different concepts of looking at how to accomplish the project, yours and mine!
No problem, there are a zillion wayt to do it "right" in this hobby. I just don't agree that requesting input or at least critique of my plan means I'm not "doing it my way". Am I reading and looking at the suggestions? Of course I am. Am i dropping everything I've come up with myself so far and changing to these ideas? Not so far. If you read through the thread, you can see I've rejected some ideas as NOT fitting my design goals. In fact, I just had another one, which I need to work on a bit, which actually combines what I had before with some of these other suggestions. My "flavor of the Reading" might have more flavor if the main IS double track instead of single. If I can work in the longer of the two or maybe both of the branches I had on the previous design, then I can have both, a mainline worthy of the Reading plus some single track railroading.
Well, since we all agree that layouts are a matter of personal preference, here is MY preference for Randy's basement
I struggled with modifying the around the walls theme, so I decided to start from scratch and focused on filling up as much of the middle as possible. I few things to help explain the plan:
This is a double deck point to point plan with stacked yards at the bottom and the helix in the laundry room. The brighter blue line in the laundry room represents the start of the upper level. The red line is a branch line or, my preference, a short line that as trackage rights all the way to the bottom yard. The solid black line identifies the edge ofthe benchwork for the yards
Enter the room from the left stairs. The stairs to the right are blocked by track and serves as access to the tunnel track back to the laundry room. That small peninsula also rises at about 1% to clear the branch/ short line staging thats in the laundry room and also keeps the helix shorter ( no upper deck above the small peninsula. Heres the plan:
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah221/doughless1/basementbranches1_zps6482288f.jpg
(See post below for picture)
The good:
Trains don't pass through the same scene twice.
Double decked for maximum main line run.
A true walk in plan that eliminates lift outs to enter the layout. The only liftouts are for accessing the furnace room.
The operators can follow their train along the entire distance.
Helix is tucked away in a separate room.
Room for two towns with industries on each level. There is enough room for 3D building flats.
Short line and branch line possibilites, and local switching possibilities with the towns.
Under staricase provides access to tunnel track.
No really bad pinch points, with blob cavities to the north providing ample turnaround space for operator(s).
Extra long portion of staging yards could hold 3 very long trains.
The not so good:
No mid layout yard, but the two staging yards that could be scenicked.
Staging yards are a bit narrow.
No continous run, however, the base of the peninsula could have a return loop punch throught the backdrop (if eliminating the towns) allowing the center peninsula to be a continous run option (keep the two towns on the other level).
There's probably other goods and bads, but that's what I see for now.
- Douglas
There ya go. Terry in NW Wisconsin
There ya go.
Terry in NW Wisconsin
Queenbogey715 is my Youtube channel
Hmm, that could be the future - however it wouldn't work rigth now, because the helix would be blocking the washer and half the dryer. I say future because I have plans to rework the upstairs and combine 2 bedrooms plus the master bath (which just has a shower, no tub) ito a true master squite with a walk-in closet and big bathroom with jacuzzi tub. That won;t use the entire space available and since there's already a door to the hall, I figure I'd move the laundry up there too. Then it would free up that entire space in the basement to expand the layout into.
However, what's here is yet another option, mainly leaving the north emd open for access rather then entering the layout more to the south. Other than maybe some other option for staging, it's definitely another alternative.
ANd you stumbled into exactly what I had been planning while house hunting. What I need to do is alter that design (and it really was a doodle, on a scrap piece of paper, with a pencil, but I saved it somewhere) to fit my space - I was hopingto find a space at least 14 feet wide and somewhere around 30 feet long - this would allow around the walls plus a penninsula with full mainline radius curves and still never have less than 3 feet for aisles - along the neck of the penninsula, much MORE than 3 feet. It just doesn't work as-is in a more square space.
Or - this is pretty much what I had in the first post in this thread. The branch comes off along the diagonal by the furnace room, and loops around iteself on the penninsula in the north east space to climb above the main deck along the north wall. The coal branch does much the same, looping inside th emain on the south west penninsula to climb over the main and cross the town inside the turnback curve at the base of it. There are several examples around here of one line on a girder viaduct cross the yard of another, and even crossing above whole towns. The difference would be double tracking the main. Creates a need for extra crossovers at the yard, however I did gain a few extra feet in length along the south wall be rebuilding the furnace room, so there should eb space for the required crosssovers.
Hi RandyYou must be getting a bit anxious by now to start doing some benchwork or at least doing the removal of all the carpet and construction of the basement.With the experience I'm gaining working on my own layout I would like to give my thoughts... I think the way I might go about planning this is to concentrate strictly with mainline run first, this will allow you the your best and longest run as it sounds like you enjoy the thought of a long run. You already seem pretty firm on the staging yard location and to me it would seem pretty practical as a dead end area. If you go with open grid you could then work in the grades off the risers. If you want rivers and bridges you can work them into the mainline pulling the mainline in toward the isle or ushing it back to the wall which ever will work best. As for the towns again you can pull or push the mainline to give yourself proper area for buildings and streets withoutrack getting in the way or even have the rail that will go into the town come off the mainline from a number of feet away and either flow right through the town and exit back out to the mainline or deadend at an industry , this could be a factor in whether the layout will be more for ops or just running trains etc. Have you given thought to height of benchwork base level, basicly lowest level where water would be?When I did my plan design I used xtrackcad for a couple reasons, 1 I could run trains in the plan , 2 if it fit in the plan it would fit in the room. Have you any experience using xtrackcad?
PS I thought Mark had a few good thoughts on the lan he posted.
Lynn
Present Layout progress
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/11/p/290127/3372174.aspx#3372174
Yes, but it is a bit too cold to get all the stuff out of the way to start ripping down. I think I will need to rent a dumpster to carry away all the trash. It's a brisk 17 outside right now, going down to single digits with below zero wind chill tonight. I guess you could say I did start already, I ripped out a small sectionand the end of that center horizontal wall trying to locate the lally columns, becuase if I couldn't take that wall back to where I have it on the plan it will put a serious crimp in the aisle. As far as I can tell - no column except centered between the east wall and the garage wall on the left.
I tried XTrackCAD, but I've been a long time user of 3rd PlanIt. The biggest problem I had with Xtrack was trying to work in the third dimension. It just doesn't do very well showing one line crossing over another and so forth. 3rd PlanIt lets you run trains - there's a 4x8 on my web site that I managed to keep myself busy on for an hour switching cars. The other neat thing is also seen as an example on my web site - with 3rd PlanIt you get a full 3D rendering of your layout. For my old layout, I drew in the benchwork and there is a 3D rendering from 3rd PlanIt next to a picture of what the completed benchwork actually looked like - VERY close!
Mark R. Just some more thinking out loud .... Mark.
This plan by Mark is just about what I was talking about for a twice around plan. A couple of changes: Add a wye connection at the staging entrance and exit so you have a continious run. Don't make a true second level, but just elevate the track by about six inches using scenery for seperation. Alternate the tracks in that you would bring the track going through the town to the front, wheather it is the high track or the low track.
As far as your thinking about the towns being 'backwards' in location during the run, once you have the layout up and running, you won't even think about it anymore. Especially so once you get some scenery in place.
rrinkerSo how do I handle this?
For the record, I still favor the around the walls option for the same reasons you mention in this post. I NEED east to west to be right to left as I face the layout. I'm just screwed up that way.
But, you can solve the problem by running a double sided backdrop down the center of any section that is away from the wall and only have one side visable at a time. Then for the part of the layout that is along the wall, have a visable "high" line and hide the return underneath. This underneath section gives you the option to have a double ended staging yard under your main yard.