Joe,
I've dismantled my layout so many times, can't remember what the original concept was. Initially, I was going to model Georgia or Florida so I bought 3 HO Kato Seaboard RSC-2's and a Stewart Seaboard Alco switcher. I never opened up the boxes before I switched to C&O coal hauling to a power plant I scratch built. Now, I am inspired by Lance Mindheims's "Voodoo & Palmetto" layout to build something based in Florida (again). If I keep the RSC-2s, I need to have someone install decoders and the list goes on...... I decided the major problem with me getting bored with my layout concepts was the fact that my layout is primarily a winter project. I don't step foot in my layout room hardly at all in the spring and summer. In the fall, I have to jump start my interest. After three years, all I have is track that is "T" pinned down to Styrofoam.
Larry
I like NuCat's idea of shifting the first plan to the right. Sometimes an idea sticks in your mind and you can't see around it--for instance a 90 degree turn. If you stop the turn at the angle of the yard ladder track, and then just run the ladder from that point (about 9" right of where you are now, you gain 9" or one and a half car lengths on each track, including the track that you need to pull cars off All American.
I want to comment on one thing you said, "operational challenge."
Operational challenge that creates extra moves becomes operational tedium very quickly. That is why it is avoided both on the prototype and layouts.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
mammay76 wrote:Stein, Thak you very much for your advice!! ill take a look at some optons following those guidelines! thanks!
You are welcome. Btw - here is a 7x2 foot shelf switching layout I designed based on a real prototype (Progressive Rail in Airlake Industrial Park in Lakeville, MN).
It is not totally prototype true - the prototype didn't have a runaround - instead they (back in 2002) used two engines - one from each end of the mainline, to switch cars into spurs facing east or spurs facing west.
But it packs lots of switching into a small shelf, use standard turnouts (Peco code 75), and should be buildable and possible to operate.
I have since extended my plan (since more space became available when I relocated the layout to another room) and now my shelf switching design inspired by progressive rail looks like this:
Benchwork has been built and I hope to start laying track this weekend.
Good luck on your switching layout! Let us see what you end up with.
Grin, Stein
mammay,
i think that everybody has strengths and weaknesses with the different skills that are involved with the hobby. some guys are more artistic while others have a better ability to understand tech. and electronics, usually their layouts will reflect that. Eric Brooman's Utah Belt for example, he's an art teacher (i believe) but admits to being a "neanderthal when it comes to electronics", his layout looks excellent but i'm sure the wiring is probably fairly simple. 6 yrs. is a long time but it's not a long time, i'm sure that structures you build 5 yrs. from now will look alot better than one you build now, and so on, and so on. most important factor HAVE FUN with it, know you will get better with time.
a buddy of mine is figuring out a way to have easily interchangeable modules that can be stored under the layout (possibly can store 2 modules under each section). if you plan this in to doing your benchwork , while it's more work, could help you big time with the "i'm bored" syndrome. after you finish with your first sets of modules, you can run those while you work on the second set and then the third set. THAT'S A 3 IN 1 SPECIAL! also if you develope a standard for these modules you could join them all together if you ever wound up with more room someday.
good luck,
Stein,
What are the dimensions of your updated Progressive Rail Layout?
That Guy wrote: Stein,What are the dimensions of your updated Progressive Rail Layout?
Layout scale is H0.
Room is approximately 11 1/2 foot by 6 1/2 foot.
Long shelf is 18" deep and about 10 1/2 feet long (chimney base at end is about two feet deep by one foot wide).
Shelf on left side (Wausau side) is about 10" deep and comes down about 4 1/2 feet from the outer edge of the long shelf.
Shelf on right (Rytway side) is about 2 feet deep in the corner by the chimney base, and is about 30" long along the tracks.
Rolling stock shown is not typical of the modern industrial park engines and cars.
Engines is short disesel switchers (a GE 70-tonner and an Alco S1) - prototypical engines would be EMD SW1500s.
Cars shown are 40' cars - which are unprototypical for the prototype in modern times (and the prototype didn't exist in the era I want to model - early 1960s in Minnesota).
So I am mixing and matching here - I am copying the track plan from a modern industrial park ca 2002, but I am using engines and cars from around 1960 or so.
The name "Progressive Rail" comes from the track plan, not from engines and rolling stock.
Guess I am postulating that the railroad (and the suburban industrial park) sprung into existence about 40 years earlier than it did - which is the opposite of what most people assume for protolanced railroads - that a fallen flag lived on longer than it did. Mmm - I suppose that means it is a "raised flag" instead of a "fallen flag"
Oh well, I can always update buildings and cars to more modern stuff later, if it should start to bother my conscience too much that my track plan is lifted from a modern prototype. As of now, my conscience is not bothering me about this
Thank you everyone for your input and advice, its really helping and opening my eyes to alot more options. SPACEMOUSE, you are right im having a hard time seeing around the certain plan. th main reason why i was keeping the track straight w/ a 90 degree turn, is because the prototype's yard is straight, but of course theres no 90 degree turn!! my brain has been churning different ideas, and you are right again spacemouse...a operational challenge like i mentioned WILL become a pain and will get old quick!! i know from my past layout having a 3 car runaround track..i had to do 4-5 extra moves to get the engine on front of the cars for the trip back, it was fun at first,,but it got old quick!! again, thank you everyone for the advice and opening my eyes a bit!!! keep the comments/advice/suggestions coming!!
SPACEMOUSE: im having a hard time understanding what you were saying about keeping the angle with the yard...could you please explain? thanks
Joe
Modeling:
Providence & Worcester Railroad
"East Providence Secondary"
HO scale
mammay76 wrote: Thank you everyone for your input and advice, its really helping and opening my eyes to alot more options. SPACEMOUSE, you are right im having a hard time seeing around the certain plan. th main reason why i was keeping the track straight w/ a 90 degree turn, is because the prototype's yard is straight, but of course theres no 90 degree turn!! my brain has been churning different ideas, and you are right again spacemouse...a operational challenge like i mentioned WILL become a pain and will get old quick!! i know from my past layout having a 3 car runaround track..i had to do 4-5 extra moves to get the engine on front of the cars for the trip back, it was fun at first,,but it got old quick!! again, thank you everyone for the advice and opening my eyes a bit!!! keep the comments/advice/suggestions coming!!SPACEMOUSE: im having a hard time understanding what you were saying about keeping the angle with the yard...could you please explain? thanksJoe
I suspect he meant something like this (red lines show change):
First turnout in ladder would change from a right hand turnout to a left hand turnout, and all tracks (and the switchback at the top) would be a little longer.
You could also change the runaround track to a regular yard track and use the same trick to create a runaround parallell to the yard ladder (instead of moving the yard ladder).
There are quite a few tricks that can be used to make do with less space than you originally think.
Btw - I changed the title of my response back to your original thread title.
Smile, Stein
Thank you stein! makes alot more sense now...i like it! i also like the plan you drew up for me, with that long spur following the main then branching off, looks really natural and prototypical...thank you!!
steinjr wrote: mammay76 wrote: Thank you everyone for your input and advice, its really helping and opening my eyes to alot more options. SPACEMOUSE, you are right im having a hard time seeing around the certain plan. th main reason why i was keeping the track straight w/ a 90 degree turn, is because the prototype's yard is straight, but of course theres no 90 degree turn!! my brain has been churning different ideas, and you are right again spacemouse...a operational challenge like i mentioned WILL become a pain and will get old quick!! i know from my past layout having a 3 car runaround track..i had to do 4-5 extra moves to get the engine on front of the cars for the trip back, it was fun at first,,but it got old quick!! again, thank you everyone for the advice and opening my eyes a bit!!! keep the comments/advice/suggestions coming!!SPACEMOUSE: im having a hard time understanding what you were saying about keeping the angle with the yard...could you please explain? thanksJoe I suspect he meant something like this (red lines show change): First turnout in ladder would change from a right hand turnout to a left hand turnout, and all tracks (and the switchback at the top) would be a little longer. You could also change the runaround track to a regular yard track and use the same trick to create a runaround parallell to the yard ladder (instead of moving the yard ladder). There are quite a few tricks that can be used to make do with less space than you originally think. Btw - I changed the title of my response back to your original thread title. Smile, Stein
Yup, that's the ticket!
(Stein, I like your expanded Progressive Rail design.)
nucat78 wrote: (Stein, I like your expanded Progressive Rail design.)
Thank you! Work is going slow among other committments, but it is moving in the right direction:
Verifying that I have enough room for trucks and other scenery:
Benchwork, lights - and a ton of assorted mess on top of the layout :-)
Next step is getting the backdrop in place and then lay roadbed and tracks. Still quite a while away from running the first train.