Howdy, Kyle,
Just a few ideas you might consider:
And a suggestion. To visibly separate the curved connector from the staging entrance - functionally - model a boarded-up industry as a flat behind the staging entrance, with a suggestion of there having been a now-removed spur to service it. That way the curve looks like the main line, even if not operated as such.
The only other thing I see is a need for passenger facilities if modeling the transition era - even if the passenger train is only a single RDC. In the more recent decades the station buildings would have gone from boarded up to demolished or recycled as restaurants or antique shops.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
TimboyHI Kyle: Maybe I don't understand your concept clearly. I can see that each yard is dedicated to service a town/industry. I'm thinking that the rear yard can be serviced by one of the loco sidings from the front yard, but not conveniently and it appears that that yard (rear) is actually the more important yard because it services two town/industry groups. Perhaps a similar loco pocket for the rear yard? It looks like you have the space. Otherwise, nice trackwork to get the rear yard servicing the lower town/industry. I think that scenic breaks are key to making the town/industry groups seem farther apart, geographically. -Timboy
HI Kyle:
Maybe I don't understand your concept clearly. I can see that each yard is dedicated to service a town/industry. I'm thinking that the rear yard can be serviced by one of the loco sidings from the front yard, but not conveniently and it appears that that yard (rear) is actually the more important yard because it services two town/industry groups. Perhaps a similar loco pocket for the rear yard? It looks like you have the space. Otherwise, nice trackwork to get the rear yard servicing the lower town/industry. I think that scenic breaks are key to making the town/industry groups seem farther apart, geographically.
-Timboy
the right yard is staging it represents the rest of the world so i think iget more out of it this way. I could switch the railroad around so that the active yard is on the right and staging is on the left, then i could have enough room to make the lead a bit longer. Another option i thoight of is just use cassette staging, the only problem with that that i can think ofr is that in order to hold a full train it would have to be around 3 1/2 feet long. i think something this long would be too hard too handle. What do you guys think is the better option?
train lover12 Another option i thoight of is just use cassette staging, the only problem with that that i can think ofr is that in order to hold a full train it would have to be around 3 1/2 feet long. i think something this long would be too hard too handle. What do you guys think is the better option?
Another option i thoight of is just use cassette staging, the only problem with that that i can think ofr is that in order to hold a full train it would have to be around 3 1/2 feet long. i think something this long would be too hard too handle. What do you guys think is the better option?
I have both fixed and cassette staging. The cassettes are lengths of steel stud, closed at one end, with flex track laid inside (rain gutter fashion) and secured with latex caulk. The 'standard' length is 56.5 inches (and if that dimension sounds familiar, it should!) with a few longer and a few more shorter. I store them on shelf brackets on the wall closest to the cassette dock.
The cassettes only originate about 5% of my total schedule, maybe four trains a 'day' (which may take a month of brief sessions to operate.) Everything else operates from fixed staging. Everything backs in, so there's no turning anything end-for-end in either stub staging or cassettes - but my layout is designed to make that possible.
I have also been operating a detached 'end of the railroad' module with (shorter) cassettes for every arrival and departure. It's never operated for much more at a time than one train in - one train out even though it has a published schedule of a dozen trains each way each 'day.' Operating EVERYTHING to and from cassettes is a royal pain in the rudderpost!
You did one thing VERY right! You provided staging from the start as, "The rest of the world." (Well, the rest of North America.) Like yours, my planning from the beginning involved providing places in, "The rest of Japan," for National Railways trains to come from and go to. Without staging, you end up with something like the CNJ Bronx Terminal - even then, it was connected to the rest of North America by 1:1 scale cassettes, aka car floats.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with LOTS of staging)
Either coincidentally or purposefully, you've copied much of David Popp's original New Haven Naugatuck Valley layout from Model Railroader January 2003. (For some reason, this layout isn't in the on-line track plan database).
He was planning this to be part of his larger layout later and that had an effect on the way he designed his layout. It's probably not the ideal use of the space if the layout isn't going to be expanded upon.
If you have access on three sides or all sides of the layout, there could be better track plan choices to provide more engaging operation.
One thing his original layout has that creates more flexibility is two staging yards, one for each direction, where you have only one. In place of the visible yard you chose, he has an industrial area.
The operating pattern you describe, where every branchline train runs to the yard, wouldn't necessarily be typical of real life, unless that was an interchange yard with another railroad (which would be a nice enhancement).
In any case, if you are interested in operation, there is possibly more that can be achieved in the same space. But as with so many designs that are posted here, it is difficult to know without knowing the dimensions of the rest of the room to understand alternatives.
If you happen to be copying David Popp's layout, which is fine, just be aware that he always intended it to be part of a larger plan and made some choices because of that are not necessarily optimal for this space as a standalone layout.
If you came up with the design yourself, there may be other choices in the same space (after considering aisles) that would yield more operating interest.
If you decide to keep the configuration as drawn, give some thought to making the visible yard an interchange yard with another railroad. That would create a valid justification for most branch trains to work there (as well as adding interest on its own).
Best of luck.
Byron
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
A classification yard at the "end" of the branch is incongruous. Typically, branchline terminals serve industries. The "yard" there isn't to classify trains: to break-up trains only to resort them into new trains. It is to receive cars to be distributed to local industries and then reassemble cars into a train to return to the "rest of the world." While some cars may have been picked up or are yet to be delivered along the branchline, there is little need to "classify" since everything is destined to be shipped back to the mainline. You'd be better off with industrial spurs rather than the several classification tracks. Industries are essential, a run-around track is convenient, and engine terminal is optional because engine servicing is mostly done "back home" somewhere on the mainline.
Mark
I trust there will be an aisle at the bottom of the plan. If not, a three-foot reach is a bit too much for an industrial/switching area.
Room plan (layout is oriented with staging along left wall, stub end of staging at lower left hand corner):
Here is a link to the kid's previous thread from a while back here (back in Feb 2010), where the room is described: http://cs.trains.com/trccs/forums/t/168641.aspx?PageIndex=1
Here is a link to one of the threads he did at trainboard (in March 2010): http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/showthread.php?t=119066
SmileStein
If that is HO scale the 15 inch curves will cause a lot of problems for you. I would suggest using a larger curve so that you will not be limited to very short cars and very small locos. Some equipment can be run on really tight curves but it all looks better on larger curves.
I would suggest looking at some plans in the model railroader data base for some ways to put in the tracks and operational goals you want. Even if you can only increase the space for your turn back curves and then pinch the layout down in the middle you might be happier with what you build. I am in the planning stage of my layout and I am looking at 36 R min for the main line by comparison. This is going to cause me to make trade offs with regard to what will fit trackwise but the 2-10-4s and 2-6-6-6s will look a lot better going around curves that are not near their minimums.
If your space limits you to something with less than the ideal space you may consider a switching layout with out the continuous run feature, several of them have been built over the years and you may get to incorporate this layout into a larger one when space becomes more available.
What ever you decide to build you will need to build to your wants and tastes. Good luck with your layout.
train lover12...they seem good at first but as i give them closer and closer examinations and the new plan smell wears off and i find that i like it a lot less.
Be aware that it's likely that you'll find this happening with any plan you find or come up with. This is why its important to write down the features and scenes that you want in the layout most, and keep going back to that list to remind yourself of what's important when you find yourself in the weeds.
You probably did this in your other threads, but I don't have the time to review them now.
Just don't get discouraged, and don't expect to find or come up with a plan that's perfect in every way - otherwise you'll be waiting for a long time. If you want something more concrete, maybe make sure that your top 3 or 5 or 7 druthers are covered by a plan, and that will probably be good enough to get started.
train lover12the features i would like are, single track mainline, two staging yards (one for each end of RR), one classification yard, 2 or more towns, 15 inch minimum mainline radius (other can go smaller, 12 inch absolute minimum), i would like to model the new haven rr in the mid 1950's,
Mmmm - would it be fair to say that you are probably wanting to follow along with your train as it moves from junction to town A to town B to yard, and maybe down the branchline?
Rather than visualizing being in a spot where a train arrives from somewhere else, does something more or less interesting, maybe interacts with other trains arriving from somewhere else in some way (interchange, taking a siding, a block swap, whatever), and then departs for somewhere else again?
The latter type of layout is a lot easier to model in little space. In principle it consists of modeling one place on e.g. 75% of a 4x8 foot table, using the last 25% narrow stripe of the table behind the backdrop to allow a few trains to arrive from somewhere else or depart for somewhere else.
Say something like Marty McGuirk's Androscogging Central (from his starting in N scale book). I googled, and found an early version of his plan (then named "Pine Tree Central" - in honor of the pioneering Carolina Central) over on railroad-line forums, in this thread: http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22305&whichpage=1
Looks like this:
Marty was not trying to model the run of a train from junction to end of line. He was trying to create a believable place where the trains will arrive, do something and then depart from.
Maybe an option for you too ?
Smile, Stein
train lover12yeah modelling just one town is definitely an option but i like being able to follow my train around a lot. another idea that i just had would be to do a HOG type of layout with staging on a Wye going into the closet. does that sound workable?
Sure. But if your main goal is to maximize the run length for a single train, you can get even more run length by simply dropping the continuous run requirement, and do a layout on narrow shelves up along the left wall, right out on a peninsula, down along the peninsula towards the window, back on the outside of the peninsula (the side towards your bed), and finally back along the upper end of the table and along the top of your left wall up towards your closet.
Get you say four or five fairly big scenes (along left wall), down along inside of peninsula, along outside of peninsula, top of peninsula, last wall.
No staging, no big classification yard. You have a small yard (just a few double ended tracks which ends in a small piece of track long enough for an engine and a caboose) at one of the ends, where cars has been dropped off for your branch line.
At the last destination (or perhaps second to last) you have a runaround, so you can get your engine on the other end of the cars for heading back.
You go pick up your engine at an engine house, sort inbound cars according to how you plan to spot them at industries, and then trundle on down the line to serve four or five small communities that visually are separated from each other.
Smile,Stein
train lover12 i don't really get what you're picturing, could you make a sketch?
(Edit: irrelevant comment removed)
Here:
Stein
I like that last sketch that Stein came up with, that is a really nice design. Too big? Trust me, if you go with a smaller HOG type layout, you'll be wishing you did a more interesting, fun, plenty of operations opportunities type of layout.
What I'm saying is, make sure you don't get bored after a few months. I'm so glad I went with a bigger layout for my first time, and guess what, I'm already expanding into the next room!
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
markpierceA classification yard at the "end" of the branch is incongruous. Typically, branchline terminals serve industries. The "yard" there isn't to classify trains: to break-up trains only to resort them into new trains. It is to receive cars to be distributed to local industries and then reassemble cars into a train to return to the "rest of the world." While some cars may have been picked up or are yet to be delivered along the branchline, there is little need to "classify" since everything is destined to be shipped back to the mainline. You'd be better off with industrial spurs rather than the several classification tracks. Industries are essential, a run-around track is convenient, and engine terminal is optional because engine servicing is mostly done "back home" somewhere on the mainline.
Mark make a good point here. You quite possibly could get more interesting operations out of a different type of yard.
Here is a yard track plan heavily based on a yard from Jack Gutsch's "Minneapolis and St. Loius" from the 2007 issue of Great Model Railroads (http://www.trains.com/mrr/default.aspx?c=a&id=1567):
As you can see, this yard area has quite a few (six) local industries, and still has room to turn a train of up to 12-13 cars or so (on the main, using the runaround behind the freight house/depot
It is about 10 x 2 feet in H0 scale - ie should fit reasonably well in about 6 feet of length by 15" of depth in N scale. It it was going to be used as an end-of-track element, the end of track should be towards the right - allowing a little tail on the main on the right.
Anyways - time for me to hit the sack.
The operations you describe are not really for a "branch" as that type of line is commonly described. What you have is a main line that runs through trains between City A (north staging) and City B (south staging). It's probably a "secondary" line, given the amount of traffic you describe. Branches typically start at a main through-line, run for a ways, then dead-end somewhere. I guess it could still be a branch if you considered north or south staging to represent the "dead-end" of the branch. The traffic you want still seems a bit high for a branch, but maybe it's a busy branch.
I would be inclined to rotate the layout 90 degrees counter-clockwise and slide it down to the "bottom" wall of your room, then stretch out the staging yards and curve them around on the top wall.This will let you move the staging ladders off of the layout proper to make them and the continuous running connector easier to hide. And if you do that, arrange the trackwork from both staging yards such that the main is not going through the diverging route of the turnout.
The modeled yard's purpose is to support a local switching job that serves the on-board industries, as well as originate two transfer trains that run to City A and City B at the end of the day. I would also add an interchange with another railroad at this yard for more variety. You've probably got the space for an interchange track and a diamond, with the other road's main represented as a short section of "dead" track that runs into the backdrop.
I would make the siding in the lower-left longer so you can have meets between longer trains.
It seems you also have room for a single "big industry" with multiple spots for multiple car types on the bottom. Think about your setting and era and find one that would fit.
I haven't studied each industrial scene or the yard for operations in detail, but I'm assuming more refinements are coming. There's a switchback arrangement on the top of the yard - be aware of the limitations they bring and be sure it's what you want.
Seems like a good start to me, anyway. Keep posting your tweaks!
train lover12okay here is the rest of the layout, now showing the closet! what do you guys think
Okay track plan. But is there *any* realistic chance of your parents actually letting you build a layout that fills up most of your room, and leaves you with just a narrow 2 foot corridor between your bed and the layout ?