80ktsClamp Very interesting.. the second one really got my brain churning and also started getting me going on being able to imagine more what is possible with the space.
Very interesting.. the second one really got my brain churning and also started getting me going on being able to imagine more what is possible with the space.
Thinking about train lengths and desired rolling stock and locomotives (and thus what kind of curve radii are desirable) are two of the first things I try to do early in the design phase.
It tells me several things - e.g. how long sidings must be for two trains to meet, how long staging or yard tracks must be (if applicable), and, if continuous run is required/desired, whether turnback loops is an option - ie whether we are talking about a walk-around type of layout, a walk-in type of layout or a duck-into type of layout.
80ktsClamp I have a couple modifications to the room as I went and got refined measurements tonight. The area is exactly 12 feet 8 inches from the back wall with the door to the front "window" wall. Then the "window wall to the beginning of the utility area is 13 feet 4 inches. The airconditioning/water heater complex extends 3 feet out to toward the door, and up the wide wall it extends 6 feet, with the last 2 feet being only 2 feet wide. Also, there is a pipe going into the floor against the front left corner of the room (near the windows) that takes out a 1 foot square area in the corner.
I have a couple modifications to the room as I went and got refined measurements tonight.
The area is exactly 12 feet 8 inches from the back wall with the door to the front "window" wall. Then the "window wall to the beginning of the utility area is 13 feet 4 inches.
The airconditioning/water heater complex extends 3 feet out to toward the door, and up the wide wall it extends 6 feet, with the last 2 feet being only 2 feet wide. Also, there is a pipe going into the floor against the front left corner of the room (near the windows) that takes out a 1 foot square area in the corner.
Mmmm - something like this:
80ktsClamp Running the DD40X isnt a strict requirement, or the main thing I plan on running. Is there anyway you could take the peninsula layout and just have the outer peninsula be the "mainline" DD40X loop and shortline smaller town area on the peninsula? What I mean is, it's not required to have the real heavy mainline able to support very long trains and the big motors extend throughout the whole layout. All in all... really amazing job!
Running the DD40X isnt a strict requirement, or the main thing I plan on running. Is there anyway you could take the peninsula layout and just have the outer peninsula be the "mainline" DD40X loop and shortline smaller town area on the peninsula?
What I mean is, it's not required to have the real heavy mainline able to support very long trains and the big motors extend throughout the whole layout.
All in all... really amazing job!
Thank you.
Here is another rough sketch to give you an idea about another thing you could do in H0 scale, with a fairly modest sized trains - in this case a Dash 8-40B and eight 50-foot boxcars, and 24" radius curves on a 5 foot wide table with a center viewblock:
As you can see, a table is not half bad for your space - just putting in a viewblock along the spine of the table turns this into "two shelves" visually.
You didn't say explicitly - but do you need an access aisle to the pipe in the upper left corner and the windows alongs the left part of the top wall ?
To get an idea about how much could fit into each 11.5 foot long and 30" deep scene, here is an 11.5 foot long and 25" deep urban scene from my layout - engine shown is an RS3, cars are 40-foot cars (I model 1957 in Minneapolis):
Here is a work-in-progress photo showing the 8 leftmost feet of my layout::
So two 11.5 foot wide x 30" deep scenes is not necessarily all that cramped. It certainly is enough to model one side as a small town with a little yard, and the other side as running through the mountains.
I am still just throwing some generic ideas at you to see if they spark ideas in you about what you would like to do - not trying you to do things any specific way.
Smile, Stein
After some very specific measuring and further consideration, here is a rough layout that I've come up with... not all that neat as I'm scribbling down ideas as fast as I can come up with them. Something about the modular table in a donut config has really grown on me.
Each square is equivalent to 6 inches and all lengths written next to stretches are in feet.
6 inces clearance have been added against each wall, as well as adequate walk in access for maintenance on the water heater and a/c systems.
Minimum table width is 1.5 feet and maximum is 3.5 feet (where it is accessible from both sides).
Minimum width in the donut hole is 2.5 feet and maximum is 6 feet.
I plan on a yard and town area over on the wide section to the right and no backdrops on any section that isn't next to a wall.
Thanks for all of your inspiration so far!
Hold my beer... ya'll watch this!
Just an addendum,
A yard or extension could continue a few feet to the right at the bottom right of the table if necessary.
The purpose of designing the table early like this is to build the optimum table design with the maximum flexibility. This table design should be able to be broken down into workable sections with what I came up with. The walk through Is in the narrow area at the 8 foot section length.
stein- that is a perfect representation of the room. I can fly an airliner, but haven't quite figured out this computer graphics thing, haha.
Your home layout is absolutely excellent.
I've got a long way to go from my graph-paper pen and pencil sketches! I figure a solid plan and foundation is the quickest way to something exceptional. :)
80ktsClamp 6 inces clearance have been added against each wall, as well as adequate walk in access for maintenance on the water heater and a/c systems. Minimum table width is 1.5 feet and maximum is 3.5 feet (where it is accessible from both sides). Minimum width in the donut hole is 2.5 feet and maximum is 6 feet.
Just some quick comments in passing:
A 6" clearance along walls is pretty useless - to narrow to be used for anything useful. Either do a minimum 24" aisle, or no aisle along walls.
Max reach during train running is about 24-30" in from the sides. You can go deeper with just scenery in the background, if you build the back bit first. But 18-24" deep scenes is a good size (in my opinion).
Minimum cockpit width of 30" is sensible. But the bigger, the better. If often (but not always) is smart to go narrower on benchwork (and to vary benchwork depth along wall) to get wider aisles.
Gotta run to catch my train (1:1 size) :-)
Grin, Stein
All great suggestions, Stein! First round is on me on my first layover in Norway. :D
The 6 inches is simply there as slop... There is no anticipation of my butt fitting in between there, however, I want some amount of space because I do not want the layout snug against the wall. The requirement being room to duck under and fight the never ending battle against spiders, haha.
As you can see, the prelim layout was designed to ensure the fattest portion has adequate reach from both sides while preserving the crucial 30 inch maximum reach from the areas where it is only accessible from the interior.
What I envision from that table setup is the mainline gently manuevering through the layout with a yard and town on the fat wide portion and spurs and in the portions where the table widens... probably access to a mine in the upper left. Definitely a tunnel or two or three, and some good grade changes along with the highest elevation above base in the far left.
Does anyone know of any HO scale airport setups? While I know I cannot possibly imagine to put a full airport on here, I'm thinking one corner or portion including a small part of an airport would be pretty snazzy, as I'm beginning to base my ideas more and more off of the large rail switching and then transit area of Salt Lake City. We stay just south of the primary rail yard when on layovers there and it is always enjoyable to be able to look out of my room and be able to see both the rail operations as well as the airport operations in the distance.
I must say.... everyones pointers here have been absolutely invaluable with taking an idea that I have had for years and something that was going end up being a stock layout at best into something that is becoming tangible in my head.
Some of the use of terms here are new to me.... I think of cockpit as "where I'm sitting while driving," and I believe by that you mean minimum center area width being 30 inches, is that correct?
Enjoy your ride on the "RL" scale train. :)
80ktsClamp Some of the use of terms here are new to me.... I think of cockpit as "where I'm sitting while driving," and I believe by that you mean minimum center area width being 30 inches, is that correct? Enjoy your ride on the "RL" scale train. :)
I did - first took a Swedish Regina 2-car EMU (Electric Motor Unit) in from my home to Oslo Central. An about 40 minute ride, the last 9-10 miles or so being in a tunnel.
Then took an NSB Class 69G EMU about 7-8 minutes from Oslo Central to Nydalen on the northern outskirts of Oslo, and walked two blocks to my office.
Cockpit as in the original meaning of the word - an enclosed area - originally used for fights between cocks (roosters), later extended to mean enclosed area in ships, airplanes, cars and model railroad layouts :-)
Grin,Stein
steinjr I did - first took a Swedish Regina 2-car EMU (Electric Motor Unit) in from my home to Oslo Central. An about 40 minute ride, the last 9-10 miles or so being in a tunnel. Then took an NSB Class 69G EMU about 7-8 minutes from Oslo Central to Nydalen on the northern outskirts of Oslo, and walked two blocks to my office. Cockpit as in the original meaning of the word - an enclosed area - originally used for fights between cocks (roosters), later extended to mean enclosed area in ships, airplanes, cars and model railroad layouts :-) Grin,Stein
Very cool! I'm still learning the world of railroad propulsion. I need to do some further research and figure out what engines I currently have. I have 7... and an additional 27 railcars. The largest is the DD40X (go figure I find out what the biggest beast is and go for it), and the smallest is a 2 axle steam loco. All but one of the rest are standard 4 axle diesel (UP, SCL, Amtrak, and Chessie). One of them is a 6 axle diesel Chessie System that looks to be of mid to late 60's design from the look of the nose.
As far as relevance of words, my current real world cockpit is the Boeing 737 with previously being the 757 and 767 just a few months ago (ah.... mergers can make you go back a bit). We in the US airline world actually fall under the railway labor act with union negotiations, and many of our duty rules stem from old railroad rules doubled since we have 2 "pilots."
While my true passion is aviation, railroads have always held a very special place in my heart with my travels and scenes when I was younger. My parents got me a 4x8 layout while I was around 9 years old and after a couple years I always wanted to go into something more involved. This was made stronger by travels to the western US and the truly beautiful terrain and massive rail machines I saw out there.
After setting on a layout, the next major task in conquering will be the wiring. While I am used to very complex electrical systems, actually setting up something along with soldering and figuring out current loops will be something of a challenge. I bought the MR wiring book today... here we go!
80ktsClamp After setting on a layout, the next major task in conquering will be the wiring. While I am used to very complex electrical systems, actually setting up something along with soldering and figuring out current loops will be something of a challenge. I bought the MR wiring book today... here we go!
You may also want to consider how to build the benchwork. I know your sketch was just a rough plan on how to maximize the available space, but the amount of funky angles you presented, along with modular tables, may present carpentry challenges that go beyond your present skill level. Adding grades would also complicate the issue.
You'll probably want to simplify the shape. It would be shame to have your well thought out plan for a finished layout completely foiled by not being able to get the benchwork built like you need to.
- Douglas
I drew up an exact and blown up version of the table today and got exact on the angles and lengths. All angles were "fixed" to even numbers and lengths are at worst 2 decimals and easily convertable to fractions of an inch.
The next trick is to figure out where the support structures need to go, what kind they will be and the way the boards will be done.
I've done some prelim drawing on the way the track is going to go, but I don't have anything exacting yet. How wide in inches is a double mainline?, also what would the width of two regular parrallel tracks be?
This is a larger scale version of the board. I've refined the angles with 2 exceptions which will be cleaned up a bit later easily (the 159 will become 160 and the 137 will become 135). you can see the way it will be divided up into the individual board cutouts as well.
And here are the dimensions of the boards:
Now to figure out the underlying support structure!
Progress update... here is the prelim track layout that I envision. 4% grade getting up to the high area to the left with mountains, tunnel, and quarry.
Town to the right with it's own short line, yard just by it and the mainline scoots on by the yard.
Comments, suggestions, insults?
Without commenting on the track plan, I must say that the benchwork is so specific to your present location that it will be very difficult-if not impossible-to easily relocate it (one of your initial criteria) let alone make it sectional (certainly not modular). Even that plan could fit rectangular units of benchwork-why such irregular shapes?
Dante
Hey dante,
I'm working on engineering the bench work right now. Each of the individual "boards" will have their own support structure. 3 will be a standard L-girder, and it looks like that the boards to the left will be a square support structure on each with support beams with legs extending out.
I've kept trying to create a more standard shape, but keep coming back to this. Something about the challenge of it and the interesting shape are attractive. Additionally, it is the absolute optimum shape while allowing entry requirements and maintenance on the utilities. I could square off the inside of it better at the exppensve of some space.
This isn't a layout that I plan on moving around until we move from the house... sorry if I implied that it would be frequently moved. With each of the boards having their individual support structure, I plan on attaching them together with blocks and bolts attached to the base of the boards so they will interlock
Too rube goldberg?
80ktsClamp Hey dante, I'm working on engineering the bench work right now. Each of the individual "boards" will have their own support structure. 3 will be a standard L-girder, and it looks like that the boards to the left will be a square support structure on each with support beams with legs extending out. I've kept trying to create a more standard shape, but keep coming back to this. Something about the challenge of it and the interesting shape are attractive. Additionally, it is the absolute optimum shape while allowing entry requirements and maintenance on the utilities. I could square off the inside of it better at the exppensve of some space. This isn't a layout that I plan on moving around until we move from the house... sorry if I implied that it would be frequently moved. With each of the boards having their individual support structure, I plan on attaching them together with blocks and bolts attached to the base of the boards so they will interlock Too rube goldberg?
I wouldn't say too Rube Goldberg, but even though you don't really want to make it easily relocatable or modular, the shapes are unnecessarily irregular; therefore, more fussy to build. I really believe that you could make your sections (or "boards" as you call them) rectangular and/or parallelograms with triangular fillers at corners if necessary and not lose area. Actually, you could gain board area if you didn't try so hard to conform the shape of the boards so closely to the shape of the track plan. The benchwork won't look as interesting on paper but will be a lot easier to build without penalizing the track plan. (Also more accommodating if you tweak the plan as you build it.)
In my previous post, I was exploring L girder support, and the solution for that was going to be well beyond my building abilities right now.
After banging my head against the wall for a while and about to give up the ghost on the "interesting layout," I realized that an extremely simple solution was right in front of me.
I looked at the open grid structure and realized that I could easily adapt it to this board structure, while allowing me to be able to bolt interlock the sub sections as well as have legs that can be dettached from the frame. Also, it allows for fairly creative leg positioning on the odd areas.
The plan is:
1. Cut out individual board sections and ensure proper fit. I'm sure plenty of cuss words will be uttered. 2. Install open grid underneath each section along with legs. 3. More cussing while checking alignment for attachment of sections.4. Install 2 inches of foam that conforms to the shape of each board. 5. Bolt all sections together6. ???7. Choo choo! Here is what I envision the open frame support structure to look like underneath the boards... not a pretty picture but easily convertable into actual blueprints:
dante I wouldn't say too Rube Goldberg, but even though you don't really want to make it easily relocatable or modular, the shapes are unnecessarily irregular; therefore, more fussy to build. I really believe that you could make your sections (or "boards" as you call them) rectangular and/or parallelograms with triangular fillers at corners if necessary and not lose area. Actually, you could gain board area if you didn't try so hard to conform the shape of the boards so closely to the shape of the track plan. The benchwork won't look as interesting on paper but will be a lot easier to build without penalizing the track plan. (Also more accommodating if you tweak the plan as you build it.)
Didn't see your reply when I was making my previous post. I know it looks otherwise but, the benchwork came before the track plan, haha. It's that tailored to the room.
Do you see me having problems building the grid structure? It seems quite simple...
Also, any suggestions from anyone on the track layout?
80ktsClamp Progress update... here is the prelim track layout that I envision. 4% grade getting up to the high area to the left with mountains, tunnel, and quarry. Town to the right with it's own short line, yard just by it and the mainline scoots on by the yard. Comments, suggestions, insults?
Turnouts drawn too optimistically. It is always a shock to realize just how much space you need for e.g a yard ladder.
Here is a rough copy of part of your plan, drawn with H0 scale Code 75 Peco turnouts
:
Note the three 40-foot (ie short) cars on that yard track. In H0 scale, you will not get a big double ended yard in 10 feet of length.
MIght be smarter to put a single ended (or mostly single-ended) yard by the aisle towards the big open part of the room, and let the main run inside the yard. Something like this:
Main design goal of yard - mostly being a staging yard, where you can hold two or three 7-8 car trains before sending them out on a run through the mountain scenes, but also make it possible to do some light switching in the yard.
Some tricks used:
RH + LH turnouts placed like this (red on left part of drawing) to avoid unnecessary S-curvesUsing curved turnouts to lengthen yard tracks
I have been following up on this thread with great interest. I quite like the track plan you have come up with, but I have to admit, that building this layout will be quite a task for the newbie. Are you sure that you will be able to build a layout of this size and complexity as your first layout? I don´t question your dexterity, but you are about to invest a sizable amount of $$$ and time, without knowing, whether you will get the "reward" you are expecting. If I were you, I´d try my hand at a smaller, less complex layout, just to put my abilities to test and to develop my abilities. A smaller layout does not need to be a 4´ by 8´, but may be a shelf switcher along one wall of your room, which you can expand at a later date, once your interest and abilities have grown.
"Less is more"!
steinjr 80ktsClamp: Progress update... here is the prelim track layout that I envision. 4% grade getting up to the high area to the left with mountains, tunnel, and quarry. Town to the right with it's own short line, yard just by it and the mainline scoots on by the yard. Comments, suggestions, insults? Turnouts drawn too optimistically. It is always a shock to realize just how much space you need for e.g a yard ladder. Here is a rough copy of part of your plan, drawn with H0 scale Code 75 Peco turnouts : Note the three 40-foot (ie short) cars on that yard track. In H0 scale, you will not get a big double ended yard in 10 feet of length. MIght be smarter to put a single ended (or mostly single-ended) yard by the aisle towards the big open part of the room, and let the main run inside the yard. Something like this: Main design goal of yard - mostly being a staging yard, where you can hold two or three 7-8 car trains before sending them out on a run through the mountain scenes, but also make it possible to do some light switching in the yard. Some tricks used: RH + LH turnouts placed like this (red on left part of drawing) to avoid unnecessary S-curvesUsing curved turnouts to lengthen yard tracks Smile, Stein
80ktsClamp: Progress update... here is the prelim track layout that I envision. 4% grade getting up to the high area to the left with mountains, tunnel, and quarry. Town to the right with it's own short line, yard just by it and the mainline scoots on by the yard. Comments, suggestions, insults?
Stein,
Absolutely fantastic as always.
Would using, say...18" radius curves leading into the yard improve it? What turnout length are you using?
Additionally, I used 24" radius curves for the mainline, and around 20" entering and exiting the yard. I figured it was probably at least a bit optimistic.... and I was!
Also, I see the yard leads in layouts... what are their real life purpose? is that for the switching engine to position itself with cars or what?
Thanks so much!
-Denny
Sir Madog I have been following up on this thread with great interest. I quite like the track plan you have come up with, but I have to admit, that building this layout will be quite a task for the newbie. Are you sure that you will be able to build a layout of this size and complexity as your first layout? I don´t question your dexterity, but you are about to invest a sizable amount of $$$ and time, without knowing, whether you will get the "reward" you are expecting. If I were you, I´d try my hand at a smaller, less complex layout, just to put my abilities to test and to develop my abilities. A smaller layout does not need to be a 4´ by 8´, but may be a shelf switcher along one wall of your room, which you can expand at a later date, once your interest and abilities have grown. "Less is more"!
When I entered into this project, "go big and do it right" is what has been going through my head the entire time. This is also why I am spending so much time doing detailed planning and research. You should see the stack of books on my desk! It helps to be quite OCD, haha.
I am typically on reserve at my airline, which means a lot of time spent at home waiting for the phone to ring. Additionally, I finally have a paycheck that can support a project like this. I plan on spending at the very least a year on this. Probably more. I figure once the basic plans are finalized I might have a train up and running in a few months... What you are seeing develop here is something I have envisioned much of my life and finally have the resources, time, and technical ability to do.
I have really enjoyed the input on this forum... it has truly been invaluable. Additionally the books available are fantastic!
I'm glad youve enjoyed watching this develop... I've had a tremendous amount of fun taking something completely intangible into something that is on the verge of starting to take physical shape!
80ktsClamp Would using, say...18" radius curves leading into the yard improve it? What turnout length are you using?
18" radius curves into the yard would make it necessary to only run engines and cars that can handle 18" radius curves. Which is why I tried to use fairly generous 26" radius curves in the second sketch.
Turnouts are Peco Mediums - which are roughly like a #6 turnout.
Yes - to be able to pull a cut of cars forward from one track, clear the switches, and then push cars back onto whatever tracks they go on (sorted by destination).
Preferably without fouling (ie blocking/sticking out into) the main past the yard, thus preventing collisions between trains on the main and stuff being switched in the yard, or trains on the main having to stop to avoid collisions.
The mainline certainly can be used as the switching lead if you don't have any traffic on the mainline while switching the yard - e.g. because you only have one person running one train on the layout at any given time.
But since there was adequate space for a yard lead on the lower end of the yard, and for an engine runaround on the upper end of the yard, both without fouling the main, I just sketched them in.
Excellent, Stein. As always, you've got the hamster in my brain churning full speed ahead.
To further refine and see if I can get this to work, I only have one "large" engine... the DD40X. The rest are all 4-axle except 1 6-axle and a 0-2-0 steamer. What I envisioned was that it "delivers" the train to just prior to the yard where one of the smaller switching engines grabs it and pulls it through, or to the short line through the town.
Perhaps 20" radius for the yard (which is looks like is what I used).
What kind of modelling software do you use?
edit: if it helps, I plan on using flex track and non-constant radius turns as necessary.
additional edit: Looks like the medium turnouts work to a 165 degree angle as the yard grows and contracts. Let's use a pico medium for the first turnout and then a wye for the next, and then a pico short for the spur into the engine service. reverse process for the exit.
80ktsClamp Excellent, Stein. As always, you've got the hamster in my brain churning full speed ahead. To further refine and see if I can get this to work, I only have one "large" engine... the DD40X. The rest are all 4-axle except 1 6-axle and a 0-2-0 steamer.
To further refine and see if I can get this to work, I only have one "large" engine... the DD40X. The rest are all 4-axle except 1 6-axle and a 0-2-0 steamer.
Probably a 0-4-0 steam engine. For some reason, Americans count wheels, while e.g. the French or Germans count axles. That is a pretty tiny steam engine, from an age way, way back, compared to e.g. a DD40X.
Up to you what engines you run, of course - but if you want to invest a significant amount of time, money and effort in building a layout, you might want to consider picking a rough era and location for your layout, and running engines and rolling stock that would look somewhat normal for that era.
It is much easier to get a layout to look somewhat plausible if there isn't too many disconnects between the elements of the layout. Engines are (relatively speaking) a pretty small part of the expense of building a layout.
Anyways - I don't know if you ever got around to following those links I used to have in my signature (lost in the forum reshuffle) ?
Here is a link to a pretty good page on layout design principles from the Layout Design Special Interest Group.
Think a bit more about what your goal is. Because you first told us you wanted to model trains running through a contemporary mountainous/arid landscape in the SW. Not sure it is a good idea to design a contemporary SW layout built around switching a yard with a tiny 0-4-0 steam engine :-)
Would 18" curves instead of 26" give you much for the yard as you first drew it?
It would give you maybe 15-16" longer tracks. So instead of just being able to fit 3 short cars on the longest track, you would be able to fit 6 shortish cars on the longest track (a 40 foot car in H0 scale takes about 4.5" of length). More modern 60 foot cars takes 1.5 times the length of a 40-foot car - so your longest track would be able to fit 2 cars (as originally drawn by me - with 26" radius curves) or 4 cars (with 18" radius curves).
IMO, not enough of a difference to be worth the hassle of using sharp curves.
Just put the yard between the main and the aisle - that automatically gives you significantly longer tracks - larger circumference on the outside, eh? Also, you won't have to lean across the main while doing things in the yard.
Making the yard a mix of double ended and single ended tracks also helps with length and flexibility of the yard - because you are going to have to use it as staging (*) as well - the longer you can make those tracks, the longer trains you can run.
(*) staging - like the wings in a theater - a place to keep whole trains waiting to come onto the main stage, and a place for trains to depart to when they leave the main stage. Allows you to have one train leaving the layout, and then another train arriving - makes your layout look like a small section of a bigger world, instead of a small self contained layout on an island.
You asked what I used to draw this stuff - XrkCad. It's a freeware program for drawing track plans. Hard to learn, but pretty flexible once you have mastered it.
I wouldn't recommend that you spend a lot of time on learning a track plan drawing program right now, though - the most important work at this stage is the conceptual design - working out what impression you want to create - era, location, theme, major scenes etc, not the exact placement of every turnout.
steinjr Probably a 0-4-0 steam engine. For some reason, Americans count wheels, while e.g. the French or Germans count axles. That is a pretty tiny steam engine, from an age way, way back, compared to e.g. a DD40X. Up to you what engines you run, of course - but if you want to invest a significant amount of time, money and effort in building a layout, you might want to consider picking a rough era and location for your layout, and running engines and rolling stock that would look somewhat normal for that era. It is much easier to get a layout to look somewhat plausible if there isn't too many disconnects between the elements of the layout. Engines are (relatively speaking) a pretty small part of the expense of building a layout. Anyways - I don't know if you ever got around to following those links I used to have in my signature (lost in the forum reshuffle) ? Here is a link to a pretty good page on layout design principles from the Layout Design Special Interest Group. Think a bit more about what your goal is. Because you first told us you wanted to model trains running through a contemporary mountainous/arid landscape in the SW. Not sure it is a good idea to design a contemporary SW layout built around switching a yard with a tiny 0-4-0 steam engine :-) Would 18" curves instead of 26" give you much for the yard as you first drew it? It would give you maybe 15-16" longer tracks. So instead of just being able to fit 3 short cars on the longest track, you would be able to fit 6 shortish cars on the longest track (a 40 foot car in H0 scale takes about 4.5" of length). More modern 60 foot cars takes 1.5 times the length of a 40-foot car - so your longest track would be able to fit 2 cars (as originally drawn by me - with 26" radius curves) or 4 cars (with 18" radius curves). IMO, not enough of a difference to be worth the hassle of using sharp curves. Just put the yard between the main and the aisle - that automatically gives you significantly longer tracks - larger circumference on the outside, eh? Also, you won't have to lean across the main while doing things in the yard. Making the yard a mix of double ended and single ended tracks also helps with length and flexibility of the yard - because you are going to have to use it as staging (*) as well - the longer you can make those tracks, the longer trains you can run. (*) staging - like the wings in a theater - a place to keep whole trains waiting to come onto the main stage, and a place for trains to depart to when they leave the main stage. Allows you to have one train leaving the layout, and then another train arriving - makes your layout look like a small section of a bigger world, instead of a small self contained layout on an island. You asked what I used to draw this stuff - XrkCad. It's a freeware program for drawing track plans. Hard to learn, but pretty flexible once you have mastered it. I wouldn't recommend that you spend a lot of time on learning a track plan drawing program right now, though - the most important work at this stage is the conceptual design - working out what impression you want to create - era, location, theme, major scenes etc, not the exact placement of every turnout. Smile, Stein
Ah- I've been counting axles. The steamer is a 2 axle, and really has no purpose but just to scoot around, haha.
All the rest of my engines fall into contemporary era. All the rolling stock does as well except for a smattering of cabooses. When I bought most of the stock cabooses were still in occasional operation.
The rest- all excellent suggestions. I actually visited your links that are in your signature numerous times, and they provided excellent insight.
Looks like I'm going modify to the main inbetween the shortline and the yard on the outside...works just as fine. I do have zero plans to use dividers- just not a big fan of that. The "yard" that i intend on using will serve functually as well as for staging.
I know it may seem a bit hardheaded, but I really don't want to limit myself to a very specific scene. I do have specific ideas in my head, but they are from varied scenes... the integration of them makes it all the more enjoyable. Just as one may not enjoy all parts of a specific piece of music while really enjoying some parts of another piece of music... I am attemping to take the parts, modify them, set them in the same key, and put them into something all around enjoyable here.
I dont have the time now to do a reconfig of it... but absolutely excellent corrections!
The fun continues...
ah ha! I figured it out. On the original scale drawing of my layout, have the track after the initial yard lead parrallel the main track through the yard. Same with the exit.
How does that work?
80...
You're throwing a few more variables into this thread than some of us were expecting. What was once thought to be a railfanning type of layout is becoming more of an operating layout with some/much switching.
I agree with Ulrich in this respect, this layout will command a good amount of money and time. It would be easier for members to offer more helpful suggestions if you formed a more focused vision of what you want in a layout and whether or not it needs to be modular. Or else you might find yourself spending a lot of time and money building something that really doesn't suit your givens and druthers.
Now that you've gotten some general ideas about shape and available space, perhaps its time to focus a bit narrower on what you want.
Perhaps you have that focus, have settled on a theme, and have prioritized your givens and druthers. I haven't been able to really detect that based upon your comments so far.
80ktsClamp Looks like I'm going modify to the main inbetween the shortline and the yard on the outside...works just as fine. I do have zero plans to use dividers- just not a big fan of that. The "yard" that i intend on using will serve functually as well as for staging.
Your layout, your decisions.
But in my opinion a viewblock across the rightmost table would give you a fair shot at at two fairly descent looking scenes, plus create the illusion (when viewed from either side), that trains are coming from somewhere else and is departing for somewhere else.
No viewblock means that the background when looking out of the pit will be a room filled with various tools and gardening implements, and when looking into across the yard a table with tracks, then a pit and more tables in the background.
Of course - no viewblock also makes it easier to see where engines are in the yard from inside the pit.
So like everything else, it is a trade-off. But I would advise against being too quick to write off viewblocks seemingly without first considering both advantages and disadvantages of both approaches (viewblock or no viewblock).
80ktsClamp I know it may seem a bit hardheaded, but I really don't want to limit myself to a very specific scene.
I know it may seem a bit hardheaded, but I really don't want to limit myself to a very specific scene.
Not suggesting that you do that. By all means pick 3 (or 4, if you use a viewblock across the table) different scenes with room for transition scenes in between between.
But I am suggesting that you perhaps should try to stick with a common underlying theme. It may sound cool to e.g. do a "little of everything" sampler, but in my opinion a collection of *very* dissimilar scenes seldom work as a whole.
Unless perhaps if they are visually completely separated, so you cannot see both scenes at the same time.
Anyways - I am just throwing out some ideas for you. Doesn't means that you have to follow my suggestions.
Well, time to start a pizza dough for dinner tonight, and then go get some more tracks wired up.