After about 15 years without a layout, I'm finally ready to build one again and in the very early stages of designing it. I'm sure that many things have changed over the years so if anyone would care to give me their opinions I will be more than happy to take them into consideration. If anyone would like to take a crack at designing it, I would welcome that as well.
The room dimensions are shown in the image below:
The following list shows some of the things I currently desire:
1. HO Scale (required)2. Double track main with two independent loops4. Point to point & continuous loop operation with visible staging5. Single level with no duckunders6. Minimum radius: 22" to 24" mainline and 18" to 22" branchline7. 42" to 48" isles with 36" minimum in some places being ok8. Primarily rural terrain (West Virginia) set in the diesel & steam era (1950's)9. Coal, timber, and other industries including a narrow gauge logging spur10. Reversing wye, possibly loop11. No DCC (yet)
You have listed several physical characteristics but what is the purpose of the layout?
Are you modeling a class 1, regional, etc.?
Are you planning passenger operations? with 80 ft passenger cars?
Do you want to primarily operate the layout with others?, by yourself?
Or do you want to primarily just watch 'em run - a railfan layout?
Are you interested in signaling? as part of operations?
What's the largest engine you want to run?
Is scenic purity needed - that is the mainline runs through each scene once?
Sorry to respond with questions, but it's hard to offer suggestions without a clearer picture of what you're trying to accomplish.
Good luck.
Paul
dbwv69 After about 15 years without a layout, I'm finally ready to build one again and in the very early stages of designing it. I'm sure that many things have changed over the years so if anyone would care to give me their opinions I will be more than happy to take them into consideration. The room dimensions are shown in the image below: http://i52.tinypic.com/15celhu.jpg The following list shows some of the things I currently desire: 1. HO Scale (required)2. Double track main with two independent loops4. Point to point & continuous loop operation with visible staging5. Single level with no duckunders6. Minimum radius: 22" to 24" mainline and 18" to 22" branchline7. 42" to 48" isles with 36" minimum in some places being ok8. Primarily rural terrain (West Virginia) set in the diesel & steam era (1950's)9. Coal, timber, and other industries including a narrow gauge logging spur10. Reversing wye, possibly loop11. No DCC (yet)
After about 15 years without a layout, I'm finally ready to build one again and in the very early stages of designing it. I'm sure that many things have changed over the years so if anyone would care to give me their opinions I will be more than happy to take them into consideration. The room dimensions are shown in the image below:
http://i52.tinypic.com/15celhu.jpg
Several thoughts come to mind:
Point-to-point can mean a variety of different things. It could mean you make up a train in a yard, make several loops, and break up the train in the other yard. Another train is then made up to go in the opposite direction. Or it could mean you start with a train at one terminal, go to the other, have the engine run around the train, and pull the train back again.
The problem with your desire list is that adding point-to-point and staging could mean 3 large yards in not a very large space.
You mention double track with independent loops. I assume this is for display running purposes. To keep things fresh without too much work, I would think you would want run-through staging for a number of complete trains. When one train is done with its display run, it goes to staging and another comes out to take its place. This puts a number of constraints on the size of staging and where it might be located.
My way of designing is somewhat similar to how I analyzed your display running and staging. There are operational concepts I want to display on the layout. For instance, I want to show a log landing. Logs are loaded on to log cars. So I need a spur with empty cars, and one with full cars at the landing area. A spar tree loaded with donkey will be used as the loading mechanism. The loaded cars will be delivered to the saw mill, empties will be sent to the log landing.
At the saw mill, log cars are unloaded at the log dump - I will probably set up a dummy jill poke. Flat cars loaded with lumber come away from the mill for delivery to the port, where the lumber will be loaded on a ship. So traffic is empty flat cars and loaded log cars in and empty log cars and loaded flat cars in.
The port needs loaded flat cars and empty box cars in, and loaded box cars and empty flat cars out. A switchback links the port to the rest of the railroad.
The work of the yard is to make up the trains to deliver inbound cars to the log landing and sawmill, and break up trains with the outbound cars. The port is serviced directly by the yard switcher.
My operational scheme determines track lengths and spurs needed at each of the 4 scenes. Each track has an operational purpose.
Another point to keep in mind is design according to standards. Are you going to do switching? If so, what form of uncoupling will you use? Use of skewers or similar pretty much forces the switching tracks closest to the aisle - it's pretty difficult to reach across moving trains on your double track to uncouple cars behind them. How will you throw your turnouts? Manually or electrically? From a central control panel, or from the aisle, or from switch stands beside each turnout? The answer again affects aisle needs, visual sight needs, and which tracks have to be closest to the aisle. Do you prefer walkaround control, or control from a central panel?
just my thoughts
Fred W
On the image of the room dimensions I provided, the area shown in yellow is fully available for the layout with no obstructions. A breaker box is located in the left corner of the lower side, so the depth of the benchwork cannot exceed 18" to 24" in that area. The area shown in grey is a bathroom and isle connecting two doors and cannot be used.
My layout will be loosely based on a prototype. Actually, it was more of an inspiration than a prototype but parts of it will be very useful for purposes of keeping it real.
At least some of the desires will need to be further explained and prioritized.
#2 & 4) P to P operation, double track continuous loops, and visible staging all seem a bit inconsistent to me. You'll need to elaborate on how the staging fits into each of the operating plans; continuous loop suggests a bridge route of some sort, whereas point to point suggests a branch line. Visible staging will wipe out a good portion of your scenery plan on one wall no doubt.
For instance: Do you really mean you mainly want point to point operations with continuous run capability for the occasional display run? Or do you want to model many trains entering and leaving the layout, with occasionally having a local appear out of staging, pick up cars on one end of the layout, and drop other cars off at the other end, before heading back into staging?
#6 & 7). As Fred mentioned, it seems you're sacrificing radius for aisle space. If you're doing a coal line with 40 and 50 foot cars, maybe that's fine. But add passenger service, and you'll want larger radius.
- Douglas
After further research, I am seriously considering the possibility of building an access gate to allow for an around the room type of layout without the need for a duckunder. The dogbone design does permit complete access but having large return loops on either end and having trains return through the same area just doesn't appeal to me.
I was thinking an around-the-room design but now I'm thinking of ways I could somehow combine the dogbone and around-the-room designs.
I think I've settled on a benchwork configuration that will allow adequate aisle space and accomodate everything I desire but I'm still having difficulty envisioning an actual track plan that meets my criteria.
Designing my track plan is proving to be a real headache but I remain confident that it can be done, in time.
Looks to me like you have it under control.I like to design the mainline run first, then figure out where I want some towns with industries. Then I go looking for plans of small switching layouts that can be used as towns. I use them because for the most part, someone has already figured out the track plan and how it will fit on a module. Usually they have at least one mainline running through it that can connect to your mainline at each end. Sometimes I modify them as needed to suite my needs. But for the most part, switching modules can provide you with a lot of ideas for towns along the line.
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.
When it comes to research, I have definitely done my homework but coming up with an actual track plan is another matter.
Next thing you need to do is to look at train lengths - now the challenges will start appearing as it becomes clear how much length you will need e.g. for passing sidings, and how much space you will want between scenes (one train length? More? Less?).
Smile, Stein
I have a similar space for my layout. One thing to consider, that I did not and wish I had, was to make it two stages, one on top of each other with a helix at one end. In that case you might be able to fit everything in that you want.
DiamonJim6
Diamond Jim I have a similar space for my layout. One thing to consider, that I did not and wish I had, was to make it two stages, one on top of each other with a helix at one end. In that case you might be able to fit everything in that you want. DiamonJim6
By stages, do you mean multiple levels, on top of the other? If so, I would rather keep it all on one level, without the need for a space-consuming heilix.
dbwv69 If so, I would rather keep it all on one level, without the need for a space-consuming heilix.
Given the size of your room, a helix would pay off in almost doubling the amount of space. In smaller rooms, the space a helix displaces (about 6 1/2' x 6 1/2' on all levels in HO) can be equal or more than the actual trackspace gained, so it's not very practical. But in your case, it would take the space of a turnback loop but the second deck would add a LOT of trackspace.
You could have each deck go out & back with a return loop on the ends:
(helix in red, the orange is an alt. peninsula possibility)
Or have a long central peninsula, allowing scenes on both sides, up & down, with branchline possibility going off along the upper wall:
So my point is that, in your case, a helix greatly expands space at minimal footprint loss (it also gives you a dispatchers desk inside).
Now, if the issue is actually building the helix, there's plenty of options out there for that, including pre-built kits.
Or, if you just like the aesthetics of the single deck, that's fine too.
Just trying to show you options.
M.C. Fujiwara
My YouTube Channel (How-to's, Layout progress videos)
Silicon Valley Free-moN
mcfunkeymonkeyOr, if you just like the aesthetics of the single deck, that's fine too.
I like the aesthetics of having a single level. Not that there is anything wrong with having multiple levels, it's just my preference to have only one.
After many iterations, here is the track plan I have so far. It's not complete, but it should give a general idea of what I have in mind. Note that the logging branch would leave the mill and round the mountain, then use a series of switchbacks to reach the upper ridge.
Comments and/or suggestions are welcome.
OK, I have a comment.I see that the upper section / wall is 17 foot long, but yet you have only put one industry in that area. The passing sidings look like they are 17 to 18 foot long. Now, so far, you haven't said how long you expect your trains to be. If you are going to have long trains that would fill a complete siding on that wall, you don't have a big enough room. That train would be about 34 cars long. Anytime that train would travel around the layout, it will completely fill up one wall making the layout look visually small. To my way of thinking, that train is too big for your room size. At the club I am in, we run 22 car trains that are double headed, but we also have four times the space that you have, and they are still crowded.I would seriously consider running ten car trains, and putting in two industries or towns per wall. Even better may be to put a town or major industry in / at each corner. Then adjust the length of your passing sidings for your ten car trains.I think the reason you are having trouble is you are trying to design a layout for long trains when you don't have the space. But that's just me.
Sorry if that isn't what you want to hear.
gandydancer19 OK, I have a comment.I see that the upper section / wall is 17 foot long, but yet you have only put one industry in that area. The passing sidings look like they are 17 to 18 foot long. Now, so far, you haven't said how long you expect your trains to be. If you are going to have long trains that would fill a complete siding on that wall, you don't have a big enough room. That train would be about 34 cars long. Anytime that train would travel around the layout, it will completely fill up one wall making the layout look visually small. To my way of thinking, that train is too big for your room size. At the club I am in, we run 22 car trains that are double headed, but we also have four times the space that you have, and they are still crowded.I would seriously consider running ten car trains, and putting in two industries or towns per wall. Even better may be to put a town or major industry in / at each corner. Then adjust the length of your passing sidings for your ten car trains.I think the reason you are having trouble is you are trying to design a layout for long trains when you don't have the space. But that's just me. Sorry if that isn't what you want to hear.
Your comment is appreciated and you make some very good points.
On a layout of this size, I generally like to run trains between 5-15 cars long so I would have to agree that 10 is a good number to maintain a proper sense of scale.
The track plan I posted was generated from a 3D Sketchup model I'm working from and the sidings were deliberately left long because things are still very fluid and it's much easier to move things along the siding rather than having to redraw the siding each time. In addition, there are no crossovers between the mainlines because it's easier to not have to deal with them yet.
Currently, I'm considering the possibility of incorporating hidden staging under the mine complex along the long section in the lower right corner. Also, I'm looking at possible ways to extend the logging branch in one or more directions.
The area labeled as "logging" would raise a red flag (for me).
If the penninsula has a width of 6 feet, then the reach in to the logging area is going to be roughly 3 feet to the center of it (whether for coupling/re-railing/scenery work, etc.
That's a long reach.
What if you replaced the peninsula that has the track running around the logging line with a pair of stacked staging loops. With a gradual grade throughout the rest of the layout to get the separation. Then you can use the area set out for a visible staging yard as a yard or another town. You can run the layout as a large dog-bone if you keep the double track, but I would change it to a single track layout with sidings. You can still keep the logging line in the middle of these staging loops.
Chris
Warner Robins, GA
Check out my railroad at: Buffalo and Southwestern
Photos at:Flicker account
YouTube:StellarMRR YouTube account
CharlieM90 The area labeled as "logging" would raise a red flag (for me). If the penninsula has a width of 6 feet, then the reach in to the logging area is going to be roughly 3 feet to the center of it (whether for coupling/re-railing/scenery work, etc. That's a long reach.
I share your concerns and have been thinking about various ways the distance could be mitigated or reduced. Unfortunately, the 30" minimum radius of the mainlines dictates a with at or near 6' so I am forced to cope with it in some form or fashion unless a better overall configuration can be found.
In the case of the logging branch, I believe that keeping the tracks below the ridgeline should help reduce the problem of reach considerably. Soon, I plan to create a mockup in my garage using scrap wood to test several ideas and will also look at the viability of reach as it relates to the position of the logging railroad.
stilson4283 What if you replaced the peninsula that has the track running around the logging line with a pair of stacked staging loops. With a gradual grade throughout the rest of the layout to get the separation. Then you can use the area set out for a visible staging yard as a yard or another town. You can run the layout as a large dog-bone if you keep the double track, but I would change it to a single track layout with sidings. You can still keep the logging line in the middle of these staging loops. Chris Warner Robins, GA
I like that idea and considered something very similar when I was trying to incorporate the junction with the store building into that area but I quickly discovered that the height of the benchwork and scenery became prohibitive in the lower left corner where the breaker box is located. It was an obstacle that I had not anticipated and as a result, I was forced to rethink my plans.
However, I'm still considering the possibility of placing hidden staging along the lower middle to lower right edge of the benchwork, either behind the scenery or incorporated into the design of the benchwork. As you nentioned, it would free up the area currently designated for the visible yard for more traditional yard or other scenery.
dbwv69 CharlieM90: The area labeled as "logging" would raise a red flag (for me). If the penninsula has a width of 6 feet, then the reach in to the logging area is going to be roughly 3 feet to the center of it (whether for coupling/re-railing/scenery work, etc. That's a long reach. I share your concerns and have been thinking about various ways the distance could be mitigated or reduced. Unfortunately, the 30" minimum radius of the mainlines dictates a with at or near 6' so I am forced to cope with it in some form or fashion unless a better overall configuration can be found. In the case of the logging branch, I believe that keeping the tracks below the ridgeline should help reduce the problem of reach considerably. Soon, I plan to create a mockup in my garage using scrap wood to test several ideas and will also look at the viability of reach as it relates to the position of the logging railroad.
CharlieM90: The area labeled as "logging" would raise a red flag (for me). If the penninsula has a width of 6 feet, then the reach in to the logging area is going to be roughly 3 feet to the center of it (whether for coupling/re-railing/scenery work, etc. That's a long reach.
Try pinching the base of the peninsula by maintaining the curve of the mainline to where it tunnels under the logging branch and pops out along the south wall. This should allow you narrower benchwork at that point and better reach to the logging tracks. If your equipment does not require 30" radius to stay on the track (most doesn't) you can reduce the radius of the track that's concealed in the tunnel, which would help everything fit.
I amend my previous thought about you do not having room for a helix, you do. Your choice if you want to go there.
dbwv69 I share your concerns and have been thinking about various ways the distance could be mitigated or reduced. Unfortunately, the 30" minimum radius of the mainlines dictates a with at or near 6' so I am forced to cope with it in some form or fashion unless a better overall configuration can be found.
Do you need a 30" minimum for the cars to stay on track around the curve, or 30" minimum for cars to cars to not look too bad on an external curve?
If it is mostly for looks (depends on what the manufacturer has done with the cars you are running), try a tighter radius curve, add a bellinadrop (a backdrop along the outside of the peninsula at the curve), and put a viewblock up along the spine of the peninsula:
Are you locked into a penninsula?
Have you considered (instead of a penninsula) making an "L" shaped shelf for that area with connections at west wall (north of company houses) and at south wall (where lumber mill is.
You could use a lift gate for access. That would expand your run length and avoid all of those back-to-back 180 curves through there that are taking up room. More possibilities for sidings and you eliminate long reaches while keeping your 30" min radius. Could move your logging operation to the center shelf portion and have a lot more room for operation and take up less with all the curves.
I'd make a 4" wide shelf extending out from north of the company houses and then a narrow connection on the south side at the lumber mill and put a swing/lift there. Loop your main through there with some bridges/tunnels and you'd have some nice scenic possibilities too.
There are some highly relevant pieces of information in another thread the OP has on the general forum:
Summarized - drawing showing general topology of layout room (L-shaped room lower left):
Description from OP: [quote user= " dbwv69"]
Yes, there are/will be 3 doors in the layout room. The main entrance into the room is the exterior door on the lower left side. All doors are frequently used, especially the one leading into the garage.
I've looked at several possibilities and have even thought about relocating the bathroom but the plumbing is embedded in concrete which makes it all but impossible. Besides, there is really nowhere else I could move it without taking space from the garage which I simply cannot do. Between my truck and tools, I am hurting for garage space as it is and moving my woodworking tools (lathe, tablesaw, etc) from the layout room into the garage has maxed out the space I have available.
A more radical solution I've been thinking about is further reducing the size of the bathroom and moving the garage entrance door between the train room and garage to the right of the steel I beam but that would only net a space of roughly 3 by 5 feet and I am having trouble justifying the modest space gains, especially considering that the box surrounding the I beam would protrude into the room.
Eventually, the entire upper floor (32' by 38') of the house will become available for my layout if I choose to utilize it so my current plan is to carefully design the benchwork so that it can be easily disassembled and moved to the upper floor if the need ever arises. The upper floor is currently a shell so it will be some time before it is ready.
[/quote]
So - layout should not block doors at lower left, into bathroom (small room at lower right) or between layout room and garage (upper right), and it should be easy to take apart and move to another room with a different configuration.
So the most logical way of building a layout with those qualities would be build a point to point layout in 2 x 4 foot sections around the walls from the entrance to the garage leftwards around the walls until ending up to the left of the door to the outside at lower left.
Possibly with one 2 foot wide peninsula sticking into some 12 foot (ie 3 sections) into the room from the leftmost wall.
steinjr So - layout should not block doors at lower left, into bathroom (small room at lower right) or between layout room and garage (upper right), and it should be easy to take apart and move to another room with a different configuration. So the most logical way of building a layout with those qualities would be build a point to point layout in 2 x 4 foot sections around the walls from the entrance to the garage leftwards around the walls until ending up to the left of the door to the outside at lower left. Possibly with one 2 foot wide peninsula sticking into some 12 foot (ie 3 sections) into the room from the leftmost wall. Smile, Stein
No, the doors cannot be blocked.
My plan is to build 2' x 8' modules, with the exception of the peninsula, which will be comprised of two 3' x 8' modules placed back to back. They are more bulky and slightly heavier than the size you propose but I have plenty of room and the means to easily transport them if the need should ever arise.
In fact, I already have the majority of the benchwork planned as far as the construction details are concerned. It was just a matter of determining the general shape of the track plan so I could determine the final configuration and shape.