MotleyI decided to go with 48" track height. Chest level for me. Still need to be able to reach in 30".
That's what having a nice, generously sized step box is good for.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
Picking up the lumber today at Home Depot. Gonna finally start building the benchwork tonght!!
I decided to go with 48" track height. Chest level for me. Still need to be able to reach in 30".
Michael
CEO- Mile-HI-RailroadPrototype: D&RGW Moffat Line 1989
Ya my old layout height was too low, at around 40" (waist high), and I felt myself bending over to get the track level view of trains running. But I had some long reaches in places, that required me to climb onto the layout to do trackwork.
This layout will be 48" track hieght. Most of the edges will be around 30" reach to the outside wall. So track access should be much better than the old layout.
Great!
Mine fills the room with a 4 ft duckunder. I knowingly have some wide spans (corners mainly) where I have to get on the layout to get to the outside edges. I sacrificed ease of access for more layout area. My point is, I learned right away to work - be it roadbed, track, wiring, backdrop, scenery - from the outside to the inside...............
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Yes I'm ready to get started. I'm going to Home Depot next Monday to pick up a bunch of lumber. Then get started building the benchwork.
My plan is to start in the upper right corner, the mountain loop. Build that benchwork first. Get the foam installed. Then lay the track for the loop. So I can at least run some trains!
Then I'll start with the left wall benchwork, and work my way around. Hope to have the benchwork and foam completed before Christmas.
Motley,
What's the status on the layout? Have you settled on a design? I'm looking forward to your progress, especially as my layout room is pretty much the same size and configuration.
I like the mountain with the reverse loop in it. I'm sticking with the way it is now.
But thanks for all the suggestions.
richhotrain ahh, you're playing with fire now, Doughless. Michael wants that reverse loop. Rich
ahh, you're playing with fire now, Doughless.
Michael wants that reverse loop.
Rich
He's not getting married to it...not that that's all that permanent anymore. He likes to rebuild. He can always add it later. This helps him get started and running trains without getting bogged down on the wiring.
- Douglas
The new plan is fine except, why the donut hole, instead just run it around the outside elininating the access hole and that loop, then (it looks like you have a 7' wide walkway now, you can put in a Y connected peninsula up to 2' wide and still have a 30" walkway.
Alton Junction
Almost as many scenes, but larger scenes with less complicated trackwork. Starting two trains in the yard going opposite directions and meeting along the layout will give you almost the same visual appeal as what the reversing loop would do. There's probably not enough space to have everything, so I prioritized how I thought Michael would:
And the second with your sand frac facility added in the NW and a three track bridge scene.
Ya I saved the river bridge section from the old layout. Although it won't fit here now. I can always add it later.
I do have that huge area for the mountain to be all scenery. And I have room for the trestle bridge running there along the inside mainline.
My plan is to have the entire mountain covered in snow. So the trestle bridge will go over the frozen creek.
MotleyBut now there's no room for my favorite scene, the multiple bridge and river scene.
Whoa there!!! That’s a pretty big call, and while I might be wrong I think you’re going to regret it.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
Ok been working on changing the plan for the yard scene. But now there's no room for my favorite scene, the multiple bridge and river scene. DAMIT!
But got some longer tracks there for staging/yard.
richhotrain While a few model railroaders may adhere to that strict definition of prototype operation, that definition seems a bit extreme in my opinion. Building, staging, and running specific prototype trains, yes. Running them according to a timetable so they appear at the proper scenes at the proper time, no. If you are going to operate at that level of detail, then you also need to replicate the exact track work found on the prototype. I don't think that prototype operation requires that degree of exactness. Knowing what I do about Michael's layout and operational practices, he models prototype operation. Rich
While a few model railroaders may adhere to that strict definition of prototype operation, that definition seems a bit extreme in my opinion.
Building, staging, and running specific prototype trains, yes.
Running them according to a timetable so they appear at the proper scenes at the proper time, no.
If you are going to operate at that level of detail, then you also need to replicate the exact track work found on the prototype. I don't think that prototype operation requires that degree of exactness.
Knowing what I do about Michael's layout and operational practices, he models prototype operation.
I understand Rich. I don't adhere to that level of exactness either, but that's what I was referring to when I used the term, albeit lazily.
It was obvious that he is not planning that level of exactness, at least to me.
Therefore, he can combine staging tracks with his yard scene, instead of using precious space to keep them separated. Parked/staged trains would enhance the yard scene instead of detract from it, IMO.
Doughless Motley What makes you think I'm not modeling a prototype operation? I meant the multiple train thing where you research and build several specific prototype trains, stage them, then run them according to a timetable so they appear at the proper scenes at the proper time. That's all I meant, strictly adhere to what a chosen prototype does in an operational sense.
Motley What makes you think I'm not modeling a prototype operation?
What makes you think I'm not modeling a prototype operation?
I meant the multiple train thing where you research and build several specific prototype trains, stage them, then run them according to a timetable so they appear at the proper scenes at the proper time.
That's all I meant, strictly adhere to what a chosen prototype does in an operational sense.
I meant the multiple train thing where you research and build several specific prototype trains, stage them, then run them according to a timetable so they appear at the proper scenes at the proper time. You didn't seem to care where exactly the scenes were relative to one another and you don't really have enough staging tracks to do that.
You can certainly model different kind of prototype ops in a different way with one or two trains and less staging. That's what I do.
In the context of my post that commented on the new staging area, if you saw the staged trains parked in the yard, then train XYZ would not be where it was suppose to be compared to where it should at be that time of day on the prototype...if that makes sense.
I just wanted to thank all you guys for all the awesome ideas and help. I'm truly grateful.
Doughless Choops https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12191537_10206670540716500_6835995054396650346_n.jpg?oh=30ffa68942f839635ef089b91cea84a3&oe=56C8F0C4 Door clearance idea. Steve Steve, That's the exact idea I had. Put double ended staging behind a backdrop accessible in the door carve out. It allows staging to not clutter a scene, and still have good access. Or, since Michael is not modeling a prototype operation, he wouldn't even need the backdrop. The staging tracks could simply be part of the yard scene, whereby his staged trains would simply look like trains parked in the yard as another crept by. Maybe a nice place for the Cheyenne Depot. I'm still not sure that the door opening is wide enough. I would think the tip of the swing needs to be 36 inches from the left side wall. Maybe it is.
Choops https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12191537_10206670540716500_6835995054396650346_n.jpg?oh=30ffa68942f839635ef089b91cea84a3&oe=56C8F0C4 Door clearance idea. Steve
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12191537_10206670540716500_6835995054396650346_n.jpg?oh=30ffa68942f839635ef089b91cea84a3&oe=56C8F0C4
Door clearance idea.
Steve
Steve,
That's the exact idea I had. Put double ended staging behind a backdrop accessible in the door carve out. It allows staging to not clutter a scene, and still have good access.
Or, since Michael is not modeling a prototype operation, he wouldn't even need the backdrop. The staging tracks could simply be part of the yard scene, whereby his staged trains would simply look like trains parked in the yard as another crept by. Maybe a nice place for the Cheyenne Depot.
I'm still not sure that the door opening is wide enough. I would think the tip of the swing needs to be 36 inches from the left side wall. Maybe it is.
I just measured the door and its 30".
Ya I like that idea with the door opening. More staging/yard tracks is better.
I'll update the plan with this.
I want the double-crossover. More route options, takes up less space, etc.
Rich,
Sometimes I wonder where your mind is....
Doughless Choops diagram is simply a dogbone trackplan with the turnback blobs combined into one..if that makes sense.
Choops diagram is simply a dogbone trackplan with the turnback blobs combined into one..if that makes sense.
As I understand, there is also a closet door too!
An option (not necessarily a viable one) is to remove the door.
mobilman44 Hi, My layout room is almost the exact same size as Motley's. From what I can tell, a bit more room (6 inches?) will be needed for the door swing area.
Hi,
My layout room is almost the exact same size as Motley's. From what I can tell, a bit more room (6 inches?) will be needed for the door swing area.
If I'm looking at Michael's diagram correctly, his stated room "height" is twelve feet. If the squares are one foot, the grey benchwork takes up the entire 12 feet. He's only showing an 18 inch door opening and less than 24 inch swing into the room.
In modern houses, most entry doors are 30 inches wide, with an extra 3 for the door framing and jam.
Michael needs to carve out a 36 inch quarter circle to accommodate an inside swinging door into the extreme SW corner of the plan.
So far, nobody has posted a plan that does this, including myself.
Unless, Michael plans on building a huge curved liftout section to accommodate a curving corner of the trackplan....not adviseable.
Choops diagram is simply a dogbone trackplan with the turnback blobs combined into one..if that makes sense. The trains use the loop to turn back in the opposite direction on a different track from the track they entered the loop...not the same track.
I still don't see the point of adding crossovers at all, sincle or double, but I'm more of a prototypical operator and don't care for trains to reverse back into the same scene they just left, so I might not see the benefit of crossovers that that others do.
I always thought that reverse polarity loops were for turning the train back onto the exact same track, or didn't want two mainline tracks at all.
Oh well.....
Choops Ditch the double cross over (too much trouble) and use two single cross overs. Steve
Ditch the double cross over (too much trouble) and use two single cross overs.
mlehman Even without the double-crossover, there are still reversing sections as drawn. So long as the train has the option to either follow around the circle/loop or chose to turn back there, a reversing section will be needed to turn back. Or is the plan to be very disciplined and never take the reversing option on the circle/loop?
Even without the double-crossover, there are still reversing sections as drawn. So long as the train has the option to either follow around the circle/loop or chose to turn back there, a reversing section will be needed to turn back. Or is the plan to be very disciplined and never take the reversing option on the circle/loop?
In the track plan shown in the link provided by Choops, there is no issue with reverse polarity. Yet, trains can turn around in each direction.