The layout design committee had a productive meeting on Monday night.
We have a couple of track plans that show promise and we have posted those so the membership can add their comments and suggestions.
We are going to look at reducing the minimum visible track radius from 36" to 32". The 36" radius return loops and curves eat up a lot of real estate, and they are limiting the space available for sidings and structures. I'm sure many of you are chuckling because you predicted that would happen, but give us a break - we are learning as we go.
Due to conflicting obligations the committee may not be too active during the month of August, but do stay tuned.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
carl425:
Those are some good suggestions!
I particularly like the idea of building some task specific carts so that the necessary tools and supplies are readily at hand when construction is taking place.
Getting the walls painted is currently in the works. We haven't decided on how to do backdrops yet. There are quite a few obstacles like outlet boxes and conduit that would have to be worked around or buried so we are just going to go with a light sky blue for now.
Under track storage will use RubberMaid style totes without shelves. We will implement a retail style inventory control system where there will be a master list showing all the bits and pieces, which tote(s) they are in, and where the totes are located. We have already warned the members that if they don't put stuff back where it belongs they will be super glued to a wall!
We have agreed that we should give all club members the opportunity to learn while the layout is being built.
Before we can start building structures we need to finalize the track plan. The available space is proving to be a challenge in many respects, but we are making progress. We have several possible yard and locomotive service area plans as well as the Allandale passenger station sort of worked out, but it seems that the hardest part has been including enough industrial and commercial sidings to make operations interesting. We have included elevation differences which a lot of members wanted. We are trying to stick to a 36" min. radius on the visible main line but we may have to compromise on that a bit.
Thanks for your input Carl. We will take the strippers on advisement!
Cheers!!
Well, since you preemptively rejected my first suggestion (strippers) here's a few others:
BTW, I've been following this thread all along and I find it to be an interesting discussion, but I have to say it's confirmed my decision to remain a lone wolf.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
The track plan is coming along nicely. One of the committee members, Henk, has come up with a plan that gives us a lot of what the members want. My plan sort of turned into a spagetti bowl so I have put it aside for now.
Now the challenge for the club seems to be how to keep the members entertained while the new layout takes shape. It seems the club is currently in the doldrums. The design committee and the executive are discussing ideas for how to keep some life in the weekly meetings. We have proposed some railfanning and a BBQ which are great ideas, but they tend to be single events. One thing that has been happening is that almost nobody is bringing trains to run on the existing portable layout. Most of the problems that we had with the portable layout have been cured, and what is left to do won't interfere with running trains. I think I'm going to suggest that everyone bring their trains and give each person some running time.
Any other suggestions besides hiring ladies of the night?
rrebellyou lose a lot of the bennifits of ply when you screw things together
rrebell:
You make a good point. Screwing straight into the end of a piece of plywood won't give the strongest joint. However, as you say, there are ways around that, one of them being the use of corner reinforcements. That is a good idea with clear lumber too.
rrinkerWhen i was in the other club that was just building, we ended up effectively overbuilding the benchwork, but that was mostly because 2x4's were a lot cheaper than fancier stick lumber. It didn't look as pretty before the scenery went on, but it was solid and didn't totally kill the budget.
Hi Randy:
2 x 4s would be cheaper but 1 x 4s would be easier to work with. I have spent some time searching for sawmills that are fairly close to Barrie and could supply what we want. Pricing is a bit more complex because most of them are quoting in 4/4s thickness rough cut in board feet, not linear feet. At first the price seems pretty good, but then you have to add in ripping and planing charges so the price advantage soon disappears. To further add to the confusion, Home Depot offers 1" x 4" x 8' supposedly good quality boards for $2.04 ea., in stock only. Just try and find 500' - 700' of that in decent condition in the stores. You would have to hit every Home Depot within 100 miles!
Using regular lumber is better for most model railroaders as you lose a lot of the bennifits of ply when you screw things together if you don't know what you are doing, far less fogiving of mistakes.
I assume that plywood rip price is having the lumber yard rip it?
I have seen many simple jigs to use a regular circular saw (no trying to handle full sheets of heavy plywood on a table saw, which you should never do without extension tables for support). With a bunch of people to help - what's it come out to if you do the ripping yourself? I am toorn - I'd like to get decent plywood and rip it, but having no help, I'd definitely have to pay to have it done. No way I can move full sheets of 3/4" plywood myself. I've built all my previous layouts with regular dimensional lumber, I might just do the same again. I never had any warping problems, which was the main reason to use a 9 ply or better hardwood plywood ripped into dimensional lumber.
Sounds like you are moving ahead nicely, with a good consensus of members. Glad the top down approach was squashed without much issue, as a club then all full members whould have a say. Good too that specific committees are willing to take input from the rest of the members as well. Good recipe for success.
When i was in the other club that was just building, we ended up effectively overbuilding the benchwork, but that was mostly because 2x4's were a lot cheaper than fancier stick lumber. It didn't look as pretty before the scenery went on, but it was solid and didn't totally kill the budget.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
We got verbal approval on Tuesday to remove the two walls in the storage area. All we need to do is send the landlord a letter requesting permission in writing. The landlord wasn't in favour of messing with the kitchen which is fine. Our new plan leaves the kitchen area intact. In fact we will benefit from having the kitchen counter space available because one of the little details we forgot was a place to put things down like locomotive boxes.
We have also received several suggestions from our members regarding what features they would like to have on the layout, and we also got a couple of suggested track plans. I'm sure there will be more coming in the next couple of weeks. There are some interesting suggestions, several of which the layout planning committee hadn't thought of.
I have also done some research regarding lumber sources. The best deal so far is furniture grade 3/4" x 4" clear pine dressed on all sides. The dimensions are actual size, not nominal. It is $1.16 CDN/ft. Interestingly, narrower boards are more expensive. The supplier said it is related to high demand for the 3/4" x 4" size. I'm sure we can rip the boards into narrower strips when needed. The same supplier also offers 3/4" 9 ply 'sound' (i.e. no internal voids) furniture grade plywood. That would be the 'Cadillac' choice. Unfortunately it comes in large sheets and the cost to rip it into 4" wide strips or narrower brings the price up to well more than $2.00 per foot. Poplar wasn't much cheaper unfortunately. I love working with poplar. We are going to explore lumber mills in the rural areas of Ontario to see what they can offer.
Perserverence pays off! Hopefully no probems with the landlord. Shouldn't be, since the walls are non-structural. Still get a club room but best of all more layout space. People shouldn't be sitting around in the lounge anyway, there's a railroad to build and run!
Good luck with getting the landlord's approval. Hopefully, he will be cooperative.
Rich
Alton Junction
Hi Rich:
richhotrainWas any decision made about that portable layout?
Yes. We have decided to keep the current portable layout for the time being, but at some point in the future we would like to replace it with a new portable layout that can be tied into the main layout. That will be a few years in the future.
When the executive members made their original space allocation plan their chief concern was that the space be condusive to a 'club' atmosphere. They wanted enough space for a lounge area where members who were not running trains or working on the layout could sit comfortably without being crammed in, and they wanted new potential members to get a good impression when they first came into the clubhouse. Both criteria were well thought out. We have accomplished both of those goals and increased our permanent layout area by about 200 sq. ft.
We still have to have the approval of the landlord to remove two passive walls. If we get that then we are away to the races!
Dave, that is excellent news. Good work by you and your fellow members.
Was any decision made about that portable layout?
Just to bring you up to date, the layout design committee had a meeting on Monday evening to re-discuss the use of the clubhouse space. You may recall that the club executive had made a 'firm' decision about how the space was to be allocated. However, three of the members of the layout design committee disagreed with the way the space was divided up so we asked for a review.
To make a long story short, the three of us who wanted the space allocation reviewed got what we wanted. The executive committee agreed to approach the landlord about removing a couple of passive walls (non-structural) and to go from a dedicated storage room to under layout storage.
The dynamics of the meeting were very interesting. We proved that reasonable discussion and idea sharing does produce the best results. One member of the executive was pretty adamant that the plan wouldn't change, and he had some very valid reasons for doing things his way. By the end of the meeting, not only had he agreed to change the plan and remove the walls, but he was the one who came up with the best new plan. And, he still gets essentially what he wanted in the first place! Win, win, win!
The only roadblock now is to get the landlord's permission to remove the walls. The lease allows for that sort of thing as long as it is approved in writing by the landlord so we don't think it will be a problem.
Onward and upward!!
rrinker Maybe a lift bridge, not a model of a bridge but a lift up section.
Either would work, but the bascule bridge was way cool! It was done quite well and the drive system was very smooth.
That would probbaly be the best way to maximize the space. Maybe a lift bridge, not a model of a bridge but a lift up section. We have one which is part of the sectional layout do it travels in the trailers and all, and gets heavy use. Been around for about 8 years now and since it's the only way to get to the middle where we run from, have table and chairs, and eat lunch, it gets used a LOT. Carries 2 mains plus a yard lead, too. In this case - I am proposing something like that just for operators, the spectators would not negotiate such things. The idea being the layout could fill the space up more than you would typically do because of reach issues, but the operators would still be able to get close to their trains with no reach issues. Spectators would be on one side of the layout, operators on the other rather than sharing aisle space. I'm thinking a mix of old style display layout with modern 'operator is close to their train' capability. Instead of a big solid area, the middle is carved up into an operating trench.
Duckunders are a non starter. We had one at the old location and everyone scraped their back on it. I saw a layout last fall that had a long bascule bridge instead of a duck under. It worked very well, but I would be a bit concerned about its longevity given the frequence of use.
There is nothing to prevent us from relocating the doors. That is an interesting idea. However, it would still require the agreement of the executive to relocate the lounge to the storage room, and the storage room as it sits now would be too small for a lounge. We would have to move the storage room south wall a few feet into the layout area. I think it would be more effective if we just removed the walls period. The kitchen would be open to the lounge and the lounge would be open to the layout room. Storage would be under the layout.
It is most unfortunate that the doorways to those spaces faces the layout area. That is the biggest obstacle in fitting the most layout in the available space because it forces a wide aisle to be in that area where otherwise it would not need to be. Are duckunders out of the question (for operators, not spectators)?
I found out about the club constitution and bylaws. There is no constitution that anyone is aware of. There are bylaws but we can't find them. They are not in the binder where they are supposed to be. Get the picture?
We have decided to approach a couple of clubs in the area in the hope that we can copy their rules and then adjust them to suit our needs.
Yes, sorry, I should have been more clear. The kitchen is already in place as is the storage room. The walls for the storage room are not structural and we do have permission to remove them.
AH - so the missing piece of the puzzle, the kitchen is already there. Thought you were planning on building one. Like I am not moving my basement bathroom because all the drains run in the poured concrete floor.
rrinker Does the club constitution or bylaws specify anything about making a decision like that without involving a member vote?
Hi Randy and maxman:
I'm not sure what the club's constitution says about these things.
I have more or less decided that I will raise the question about having all club members involved in deciding on how the layout room will be used, but I won't do it in a general meeting. I will wait until the layout design committee meets on July 10th, and I will try to do it as gently as possible.
One thing that we have to keep in mind is that the club only has 16 or 17 members. We really can't afford to lose people because things got into an uproar.
By the way Randy, moving the kitchen would be a huge task given that the floors are concrete. In fact we are lucky to have a functioning kitchen because there are complications with the existing set up that the landlord has already spent a lot of money to address.
As for the precedent that might be established, I'm not too concerned. Age will address that soon enough.
rrinkerDoes the club constitution or bylaws specify anything about making a decision like that without involving a member vote? Yeah, question the top executive's unilateral decision might stir up a hornet's nest, but unless this guy owns the whole thing and just allows the rest of you to use it as a club of sorts, it's a bad precedent to allow stand.
Yes, if it is a benign dictatorship where someone owns the property, funds everything, and allows others to come and play, that would be one thing. Otherwise I would think that the voting members (those that pay the dues and support the organization) would wish to have a say. Especially if, as alluded to earlier, the President and Vice-President are going to move on to other pastures.
Dave knows the makeup and politics of his club, although it sounds like one guy makes the rules, and others follow. It may not be worth the grief to rock the boat. Shame though as it appears most of the space is going to be used for non-layout related items, leaving a relatively small space for the layout.
I'm not even saying get rid of the kitchen at this point. Just flip the use of the two spaces so the sotrage room is the one against the outside walls, or the upper right if those aren't exterior walls, and the kitchen is the space between the entryway and the storage room. With the storage room door NOT on the bottom - that would allow the layout to butt right up against the wall that forms the storage room. If they really want to have their kitchen, fine - but there is a more space efficient way to do it.
Does the club constitution or bylaws specify anything about making a decision like that without involving a member vote? Yeah, question the top executive's unilateral decision might stir up a hornet's nest, but unless this guy owns the whole thing and just allows the rest of you to use it as a club of sorts, it's a bad precedent to allow stand.
hon30critterbut I am wary of pushing the issue further. I don't want to create friction within the club.
If you don't like meatloaf and don't complain when someone serves it to you, you will get served meatloaf for the rest of your life.
rrinker 6x12 doesn;t seem like much, but then when you allow room for people to walk around it - you are up to using 12x18 of the floor space and that's just leaving 3' on each side for people to walk through, which is rather small for a public display
Agreed.
rrinker Insisting on a walled off kitchen makes me wonder if the members want to build a layout or just have a social club
Actually, unfortunately the members weren't asked about the floor plan. The decision was made by the executive. Only a couple of members have questioned the plan (I'm one of them) but I am wary of pushing the issue further. I don't want to create friction within the club.
FWIW, the decision to not store the portable layout in the trailer is firm, and nobody is objecting.
Thanks for your input Randy,
6x12 doesn;t seem like much, but then when you allow room for people to walk around it - you are up to using 12x18 of the floor space and that's just leaving 3' on each side for people to walk through, which is rather small for a public display. Unless you put it in a corner and only expose 2 sides.
Our sections in their trailers are in an unheats/uncooled space - our museum is an old factory coomplex where the machinery and so forth have been removed, leaving large empty buildings. Large enough to drive vehicles in, but they are not sealed and have no HVAC. The only reasont he trailers are inside one of them is to protect the trailers themselves - so while the sun doesn't beat directly on the trailers, it does ont he building and it gets quite hot in there. Cold in winter with the leaky walls, doors, and windows and no heating.
The layout USED to live in an old school bus - the seats were all removed and rackes built inside to hold the sections. We outgrew that (too many sections) plus handling them one at a time into venues where there was no drive in access took hours and was an exhausting task. It takes 2 guys to roll a rack of as many as 6 sections - it also takes 2 guys to carry ONE section by itself. Witht he racks and trailers (the racks roll on and off the trailers) we can unload and have the layout operating in 2-3 hours.
Anyway, of all mu suggestions, swapping the kitchen and storage would have a big impact ont he layout space if the doors were relocated - and those that insist would still have their kitchen/lounge and store room. Insisting on a walled off kitchen makes me wonder if the members want to build a layout or just have a social club I'm tempted to remove the half bath I have in my basement just to increase layout space by the about 4x8 feet it takes up! If I didn;t have bad knees I could easily justify it, just come upstairs when I need to use the bathroom, but for now the knees win out of more layout space (there's a sink in the laundry as well so even without the bathroom I'd have a utility sink to wash brushes and stuff). I'm all for maximizing layout space at the expense of "it would be nice to haves". Already moved to engineering a tall, removable backfrop to hide the furnace and water heater, as I gain significant layout space by eliminating the small room they are currently in.
I understand what you are saying about the portable layout not having to be set up in order to do work on it, but it really won't make a huge difference if it is set up or not. The layout is only 6' x 12' when assembled. Even if partially packed up it will still occupy close to the same space given that a work area would have to be set up to service the modules.
We don't want to store the portable layout in its trailer because the trailer sits outdoors all year round. The temperature and humidity changes would likely wreak havoc with the layout.
maxmanIf those aisle widths are 33 inch, I think that is inadequate if you expect to have public access open houses
I agree. It was just posted to give them something to look at for what may fit in the space they have. 4 foot isles are going to eat that space up quickly.
Steve
hon30critterHey Choops! That looks like a neat plan.
If those aisle widths are 33 inch, I think that is inadequate if you expect to have public access open houses.