Doc, you have a 120 sq ft area to play with. Obviously the footprint of the final layout will not be that big once you factor in reach, aisles, etc. But you can put a lot of layout into that space. I tore up my second layout, without ever coming close to finishing it, for the reasons that South Penn mentioned. It was a mess. Tearing out benchwork is easy, tearing out track in an attempt to save and reuse it it is a real pain.
Bear "It's all about having fun."
Doc, we were all there at one time or another, and some of us have not improved on our ignorance all that much. If I were to give you any parting advice, after you have some research under your belt, you may find that you will want to tear up the benchwork to accommodate the lay out plan that you settle on.
aprofitt0002 Men, after some thought I've decided I need to back up a bit and do some reading and study of railroading in general and model railroading in particular...terminology, etc. I have been so anxious to get something going that indeed, as was said earlier in this thread, I have gotten the cart before the horse. Many of the things spoken of in this thread just fell on not deaf but ignorant ears and that's no way to begin, so, I'm ordering more books. I have already subscribed to Model Railroader and Toy Trains magazines and I'm going to be a reader for a while...spring is coming soon and I've got 3 tractors that need restoring so I won't be short on something to do. In addition, maybe the reading and the study will go well and i will be able to work on model railroading while i read but i can see I don't need to be communicating when i don't even understand the language. I'll keep you posted as to my progress but otherwise will try to keep questions and eagerness in check. Blessings and thanks to all... Doc
Men, after some thought I've decided I need to back up a bit and do some reading and study of railroading in general and model railroading in particular...terminology, etc. I have been so anxious to get something going that indeed, as was said earlier in this thread, I have gotten the cart before the horse. Many of the things spoken of in this thread just fell on not deaf but ignorant ears and that's no way to begin, so, I'm ordering more books. I have already subscribed to Model Railroader and Toy Trains magazines and I'm going to be a reader for a while...spring is coming soon and I've got 3 tractors that need restoring so I won't be short on something to do. In addition, maybe the reading and the study will go well and i will be able to work on model railroading while i read but i can see I don't need to be communicating when i don't even understand the language. I'll keep you posted as to my progress but otherwise will try to keep questions and eagerness in check. Blessings and thanks to all... Doc
I mentioned on here before about the mistakes I made when I started my layout. I didn't know what I was doing and bit off more than I could chew. Then, instead of starting over and making it right, I kept modifying what I had and making things worse. Now, I have a section that needs scenery, but I can't reach the area, even with a ladder.
This is no excuse, but there was no internet or this great forum to ask questions. Take advantage of both.
Take your time, do your research, and make it right, even if you have to change some of your benchwork. Otherwise, today's mistakes will snowball into a mess.
Thanks, Mike...garden tractors. I'm currently restoring a 1967 Case 195 and have a JD 60 that is already restored. I've got a 1983 Case 210 that's waiting under a tarp. I recently sold a 1973 Case 448 and a 1998 JD 345. I'll be on here from time to time just to keep in touch with everyone and to ask the occasional question, but I'm so far less than ignorant when it comes to trains and modelling right now I'm sure it's laughable. Doc
aprofitt0002spring is coming soon and I've got 3 tractors that need restoring so I won't be short on something to do.
Cool. Full size, or the lawn/garden variety? My summer hobbies include old garden tractors. I have few pictures in the photo link, you just have deal with the Photobucket pop-ups, and dig through my library.
I'm not on here much in the summer, so I understand completely.
Come on back when your ready!
Mike.
My You Tube
Doc, you can probably install a stub end yard in that northern penninsula and use the five finger turntable to turn your locomotives around, although it looks like you will have enough room for a non-five finger turntable. Run a loop around the west into the southern area and then run the main back up the 2 ft westside up to the yard. But, there is no way you can run a continuous loop with that 36 inch pennisula.
Doc, let me give you a few pointers, 1 let's say you have a 48" wide table now get 24" radius and lay it in a half circle you'll find the ends will hang over by half the track width, why? Because. Oh he's center field! The answer is the radius is if you multiply the radius by two you get the distance from track center to track center in a half circle.
2A all equipment has a "Minimum radius" which you usually want to go a little bigger than to be safe. So look at what you want to run and see its minimum radius. 2B radius also has a roll in turnouts the smaller the number (e.g./i.e. #4) the tighter the angle of the diverging route.
3 based on what you have you are going to have either a point to point or an all switching layout, something to add I love seeing trains just run BUT switching opportunities must be included otherwise you'll become very bored, very fast.
Now I don't want to bill myself as an expert I'm a "probie" (NCIS "probie" means probationary as in rookie or newbie) too albeit a very read up one, there are many here who have more experience than me and will add to this but may I suggest you add on to make a donut with a central operating pit (you could even have "aisles" on three sides to allow for more access) and that will accommodate your continuous running concept BUT first work out a track plan then do more construction, you'll find though that even donuts have restrictions especially with larger radii because the curves will eat your space. Good luck. And feel free to ask plenty of questions.
Steve
If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough!
Steven and all...I just ordered Armstrong's book...should be here late this week. I'll have to recalibrate, read the book, and then get back with everyone on this. Doc
aprofitt0002 I seem not to be understanding the matter of curvature. It would seem that board that is 36" wide ought to accept a curve with an 18" radius.
The radius is determined from the mid-point between the rails, so the inner rail will be a little less than an 18 inch radius, and the outer rail will be slightly more. So an 18 inch radius curve, or 36 inch diameter, will slightly over hang your 36 inch wide table by 1/2 track width on each side.
I'm going to get Armstrong's book and recalibrate. I can't (or won't) tear down my bench but surely I can find an acceptable layout track design that will fit. I'll try to keep everyone posted to my progress in revising track plans. Doc
Big 'un, I've wavered back and forth on which track to use...just one of the unfortunate circumstances of never having any experience at all with either. Doc
Thanks Tex...I'm sure you are right...it's just that I'm a little wary of using flex in my first attempt at things. Doc
Well, NWP SWP, You make the same point made above by Bearman. I trust both yours and his judgement and know you must be correct...This would mean that I need to ditch the layout plan I have and go in another direction and Armstrong's book sounds like the place to go. I'll see if I can pick one up on Amazon tonight. Doc
OK, I seem not to be understanding the matter of curvature. It would seem that board that is 36" wide ought to accept a curve with an 18" radius. Admittedly, the rails would come up right next to the edge of the 36" bench but shouldn't it work??? Doc
Let me say a word or two in favor of building the benchwork first -- which I did -- but I was using the David Barrow "domino" system of repeated 2' x 4' dominos which after constructing several I could not only physically move around the layout room like big chess pieces (or like, well, domino tiles) to give me a very tactile sense of the possible, but I also used a large scale 1" = 1' drawing (using one inch graph paper) of my layout room and 2" x 4" cardstock domino tiles to try various arrangements of how the benchwork could fit and what could be done with it. By lucky coincidence I also had a plastic commercial track planning template which was to 1" = 1 foot (no longer made I think).
Barrow's idea is that the 2 foot width creates the discipline which in turn informs the track plan - and he favors linear track plans as do I.
That is obviously different than what our friend has done which is to construct a rather traditional type of train table. But certainly there are many track plans in books which can be freely adapted to nearly any existing "train table" arrangement.
Dave Nelson
Aprofitt002 you don't have to write a separate post to each of us, I usually highlight the name and then respond individually
Aprofitt002
rrinkwer
BigDaddy
I wouldn't go with track and preformed roadbed, though a lot of people do. It's more expensive, as is, it doesn't look realistic, and it's just not that hard to curve a piece of Atlas flex track and glue it down to a piece of cork roadbed, that you also curved, glued down and sanded the sharp edge off.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
My first two HO layouts were with sectional track. They worked out fine, but I lusted to be with the "big boys", to use flex track, KD couplers, wire in reverse loops, and the like.
No question about it, properly using flextrack requires some skill and certainly that gets better with experience. The sectional track route is a workable start, but if you end up truly "into" the hobby, there will be flextrack in your future.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
As a fellow rookie I feel the need to tell you that you have greatly narrowed down the options you have by building the benchwork first, there is absolutely no way to double track in a 36 inch peninsula, you'll be hard pressed to do it as single track! Now if you're doing N scale yes but not HO or OO in your case. I suggest you read Armstrongs book on Track Planning for Realistic Operation it will give you more understanding of what fits. Good luck and have fun!
I am still of the opinion that you will not be able to run anything more than a 15" radius loop in that northern penninsula which is only 36 inches wide. At 15 inches, those long pasenger care may not be able to negotiate a loop that tight. I also dont think you can run a double track main through that 24 inch wide west side of the layout. But, I will defer to others on this forum who are more knowledgable than me.
Mike, I think I can get by with 18" radii for OO scale. I added a "wart" to the outside of my bench on the 36" end and I think I'll be OK with that. I'l have to build a bit of restraining structure to make sure if the train derails it won't fall to the floor. Doc
Thanks Mike for the encouraging word. I can do it if I've got good help like you and the others. Doc
Well, Mr. Mobilman, would you recommend using flex track since this is my first layout? I had assumed the snap together track would be more for a modelling virgin like me but let me know your thinking on this. Doc
Well, Henry, the purpose of the line will be passenger transport between the two towns and then on up and down the line to parts east and west. Doc
Mr. Slammin, I'm assuming a switching layout is an alternative to a closed loop layout but I'm not sure of much after that. Doc
Thanks, Randy. I used greenboard instead of plywood because we had 5 4 x 8 sheets of greenboard left over from re-modelling our bathrooms. I plan to overlay the greenboard with 1" extruded foam board. Doc
I plan to overlay the greenboard with 1' extruded foam board. Doc