I'm building my first model railroad layout. It's 16' long and 42" (3.5') deep. I'm debating whether I should make it an island layout so that we can access both sides of the layout. I have a freight yard on one side and several spurs to industries on the other side. It's a loop layout with 18" curves at the far ends. The spurs are on the wall side but are a stretch to reach. I'm 6'2" with long arms and can do it, but when all the buildings are in place I'm concerned about accurately uncoupling cars, etc. I'm fine with pulling it away from the wall, but would be bummed to lose the ability to have a nice backdrop which I would like.
to the forum your initial posts are delayed in moderation. Doesn't last long if you are an active participant.
Most on the forum would judge your layout to have too narrow a radius given it's large size.
I worked in my father's mens store and you measure a man's arms from the center of his spine to the wrist, with the arm bent 45 degrees held parallel to the floor.
I an 6'-0" and wear a 16" -35 shirt. That's considered long arms. But I can't reach anywhere near 35" because my my chest and shoulder uses up almost 1/3 of that 35". Unless you are leaning on the layout, I don't know how you can possible reach that far, unless I misunderstand your layout or your knuckles touch the ground.
Electronic uncouplers can solve part of the problem, but you will need to scenic the layout possibly deal with a derailement over there.
Micro mark sells a platform that leans over the layout.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
Welcome to the forums.
Layout height needs to be considered along with arm length. The higher your layout, the less you can reach. Do a mock up with something to represtnt trees and buildings
I agree that 18" is quite sharp for a larger layout, if you can, go bigger. Can you add 6" or so to the sides of the ends to give you the small blob effect and the ability ot have a wider radius?
You mention losing your planned backdrop. You could put in a backdrop/scenic divider down the center. If you make it high enough you will have to follow your trains, as they go out of sight. Mine is just high enough, so thaat I can't see the action on the other side, but could communicate with another operator if one was there. My layout is short, so I operate mostly from the end. With a scenic divider you get double the backdrop space.
Have fun,
Richard
Those dimensions will require walk-around access during building, maintaining, and using the layout.
You can keep it that wide at the ends to maintain your curve radii, and narrow it in the middle by pushing the front track(s) toward the back, especially if you have access to both ends (i.e. neither end is in the corner of the room).
For most people, 32 - 36" is the absolute limit of reach with any dexterity, and that's if the layout (including structures up front) is hip-high or lower so you can bend at the waiste. But that height tends to have you looking down on the layout, as from a helicopter or airplane, which displeasurably shows long cars/locos on short radius curves. At armpit height, 24" is probably the maximum easily-accessible width.
-- Andy - Arlington TX
This bench is 18' x 6' and it is a little tiring reaching the turnouts in the middle at the top of the yard ladder. That will change when I add a few tortoises to flip the points. A three-foot reach is the absolute furthest I would go and only if it was for scenery. 30" is the most if you have to reach something on a regular basis.
Getting your radiuses up to the maximum you can fit will also make life easier and allow you to run more things. Could you widen the bench at the ends so it looks like a dogbone?
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
I am much shorter and can reach 30" for scenery work, about 27" to throw a switch but for uncoupleing, try about 20".
Height of the layout comes into play as well. The lower it is, the further you can reach in to a point.
Mike
Or a step stool may be needed to work on the back parts if the layout is higher and has some depth.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
With an island, you can have a backdrop down the center, so you get TWO backdrops! This also makes the layout seem much bigger because you can't see the whole thing from one spot.What happens on one side is out of sight from the person running trains on the other side.
However - before building a large island - sketch out your room. If you have room to pull a 16'x42" layout away fromt he wall and have enough room to walk on both sides, you likely have room for something more open and around the walls - again giving you a LOT more backdrop, but now with no reach issue. Doors, closets, and other things that need to remain accessible in the room can interfere witht hat though, which is why it's important to sketch it all out and plan before starting to slap lumber together. But an around the room type layout gives you more track to run on, the train isn't chasing its tail constantly, and you can use larger radius curves where your equipment will look and run better.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
There are pros and cons to an island as opposed to around the walls. As with everything, there are going to be trade offs and you have to decide what is most important to YOU. I do agree with the comment that 42" wide is a little narrow for an oval. It's going to limit you to 18" radius track which will in turn limit what kind of equipment will run reliably and look good on curves that sharp. A double sided backdrop is a great idea for an island or peninsula. For at least ten years I have had in my mind to build a 4x8 winter layout which I would bring out around Christmas time along with all the other decorations. If I ever get around to it, it's going to have a double sided back drop. Also, such a back drop doesn't necessarily have to go down the center of the layout. You could angle it so it is at a diagonal or you can have more room on one side of it than the other and use the narrow side for a small staging yard.
If you go for an island layout, I would try to widen it out to allow bigger curves. Increasingly, new HO products are built with a 22" minimum radius, and many passenger cars need at least 24" radius.
At one time long ago I had an 8' by 16' HO layout with one long side up against a wall (with a backdrop). I liked having broad curves, but it required a couple of 'pop-ups' - openings where I could get in to work on or fix things. Eventually I rebuilt it to a free-standing layout in sort of a peanut or hourglass shape - six feet at each end, but about 4'-6" (IIRC) in the middle. That allowed for reasonably large curves, but the narrow middle greatly helped reaching the interior of the layout.
If possible, see if you could build the layout 42" wide in the middle but say 54-60" or so wide at each end. Keep in mind the broader curves won't just allow you to run more equipment - even engines or cars that can take an 18" radius curve will look better on wider curves.
Having a 24" deep layout is prob the most I'd go. I'm 5'8 and have a layout that's 48" high. Those dimensions enable me to get what I need w/o too much trouble.
rrinker...If you have room to pull a 16'x42" layout away fromt he wall and have enough room to walk on both sides, you likely have room for something more open and around the walls - again giving you a LOT more backdrop, but now with no reach issue....
I totally agree with Randy, and can't imagine ever going back to a table-top style of layout, where the curves are often too tight, and the train is usually chasing itself.
Wayne
The around the room layout has (IMO) a lot of advantages and I've had two of them (1994-2008, 2008-2020). The main level was about 46 inches (I'm 5-10) and the minimum distance from the wall was 3 feet. If I had a bigger room (mine was 11 1/2 x 15) I could have kept the max width to 3 feet and still work in all the features I wanted. Anyway, I did some things that made the excessive width somewhat tolerable and thought I'd pass them along.
- I made two 1x1x1 ft blocks using 1x12s, and covered them with carpet remnants. They looked good, and made a nice portable step up to allow me to more easily reach further distances. They also gave kids a better view.
- I did my best to make the furthest distance trackage bulletproof. Especially on the second layout, I succeeded.
- When scenicking, I worked from the furthest distance inward. This allowed me to get on the closer areas w/o damaging anything. I also had some thick foam pillows for the ol knees.
Really, if the layout is well designed and built, you shouldn't have to reach those far areas all that much........
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
LastspikemikeBefore you build, draw.
Always the best practice.
mobilman44 The around the room layout has (IMO) a lot of advantages and I've had two of them (1994-2008, 2008-2020). The main level was about 46 inches (I'm 5-10) and the minimum distance from the wall was 3 feet. If I had a bigger room (mine was 11 1/2 x 15) I could have kept the max width to 3 feet and still work in all the features I wanted. Anyway, I did some things that made the excessive width somewhat tolerable and thought I'd pass them along. - I made two 1x1x1 ft blocks using 1x12s, and covered them with carpet remnants. They looked good, and made a nice portable step up to allow me to more easily reach further distances. They also gave kids a better view. - I did my best to make the furthest distance trackage bulletproof. Especially on the second layout, I succeeded. - When scenicking, I worked from the furthest distance inward. This allowed me to get on the closer areas w/o damaging anything. I also had some thick foam pillows for the ol knees. Really, if the layout is well designed and built, you shouldn't have to reach those far areas all that much........
I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who pushed the limits when it comes to layout depth. I like deep scenes although the downside is you are going to spend more time and money scenicking them. A couple years ago Tony Koester wrote an article about the advantages of narrow shelves with minimal scenery.
Most of my around the room layout has 3 foot wide benchwork. Most of the trackwork is near the front of the benchwork which means I don't need to do a lot of reaching. The exception is where my main classification yard is. I have an industrial beltway on the opposite side of the main in that area and it sometimes requires a little bit of reaching. I could do it while standing on the floor but I find it easier to use a step stool. That way I don't risk destroying something in the foreground.
I really went over the top where my main passenger station is. That's 4 feet deep. All the track is in the front two feet so the back two feet are really just a 3 dimensional backdrop. At the very end of it is a five foot section where the tracks disappear into a tunnel. I have a lift out section over the track if I need to get at those hidden tracks, which often I do. Since I built that section, I only had to get into the back corner one time and to do that I removed the foreground buildings and climbed on the benchwork. I did build sturdy benchwork and it could support all 270 lbs. of me.
Micro-Mark sells what they call a top side creeper which can help a modeler access the hard to reach areas by providing a platform over the top. That costs several hundred dollars and for the few times I would need it, it's just not cost effective. I created my own version using one of those Little Giant ladders that are advertised occasionally on informercials or on QVC. I can adjust one side of the A-frame ladder to be vertical so I can get it right next to the benchwork. I have one of their flip out platforms that I use to extend into the layout. I've only had to use it a couple times to do maintenance on the scenery at the back of the four foot deep section.
I do have one lift out section which is right behind my roundhouse in a corner of the layout. That I've had to use often. The liftout section has taken a beating over the years and is in need of a facelift.
When I built my new layout, I wanted to replicate the entire area around Dearborn Station in Chicago, including the complex of 13 large freight houses. I figured that I needed a length of 30 feet and a width of 5 1/2 feet to do it justice.
I had the necessary 30 feet of length, but I only had 10 1/2 feet of available space for the width due to the location of the furnace. The basement manager demanded a minimum aisle of 4 feet between the layout and the furnace. So, that left me with 6 1/2 feet for the width of the layout.
Obviously, there was no way that I could reach into the layout 6 1/2 feet. So, I decided to create a 2 foot wide aisle on the other side of the layout between the edge of the layout and the basement wall. So, now I was down to 4 1/2 feet (54 inches) of layout width, enough to easily reach in 27 inches from either side but 1 foot short of the width needed to replicate the entire Dearborn Station track work.
My solution was selective compression. Instead of 4 tracks per siding for the freight houses, I went with one track per siding.
Rich
Alton Junction
kilofortyI'm building my first model railroad layout.
OK... all is good here.
1) You are building, not just arm-chairing.
2) It sounds like you know it is your first layout, but not your last.
Here is all the advice I will give you...
All this thinking, drawing, and analyzing will not amount to a small hill of beans compared to how much you will actually learn building your first layout.
Eventually, you will see all the things your wish you would have done differently and the layout will become un-fun.
Then take everything you have learned, including how far you can actually reach, tear the layout down, and build your second one. When you start your second layout you will have the valuable experience it takes to know which questions to ask and what answers are useful.
Have fun! (I know I said it twice, but it is the most important part).
-Kevin
Living the dream.
I bought this giant pad of paper with 1" squares at Staples for $7.00. 1" = 1'.
I had a CAD architect program that I could design houses on and was quite proficient with it, however, there is something about using paper and pencil for a layout.
LastspikemikeBear in mind that if you just blaze away and build it you will end up building it at least twice before you're done. Paper and pencils are cheap. Time invested drawing out your plan pays back many, many times over while you finally build it.
I have already built the STRATTON AND GILLETTE five times! Seven if you count the cardboard layout and the experimental segment. Eight if you count the NORFOLK STRATTON train show layout.
You can plan yourself to death, building is fun.
I have enjoyed EVERY one of the previous layouts, and only that kind of experience makes me certain I will enjoy and be satisfied with the final version.
As long as you know your first layout is for learning... leave the gate running and have fun along the way.
BATMANThere is something about using paper and pencil for a layout.
I am definitely a pencil and paper person. All I have ever needed was a good basic sketch and idea to get started.
I have drawn hundreds of variations of my layout area. Not that you have to do that, but I found that what I thought I could fit and what I actually can fit in 3D space are often vastly different. The temptation might be to push trackage as far to the outside as possible to maximize the length of track you can run on, but not at the expense of reach-in distance.
I simply took a sharpie marker and stood at the edge of my around-the-walls layout and reached out as far as I could without bending at the waist and marked the location where the marker was plumb vertical to the foam. For me, anything behind that line is the "no go" zone. I'm not going to want to have complicated trackage with turnouts and the like in a place where I may have to frequently bend and reach.
I also avoided duck-unders for this same reason. I'm pretty flexible right now, but in 20 years?
Andy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milwaukee native modeling the Milwaukee Road in 1950's Milwaukee.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/196857529@N03/
SeeYou190 BATMAN There is something about using paper and pencil for a layout. I am definitely a pencil and paper person. All I have ever needed was a good basic sketch and idea to get started.
BATMAN There is something about using paper and pencil for a layout.
I began with a drawing which I did on graph paper but I found I had to make a number of adjustments on the fly because either the track or the scenery didn't fit. I remember one mistake I made was figuring I could put the Walthers ice house between the siding tracks and the backdrop. I had he dimensions of the structure but I failed to account for that being the footprint and the eaves extended beyond that. I ended up having to trim the eaves so the roof was flush with the back of the structure. I had laid too much track in that area to rip it up and move it.
Someone earlier mentioned avoiding duckunders in case flexibility become a problem. My best place for going under is 46" of clearance. I figure if it becomes necessary, a chair on wheels should do it.
Thank you all for the helpful replies! Here is my layout in SCARM if it's helpful to see. Link is below:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6lzr4johzgk1dq5/Photo%20Feb%2021%2C%209%2000%2050%20AM.bmp?dl=0
Choosing between an island with backdrops or a shelf will probably depend on the size and layout of the room. Island layouts take a lot of real estate... Island with backdrops that block the view will also mean that you will need to physically follow your trains as they run... If you are running DC, then that's not very practical. DCC with a throttle makes it easy, and you will get a lot of mileage with the backdrop.
I opted for a shelf layout for the tiny train room I was allowed to have () and never regretted that decision. 24" is the maximum depth. You WILL need to access the back of your layout... In your case, it could be a "bone" shape layout, as mentioned earlier, with better access in the middle. Many will advocate for larger radii, and I must admit that I have 22" radius on mine. But it's not absolutely necessary: 18" is fine with 4 axle diesels and steamers with 6 drivers (although Mantua's 2-8-2 and oldtime 2-8-0s will do fine). Just keep the rolling stock within 60' and all should run OK. But if you want to run modern diesels (6 axles), then 18" is insufficient IMHO. I think that big engines just don't look right on a small pike. Small engines that run slower just look better to my eye, especially those small steamers...
Simon
Here is a SCARM diagram of my layout:
A lot of interesting topics:
duck-unders: They are great but get old. I had it on my 1st layout and glad to no longer crawl to reach the layout.
drawing layouts: def count me in! I used a free layout drarwing tool and then plotted points on the foam. I then replicate the layout with sharpies. They come in different colors, so use them for sidings, mainline, etc.
layout width: a step-stool gets tiring standing after awhile, so 24" is about my max reach. Also, always work from back to front to avoid reach and knowing over stuff.
I read that some create a removable panel in the layout to work on in a large area. This is cool for an island or peninsula. The peson created it and hid it with scenery. Thoughts?
No matter how much time I spend on drawing plans, when it comes time to build it I almost always make changes. That's part of the reason I like flat-top construction and Kato Unitrack, I can run trains on the track and see what works and then easily change what doesn't.
A suggestion for the OP - maybe build the first section of the layout, like 42" by 72", and then lay some track and see what runs on those 18"R curves. I'd hate to see you spend a lot time building the entire layout as you describe it, and then go out and buy a $300 engine that it turns out can't work on those tight curves.
davidmurraySomeone earlier mentioned avoiding duckunders in case flexibility become a problem.
I have mentioned several times before, but worth bringing up again.
I am 53 years old, and the next layout should be my last. As such, it is designed with wheelchair access and durability in mind. You never know what the future will bring.