Engi1487 My goal in the long run is to have a layout with radious curves around 40' and 42' curves as I really like the realistic look trains have on realistic curves, with their front couplers being perfectly center on the track, rather they swaying outward and long freight curves that dont look like they are swaying over the track sides or extending outwards too much.
i think the above desire is unrealistic in a 14x17' space
while estimating what you need (or want) may be interesting, i think recognizing what you can do with what you have is essential
i think it will be less frustring to recognize what you can do with the space you have and limit the size of locomotives, passenger cars and trains that fit the space.
Outsailing86John Armstrong Sketching with Squares is what you are looking for.
bears repeating
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
Estimating the layout space you truly need, rather than want?
That's the title to this thread, but I don't know what it means.
Estimate the layout space you truly need? My basement measures 60' x 34'. That's what I need.
A 100' x 100' outbuilding. That's what I want.
A model railroader is incapable of estimating the layout space that he truly needs. How would you calculate that?
A large layout? Be careful what you wish for. I started out in 2004 with a 4'x 8' layout - - a simple oval. I needed more. So, it quickly became a 12' x 8' layout with two pop up holes in the middle. I needed more.
Fast forward to today. My space is 42' x 25'. It has taken me 3 years to demolish the old and build the new. It is too big. I cannot manage it. I have way more locomotives and rolling stock than I can operate as a lone wolf. I am constantly selling off like new equipment because I cannot use it.
I find myself currently planning my next layout which will be a downsized 24' x 12'. There will be few turnouts and lots of hidden staging. The 130' turntable and 9-stall roundhouse will be eliminated. The 10-track downtown passenger station will be a thing of the past. No freight yards or coach yards. Gone will be the engine servicing facility. No spurs, no sidings.
My objective will be to sit on a chair, beer in hand, and watch trains run. My current layout is designed for operations, but I lack the desire or motivation to conduct operations.
A large layout? Be careful what you wish for.
Rich
Alton Junction
Great stuff everyone! Starting small is the right way to go and then building up. I did that on my 1st layout and the 2nd one is much easier to handle. There's no way I could avoid feeling intimidated with the size of the 2nd had I not followed this approach.
Building the layout to accoodate your needs is paramount. The time, money, energy spent on it is worth the joy of seeing young kids marvel at the work. Seeing another's jaw drop when you show them your work makes the effort worthwhile.
Talk can walk but you walked that talk. Impressive! That looks great Rio. You should be proud of your achievements thus far
TF
Onewolfhat's why God invented unfinished basements.
Thank God I don't live in California anymore, as much as I miss it.
In model train layout design there is only "want". There is no "need". I think I heard Yoda say that.
So true! I used to work for a government agency and one of the government employee's had this tag in every email sent:
"There is no try, only do!" - Yoda
If you want 40+" radius curves and a long mainline run, then you are going to WANT a large space. My current layout (being disassembled as we speak) is in a 28x32 ft space but I had to go to 3 levels to get the broad curves (40"+) and long mainline run (500+ ft) that I WANTED.
I wanted 40+" curves too, but in the high cost of living area the best my wife could find me was the basment which we finished ourselves in the photo's above - an odd shaped space about 15x33 (excluding the far room by the walk-up doors). But I also wanted a "decent" mainline run so I had to settle for 32" minimum curves, although they only come down to 32" in 2 spots and a bit larger elsewhere, mostly in the 34 to 46 inch radius range.
This is mostly a single level but a large staging yard under the main yard and a branch-line below the mainline (partial 2-deck?). I wanted to keep it "managable" due to my lack of hobby time as the house is a fixerupper and my wife has ongoing plans.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
What layout builder never wanted more space? I'm not saying that no one is happy with what space they have. I am saying that each of us - secretly or not - has imagined what they would do with more room.
Who hasn't lusted for a long staging area, or turntable facilities, or that long main, or an "off the main" logging or mining sub, etc., etc.?
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
Smon' suggestions should be listened to.
I was building a large layout. A few times along the way, I paused briefly to look at how much I'd done and how long it took. I found that long-term I spent about a month to do one square foot of layout. That's everything, from benchwork to buildings, building kits, laying track, wiring, the whole kit and kaboodle. Time was everything, too, grocery shopping, raising a daughter, going to work, skiing, bicycling and all.
This, for me, was more of a retrospective analysis, because I thought I'd have my first 5x12 foot layout section pretty complete and presentable in 7 or 8 months, when in reality it took 5 years.
Other than having to sell the house and move away, this kind of worked fine for me. I never got to the point of being tired of the layout or the hobby. I always had more to do.
But, carefully consider how much time you will have to spend, and how much you want to spend on layout building. I built my layout in sections which I pretty much finished before starting another section. Each section carried with it a satisfaction of completion.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
First question: Are you planning in staying in that location in the long term? Building something to fill that space would take years for a typical model railroader. If not, consider a smalling portable layout.
Assuming you are staying there for a long time, I would approach it incrementaly, like Wayne suggests, but perhaps starting with a small dog bone shape, with a plan to expand. DO the large plan to see how it can be expanded, but consider building the dog bone first to get you going. The dog bone does not need to stay in its integrity in the final plan - part of it can be dismantled at some point in the expansion. Planning is the secret and the loop will keep you motivated. I for one needed to see trains running fairly quickly as fixing old locos is my favorite part of the hobby.
Anyway, that's my two cents worth.
Simon
Engi1487 I understand that this might be a difficult approch to estimating what space you truly need rather then want, as your livng space determines that, and when house searching for a sutable spare space that can be difficult as well, as for ever model railroader spare space is a highight.
I understand that this might be a difficult approch to estimating what space you truly need rather then want, as your livng space determines that, and when house searching for a sutable spare space that can be difficult as well, as for ever model railroader spare space is a highight.
That's why God invented unfinished basements.
Modeling an HO gauge freelance version of the Union Pacific Oregon Short Line and the Utah Railway around 1957 in a world where Pirates from the Great Salt Lake founded Ogden, UT.
- Photo album of layout construction -
angelob6660 It's the matter of overhang. In the beginning of railroad planning I wanted no overhang. The main reason was passenger operations. So as time went by I realized/ noticed I don't really need broader curves passed the 17" radius. As long as I don't need to expand the couplers on the locomotive to the freight cars I'll be fine. Second somehow I don't noticed the overhang on 89' flatcars with trailers and I do notice it on auto racks. Not as much on Superliners.
I was curious because I will have enough Kato models to build a prototypical Amtrak California Zephyr in N scale: 2 F40PH's, 2 baggage cars, 1 ex-El Capitan transition coach and 11 Superliner cars.
jmbraddock Another consideration in how much space you need, and it is often overlooked until too late, is how much space can you maintain? Do you have the stamina, will power, time and finances to build the layout you want, regardless of the size of the space available. How often do we hear of layouts that never got finished because it turned out to be more than the owner could handle?
Another consideration in how much space you need, and it is often overlooked until too late, is how much space can you maintain?
Do you have the stamina, will power, time and finances to build the layout you want, regardless of the size of the space available.
How often do we hear of layouts that never got finished because it turned out to be more than the owner could handle?
Or enough time. I keep hitting the wall trying to build my 15x33 HO layout because my wife always has a long list of house projects whicn never ends. I've gotten about 8 or 9 months of some partial weekends out of the past 18 months.
I started out with about 1200 square feet, but other family considerations quickly whittled that down to about 560sq. ft., in an unusually shaped room with 10 corners...
My original track plan, simply a sketch, was tossed and I moved the already started benchwork into the new room.I continued building benchwork and open grid tabletops until it circled the room, then cut 2 or 3 sheets of 3/4" plywood into arcs of varying radii, from 30" up to 48".Next, I joined those pieces together, and chose the largest arcs that would fit into each corner, leaving room for scenery and unknown structures, where possible.
After that, all that was left to do was simply connect the curves with straight-ish track. In my opinion, the layout is much better and more interesting than the one sketched out for the entire basement.
Wayne
SeeYou190 angelob6660 I wanted to run prototypical Amtrak Superliner trains. They said 15" was fine in N Scale. I bought a circle of track and realize they were wrong, you still had overhang. By reading more it states that I would need like 22-24" or more radius curve and bigger turnouts for the passenger diagrams. My dream house N scale layout had 30" minimum radius and one 180 degree turn was 72" radius. My next HO layout will have much tighter curves than this! Space available rules the curves. -Kevin
angelob6660 I wanted to run prototypical Amtrak Superliner trains. They said 15" was fine in N Scale. I bought a circle of track and realize they were wrong, you still had overhang. By reading more it states that I would need like 22-24" or more radius curve and bigger turnouts for the passenger diagrams.
My dream house N scale layout had 30" minimum radius and one 180 degree turn was 72" radius.
My next HO layout will have much tighter curves than this! Space available rules the curves.
-Kevin
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
riogrande5761 Wait. you say with 15" Superliners were wrong on those curves. Yet later you say - 15" will do fine with Superliners, Auto Racks, and 89' flatcars. ?
Wait. you say with 15" Superliners were wrong on those curves. Yet later you say - 15" will do fine with Superliners, Auto Racks, and 89' flatcars. ?
angelob6660I wanted to run prototypical Amtrak Superliner trains. They said 15" was fine in N Scale. I bought a circle of track and realize they were wrong, you still had overhang. By reading more it states that I would need like 22-24" or more radius curve and bigger turnouts for the passenger diagrams.
Living the dream.
I wanted to run prototypical Amtrak Superliner trains. They said 15" was fine in N Scale. I bought a circle of track and realize they were wrong, you still had overhang. By reading more it states that I would need like 22-24" or more radius curve and bigger turnouts for the passenger diagrams.
I have the space or desire to expand the curve radius pass 18". 15" will do fine with Superliners, Auto Racks, and 89' flatcars.
Size means nothing.
I have had five layouts in two scales. I did not enjoy largest one the most or the smallest the least.
For this, I would say the John Armstrong Sketching with Squares is what you are looking for. 14*12=168"
for the two quarter circles, subtract 2*42" = 84" curve
168"-84"=84"
84"-(2*6") = 72" (6" edge of layout to curve)
so you would have 72" (6') of tangent between curves in your around the walls layout
In the hobby of model railroading ones spare living space determines what size of layout that they can design, work with and build. However even those with large enough spaces, dont have to design large layouts as they can be hard to maintain with so much space and track to paintain that comes with a larger layout.However how could one, estimate or plan a layout that fits their needs, as well as what space they would need and could work with, even if they dont have the space they truly want to accomplish it, or are just not sure?For example, my space avaible is 14' x 17' but there is a starwell and door next to it, and a wall that needs to be taken out. It will be renoed in the future so making a layout isnt the top priotiy. My goal in the long run is to have a layout with radious curves around 40' and 42' curves as I really like the realistic look trains have on realistic curves, with their front couplers being perfectly center on the track, rather they swaying outward and long freight curves that dont look like they are swaying over the track sides or extending outwards too much. I understand that this might be a difficult approch to estimating what space you truly need rather then want, as your livng space determines that, and when house searching for a sutable spare space that can be difficult as well, as for ever model railroader spare space is a highight.