NVSRR Not doing duck unders since I do have back problems and now slight balance problems from a stroke. so lift sections or no sections at all.
Not doing duck unders since I do have back problems and now slight balance problems from a stroke. so lift sections or no sections at all.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrainThat makes Bear's first proposed track plan superior in many respects
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
Now, and don’t ask me why, I got the impression that the layout area was part of as larger basement and had access on at least, two sides, as peninsulas are space gobbling devices and require such access.
Bears first though of it being in a bigger space is correct. It sits in a 26 x 26 building. 15 x 15 is the dedicted space for the layout area. rest is workshop and storage. it does sit off the two walls by 2 feet. Stands alone,no wall supoport. The configuration can be shifted around as long as either the generl square footage of the areas are maintained or the layout design is smaller. doenst have to fill that whole area
SHane
A pessimist sees a dark tunnel
An optimist sees the light at the end of the tunnel
A realist sees a frieght train
An engineer sees three idiots standing on the tracks stairing blankly in space
NVSRR it does sit off the two walls by 2 feet.
If that's the case then why not JaBears 2nd plan modified to be a Z. Return loop in the NW and SE corner, wide benchwork along the north and south sides and diagonal NE to SW middle bench. You don't operate it from the "inside" you operate it from the "outside". All the benchwork has a backdrop down the middle with a scene on either side.
You get continuous running with no duckunders, you get visually "pure" scenes. If you make the benchwork on the straights a series of sections, one for each "side", then the layout could be disassembled and possibly reconfigured as an around the walls layout later.
Everybody will tell you an around the wall layout is better, but you aren't doing that in the first place, so it doesn't matter. You are building an island, leverage the strengths of an island layout to your advantage.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
dehusman NVSRR it does sit off the two walls by 2 feet. If that's the case then why not JaBears 2nd plan modified to be a Z. Return loop in the NW and SE corner, wide benchwork along the north and south sides and diagonal NE to SW middle bench. You don't operate it from the "inside" you operate it from the "outside". All the benchwork has a backdrop down the middle with a scene on either side. You get continuous running with no duckunders, you get visually "pure" scenes. If you make the benchwork on the straights a series of sections, one for each "side", then the layout could be disassembled and possibly reconfigured as an around the walls layout later. Everybody will tell you an around the wall layout is better, but you aren't doing that in the first place, so it doesn't matter. You are building an island, leverage the strengths of an island layout to your advantage.
I agree! With no walls, I would also do a Z shaped, self-standing layout. Bonus: if you move, you can probably take it with you without too much damage, if you plan it that way. A coal mine at one end (in montainous scenery), and industry/yard at the other end. I wish I had space to do that...
Simon
NVSRR Bears first though of it being in a bigger space is correct. It sits in a 26 x 26 building. 15 x 15 is the dedicted space for the layout area. rest is workshop and storage. it does sit off the two walls by 2 feet. Stands alone,no wall supoport. The configuration can be shifted around as long as either the generl square footage of the areas are maintained or the layout design is smaller. doenst have to fill that whole area SHane
26' x 9' would make a much better layout.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRAL 26' x 9' would make a much better layout.
dehusman NVSRR it does sit off the two walls by 2 feet. If that's the case then why not JaBears 2nd plan modified to be a Z. Return loop in the NW and SE corner, wide benchwork along the north and south sides and diagonal NE to SW middle bench. You don't operate it from the "inside" you operate it from the "outside". All the benchwork has a backdrop down the middle with a scene on either side.
Can someone draw it?
richhotrainI am having a difficult time visualing this proposed Z-layout. Can someone draw it?
Thanks, Bear. I appreciate the effort.
The first drawing baffles me somewhat in that it just seems to be a sort of deformed oval. What's the advantage over prior drawings?
The second drawing is very similar to Bear's earlier drawing, and I remain convinced that it is superior in all respects. The earlier drawing made provision to choose to enter or bypass the peninsula, adding interest to the layout.
It seems to me that a square footprint limits the opportunities to add interest to what otherwise becomes a circular layout for all practical purposes. While the overall square footage is decent at 200 square feet (14' x 14.5'), some sort of rectangular footprint would provide more opportunities for sidings and spurs. I think that is what Sheldon had in mind when he mused over a possible 26' x 9' footprint.
Okay, there is more space than I thought. Apparently, there can be aisles on the outside of the layout all the way around.
- Douglas
Where is the door entering this room?
If there is access around the whole outside, this is possibly an ideal candidate for a "mushroom" type layout i.e. access to the outside lower level, with "inside" access to an elevated upper level. Of course this would entail a significant degree of complexity. I would also consider a dogbone with "blobs" on each end of a double track mainline. The space for the yard is inadequate - barely 5' straight if the minimum curve radius is considered, and this will be eaten up by the ladder(s). The yard needs most of an entire wall or possibly something along the diagonal something like 10' long as a minimum. What train lengths are going to be run?
We all forgot something. the layout stands two feet off two walls. that makes the spaces 16 x 16 or 150 sqft.
I went back over to the building to measure where the door is even though sticking to the 150 sqft means the layout can be positioned to completely avoide the door no matter the spape of the layout.
I realized the waste of space. If i move the workbench next to the spray both then move the stored largescale (when not in use outside) where the work bench was, i now have half the building for layout space. a whole 21x10 area. effectively splitting the building in half the same way my grandfather hadf when he built it for storage and his large layout in 65. that space at two levels is quite large indeed. I do not need to use it all though.
I was originally looking to review this decision of do I start over or keep going. in 10 years. the existing layout would be 23 by that time. but the stroke made me think now is better since 10 years from now i might not be able to build a new one. or afford it. If I go that route. helth says a no ductunder deisgn might be far better than working with the current deign. .
Bear's one design kind of creates four different areas though.
Shane
16' x 16' = 256 sq. Ft.
If it were me, I would go for that 21' x 10' space.
richhotrain I am having a difficult time visualing this proposed Z-layout. Can someone draw it? I thought I could but… Apologies to Dave H, I’m not trying to “take the mickey!” Shane Rev2 by Bear, on Flickr Shane Rev3 by Bear, on Flickr I fear that I’m providing a “How to not plan a Layout” tutorial. Cheers, the Bear. P.S. Perhaps I should stick to colouring in books and try to keep the crayon within the lines!
richhotrain I am having a difficult time visualing this proposed Z-layout. Can someone draw it?
Shane Rev2 by Bear, on Flickr
Shane Rev3 by Bear, on Flickr
I like both of these, but the same concept applied to the 21' x 10' space would be even better. urban on one side, rural on the other, some staging could be hidden in the middle.
I have designed several large "island" layouts for others, they all turned out nice.
One more general comment - 30" aisles are not acceptable to me.
If I follow the 21 x 10. I could have zero isles. No duck understand either. With a a dog bone that has one side mostly hidden as to appear to be a single main in a roral area going point to point
shane
You certainly have a lot of space to play with. That leaves you with many options, as you have heard from many members. My advice would be to look at the MR track plan database, or purchase one or two books on designs (Kalmbach has a few "101" plans books). Consider your preferences (era, industry, rolling stock), and see what fits. When I designed my plan, I got a lot of inspiration from these books.
A dogbone design inherently puts access problems into the two turnback lobes unless you have access on all four sides. Even if one lobe is up against a wall, there is still an access issue there, especially if you use broader curves (which makes the lobe bigger).
You can install an access hole into the middel of the large lobe. The hole can be concealed by a backdrop that's installed in front of the hole but set back 30 inches from the edge. It would sort of bisect the lobe diagonally. Behind the backdrop would be the access hole and even a good start on a staging yard, since that portion would be unscenicked.
But you would still want access behind the long straightaway. You could scenic a part of that straightaway if your staging was largely contained within that one lobe.
The shape of the layout also might depend on what you want to run/model. A C-shaped layout with a 15 x 15 footprint that had access all around and backdrops in the center (like Bear's design) would give you the potential for the most scenes. But each scene would be relatively short and half of them would be very curvy. Probably a good choice for a 1950's coal hauler. Not so much for a midwest grainger or even passenger ops, IMO. Just tossing out some concepts to mix and match with layout shape.
I realized this is mostly a health decision. Really. With this stroke, I am recovering good but the damage is done. What if another comes along, how will accessibility. And just general abilities be. I decided to take the 12 year old layout down redesign to something more friendly to potential handicap. Plus I have learned along via internet that wasn't around 12 years ago when this one was designed. Off to start the process. First the list of industries and such plus looking over track arrangements and track plans. See what might work, and what won't. See if bear's ideas work
Which of Bear's options will you choose?
richhotrainWhich of Bear's options will you choose?
richhotrain Which of Bear's options will you choose? I wouldn’t be offended if none were. It was a useful exercise for me.
richhotrain Which of Bear's options will you choose?
And maybe Bear would have some ideas on a 21 x 10 space too.
It looks like Shane is not going to tell us.
I think something was said earlier about a door along the long wall limiting that space to 21'?
So if we can use the "public" space as a front aisle and as the aisle by the door, I would build a 19' long x 6' wide layout with a backdrop down the middle. The mainline could loop twice around and part of it could disapear into some thru staging.
That is an 80' mainline run that could have 32" or 34" radius curves, a nice yard for 12-15 car trains and similar hidden staging. No duck unders, no hard to reach areas.
And 3' scene depth is a great for good appearance and room for industies , etc.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL I think something was said earlier about a door along the long wall limiting that space to 21'? So if we can use the "public" space as a front aisle and as the aisle by the door, I would build a 19' long x 6' wide layout with a backdrop down the middle. The mainline could loop twice around and part of it could disapear into some thru staging. That is an 80' mainline run that could have 32" or 34" radius curves, a nice yard for 12-15 car trains and similar hidden staging. No duck unders, no hard to reach areas. And 3' scene depth is a great for good appearance and room for industies , etc. Sheldon
Agreed, that shape would be high on my list, especially if access inside the room is needed for other things. The long backdrop provides the well-defined scene separation you want. It sort of replaces the sheer distance that other layout shapes need for that separation.
And there are no access issues for a person who might have mobility challenges.
Doughless ATLANTIC CENTRAL I think something was said earlier about a door along the long wall limiting that space to 21'? So if we can use the "public" space as a front aisle and as the aisle by the door, I would build a 19' long x 6' wide layout with a backdrop down the middle. The mainline could loop twice around and part of it could disapear into some thru staging. That is an 80' mainline run that could have 32" or 34" radius curves, a nice yard for 12-15 car trains and similar hidden staging. No duck unders, no hard to reach areas. And 3' scene depth is a great for good appearance and room for industies , etc. Sheldon Agreed, that shape would be high on my list, especially if access inside the room is needed for other things. The long backdrop provides the well-defined scene separation you want. It sort of replaces the sheer distance that other layout shapes need for that separation. And there are no access issues for a person who might have mobility challenges.
I have designed several "island" trpe layuts like that for others. They all turned out nice.