This is a first draft of a layout. The biggest problem I have is that I just can't picture the size--I mean those N thingies are itty bitty. The dimensions of the layout is 3 x 7--and I'm not married to that size. The main purpose of this layout is for rail-fanning while I figure out what I'm going to do with my basement.
The layout is modern Buffalo & Pittsburgh coal country. But the B&P hauls lumber and does locals.
I picture the bottom half of the layout as a hillside coal operation. The top half is industrial/rural switching. I have a couple factories, a freight dock and a junkyard. I don't have to use them. There is no backdrop down the middle, but the hillside will prevent seeing the one side seeing the other.
The top two tracks are kinda sorta visible staging. I would not be opposed to dropping down a level for off table staging.
I'll take any and all suggestions.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
SpaceMouse wrote: This is a first draft of a layout. The biggest problem I have is that I just can't picture the size--I mean those N thingies are itty bitty. The dimensions of the layout is 3 x 7--and I'm not married to that size. The main purpose of this layout is for rail-fanning while I figure out what I'm going to do with my basement.The layout is modern Buffalo & Pittsburgh coal country. But the B&P hauls lumber and does locals. I picture the bottom half of the layout as a hillside coal operation. The top half is industrial/rural switching. I have a couple factories, a freight dock and a junkyard. I don't have to use them. There is no backdrop down the middle, but the hillside will prevent seeing the one side seeing the other. The top two tracks are kinda sorta visible staging. I would not be opposed to dropping down a level for off table staging.I'll take any and all suggestions.
Since it will be a two sided layout, and it will be all that you have for a year or so; I would suggest that you take that second track down and make it into another loop. This will give you a double main line and let you have one train run in circles while you switch with another. I think that having two trains in operation at the same time will greatly increase the interest factor.
Spacemouse!
Welcome to the dark side! Another convert!
I think Alan might be onto something. Since space is not an issue you might even increase it a half a foot to accomodate the new loop and not look to cramed in there.
Can you believe I just said that? I mean, add 6" so it doesn't look cramed! Try that in HO!
pcarrell wrote: Spacemouse!Welcome to the dark side! Another convert!
Dark side? Just because they are small and known to be infectious doesn't make them dark, it makes them more like a virus or E. coli.
Okay, here's another stab at it. I've completely re-envisioned what I want from the layout and it has grown to 4 x 8. It is no longer a B&P layout. It is now present day NS with Conrail leasing with Conrail switchers. I left the mine in, but now it is abandoned. This is more what I conceive of as "my style" in terms of operations.
The problem is now it is more of a longer-term project and too expensive to be a temporary gig. Also, it won't fit anywhere when I start with the basement gig.
SpaceMouse wrote: Okay, here's another stab at it. I've completely re-envisioned what I want from the layout and it has grown to 4 x 8. It is no longer a B&P layout. It is now present day NS with Conrail leasing with Conrail switchers. I left the mine in, but now it is abandoned. This is more what I conceive of as "my style" in terms of operations. The problem is now it is more of a longer-term project and too expensive to be a temporary gig. Also, it won't fit anywhere when I start with the basement gig.
Now I am confused. Do you want a relatively inexpensive short-term/portable/moveable layout or do you want something more permanent?
Alan_B wrote:Now I am confused. Do you want a relatively inexpensive short-term/portable/moveable layout or do you want something more permanent?
Alan,
You should see it from inside my head.
I'd like the 4x8 design in the 3 x 7 space and not have it cost so much. Something has to give, I know.
SpaceMouse wrote: Alan_B wrote:Now I am confused. Do you want a relatively inexpensive short-term/portable/moveable layout or do you want something more permanent?Alan,You should see it from inside my head. I'd like the 4x8 design in the 3 x 7 space and not have it cost so much. Something has to give, I know.
Go back to the original; add the second main. This will give you the 3 x7. Any additions or changes will then have to be inside the loops. You can change the inside to give you a good sized yard or just have the original industires.
What is the radius on the ends anyhow ?
Alan_B wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: Alan_B wrote:Now I am confused. Do you want a relatively inexpensive short-term/portable/moveable layout or do you want something more permanent?Alan,You should see it from inside my head. I'd like the 4x8 design in the 3 x 7 space and not have it cost so much. Something has to give, I know.The radii are 15. I'm working on a little grander plan that can have a better life expectancy. I'll post it whe I get her done. Go back to the original; add the second main. This will give you the 3 x7. Any additions or changes will then have to be inside the loops. You can change the inside to give you a good sized yard or just have the original industires.What is the radius on the ends anyhow ?
The radii are 15. I'm working on a little grander plan that can have a better life expectancy. I'll post it whe I get her done.
(this probably belongs as much with your post on the main board as here)
You are in a good spot to make a new start - you really haven't invested much at this point for your grand scheme for the full basement layout. It's good to see you playing with alternatives to your HO logging idea. It might be a good time to sit down and really decide if that is for you - since this 'temporary' N scale idea seems to be growing and growing. I'd consider N scale myself but I have quite a bit invested in locos and rollign stock that go with my grand scheme.
As mentioned in the other thread, you could even do your original idea, but in N scale - in the same space you could have much longer runs, wider (relative to the equipment) curve radius, and a much higher scenery to track ratio. And probably have more aisle space at the same time.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Greetings to you from "next door" in Cambria County.
Since you're in a way, thinking out loud, I thought a couple N Scale websites presented in that same way might be helpful:
[1] You are probably aware of Dave Vollmer's Pennsy Middle Division on a door and foamboard base which is fully portable at http://kc.pennsyrr.com/layouts/dvollmer/index.html
[2] Spookshow's website at http://www.visi.com/~spookshow/trainstuff.html brings quite a refreshing perspective with N Scale project railroads that are roughly the same size that you are planning, and Spookshow's writing style is very thinking out loud.
Also, I just picked up the 223 page "N Scale Model Railroading" by Robert Schleicher on eBay for apx. $10.00 (2000 retail at $23.95). The project railroads are generally smaller, like one that's 6' x 6', and; while some information might be basic for you, the material covered is N Scale specific with that N Scale approach to things.
http://index.mrmag.com/tm.exe?opt=I&MAG=BOOK&MO=7&YR=2000&output=5
Personally, I'm taking my good 'ole time preparing a 9' x' 9' trainroom, and slowly designing an N Scale interurban line interchanging with a 1956 Pennsy mainline. Slow but sure progress is good progress.
From what I've seen of your posts at this forum, you'll be able to apply your model railroading common sense in short order. So, my read is that you've already got a lot on the ball. Your grasp of DCC is light years ahead of most of us, and you'll do just fine once you zero in on some of the subtle differences of going into N Scale.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
tgindy wrote:Since you're in a way, thinking out loud, I thought a couple N Scale websites presented in that same way might be helpful:
I am kinda thinking out loud. I figured as long as I was going to go bigger and more expensive than I could afford, I'd see what would happen if I put it where I had planned to put my saw mill.
The ten tracks on the lower right are visible staging, but you have to go off the layout through the wall and back in to get to them. The five tracks neared the wall are a level higher than the ones to the immediate right of them. The top ones higher loop and then to the two tracks along the top of the drawing and they can go in either direction.
The lower tracks go to the lower loop then to the tracks that head immediately to the yard. I just realized I could simplify the staging exchange quite a bit.
I forgot to add my passing track along the top.
It is still NS and Conrail current time. This has become a several year project and doesn't make sense since I already have 20 or so craftsman structures in HO as well as all my rolling stock.
I keep getting ideas and then shotting them down myself.
Chip, at this point, if you would like to be able to reorient trains, the only thing I would encourage you to consider in the way of additions to this plan (which looks fine to me) is a turning wye. For example, at centre right, inside the oval, you have a curved track that would meet the diagonal to its right if you were to extend it another 12". If you could loosen the curve and actually cross that diagonal higher, that would be your main leg of the wye. Add a turnout just outside the cross-over, and you can commence to turn toward the lower tracks, maybe meet the inner lead, and you can turn trains.
Not sure if this is helpful, or if it even adds any oomph for you, but what you have seems good.
-Crandell
Thanks Crandell,
That's a 2% grade right there, but I can turn trains, both the upper and lower level at the left.
Thanks to everyone that has gotten me this far.
It's come full circle. The larger layout was just too big. It would have cost more than doing something big in my old west theme. I've returned to the smaller size 3 x 7, because of cost and because I don't know if I'll be able to model these itty bitty things. If I can, it opens up a whole new world for the basement design.
This layout is mostly about the classification yard and railfanning through the mountains. I'd like to have more car spotting, but there is enough movement in spotting trains. I'd also like to work an Amtrak station in, but the one in Johnstown is underground with a platform that pops up between the eastbound and westbound mainline tracks. I'll probably do that.
I think it works. I can tighten it up by cutting down the turnouts. I'm still having some trouble visualizing size, especially the buildings and streets and stuff. I may just leave that area till last or spot the buildings and figure out how to get the trains in later.
Without further adeu...
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
As you know I've been modeling yesteryear. So I've not had to deal with such mundane questions as things like roads, etc.
Roads: It seems that There would not be any roads leading in or out of a yard that would cross over a double main and a yard lead. What I thought I'd do is bring in the roads via a tunnel.
Power: I may be wrong, but I don't think I need electrical poles along the tracks in the mountain road. However, I'll need power in the town. How do I determine where the poles go?
Signals: Where would I put signals and is there a special type that NS would use?
What else am I not thinking of. Think basic. I've been modeling the stone age of railroading.
Harold (hminky), from this forum, models your time period in a different scale. He has a great website with lots of ideas and tutorials. Check it out: http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/
Also, you're going to need horses and all the stuff that goes with them. Out houses are in the cards too. Many towns of the period, whether east or west, had boardwalks so the ladies could get around without getting all muddy. Speaking of that, victorian clothing was "in". Wells Fargo stage coaches took care of bank supplies and the pony express did the mail.
I'm sure there's plenty more to think about, but thats a good start.
pcarrell wrote: Harold (hminky), from this forum, models your time period in a different scale. He has a great website with lots of ideas and tutorials. Check it out: http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/Also, you're going to need horses and all the stuff that goes with them. Out houses are in the cards too. Many towns of the period, whether east or west, had boardwalks so the ladies could get around without getting all muddy. Speaking of that, victorian clothing was "in". Wells Fargo stage coaches took care of bank supplies and the pony express did the mail.I'm sure there's plenty more to think about, but thats a good start.
Sorry if I misrepresented myself. The N-scale layout will be modern NS with Conrail Switching. I know how (at least how I do it) to model the Old West.
SpaceMouse wrote:This layout is mostly about the classification yard and railfanning through the mountains. I'd like to have more car spotting, but there is enough movement in spotting trains. I'd also like to work an Amtrak station in, but the one in Johnstown is underground with a platform that pops up between the eastbound and westbound mainline tracks. I'll probably do that.
I'm also using the Johnstown Pennsy Passenger Station (circa 1956) as a guideline for passenger interchange. The Green Max N Guage Structure Kit Series No. 15 has the perfect platform with steps going down, as in the prototype, to the pedestrian tunnel between the station & platform steps "under 50%" of the mainline. It includes the steps, a bench, water fountain, and small weather enclosure. This platform has a footprint of 7 3/4" x 1 3/8" and the detail is exquisite.
I'm looking forward to see how you model the elevation difference from the station to the top of the passenger platform at the mainline.
In my case, the free-lanced interurban traction line will let off passengers at the front or side of the station alongside Greyhound passengers.
Just a little thought...
Are you thinking of incorporating this layout into a larger layout someday? Or, will there be an implied interchange with another railroad?
tgindy wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: This layout is mostly about the classification yard and railfanning through the mountains. I'd like to have more car spotting, but there is enough movement in spotting trains. I'd also like to work an Amtrak station in, but the one in Johnstown is underground with a platform that pops up between the eastbound and westbound mainline tracks. I'll probably do that. I'm also using the Johnstown Pennsy Passenger Station (circa 1956) as a guideline for passenger interchange. The Green Max N Guage Structure Kit Series No. 15 has the perfect platform with steps going down, as in the prototype, to the pedestrian tunnel between the station & platform steps "under 50%" of the mainline. It includes the steps, a bench, water fountain, and small weather enclosure. This platform has a footprint of 7 3/4" x 1 3/8" and the detail is exquisite.I'm looking forward to see how you model the elevation difference from the station to the top of the passenger platform at the mainline.In my case, the free-lanced interurban traction line will let off passengers at the front or side of the station alongside Greyhound passengers. Just a little thought...Are you thinking of incorporating this layout into a larger layout someday? Or, will there be an implied interchange with another railroad?By the way, your the yard throat, yard ladder, the curved switch-backs are clean, and; eliminates many of the unneeded yard-turnout "s-curves" you might see on other plans.
SpaceMouse wrote: This layout is mostly about the classification yard and railfanning through the mountains. I'd like to have more car spotting, but there is enough movement in spotting trains. I'd also like to work an Amtrak station in, but the one in Johnstown is underground with a platform that pops up between the eastbound and westbound mainline tracks. I'll probably do that.
By the way, your the yard throat, yard ladder, the curved switch-backs are clean, and; eliminates many of the unneeded yard-turnout "s-curves" you might see on other plans.
Thanks for the tip. I'll keep an eye out for that structure.
As for the compliment in yard lead, thanks. I had that in mind when I designed it. I wish I could have done as well with the cross-overs on the main. I'll have to do some research and see if there are any premade crossovers that smooth that up a bit. I may just have to post a speed limit there.