Well, it's been awhile since I have posted on this forum. You know, summer comes around and I get interested in getting outside, sports, and hobby wise my R/C warbirds. I'm sure many of you have a similar story.
I decided to tear down my first layout a few days ago. I just wanted to do something different and try something else. I would tell you what most people would, that the layout will come back "bigger and better," but instead I will tell you it will be "smaller but definitely better for me." I had built an L-Shaped layout, 12 x 8 size-wise. In the end, I found that the layout was just too much. It was too difficult for me to get the level of detail and quality that I wanted with the size of the layout, among other things.
So, I have decided to build a smaller but highly detailed Railroad. I was looking at some of the 4 x 8 Model Railroader project layouts, and Dave Vollmer's beautiful PRR layout, and I got inspired. I would rather have a layout that size with that level of detail and craftmanship then a larger layout that still needs details here, scenery work there, etc.
I started ripping out the trackwork, setting the structures to the side, gathering up any usable details, scenery, etc. and you know what? It wasn't that hard to do. In 30 minutes I had most of it pulled up. I guess it helps to simply use latex caulk to secure track and structures.
Here are some photos of my 1st layout, now ripped up. Don't mind the old 70's rolling stock in a couple of pictures, I had found them in an old box of my Grandfathers and simply set them on the layout to see how they ran. I'll post some pics of the ripped up layout later.
... not at all bad looking - in fact, it shows a lot of craftsmanship. I am eager to see your new layout - keep us posted!
TA462 agree, other then your choice of track.
What's wrong with my track? I understand, Unitrack is the best sectional stuff you can get, but it still isn't flex or something like that. I will tell you though that you can't beat it for reliability. I think the Kato switches are one of the best in the business. But, to be fair, with some work (like ballasting the sides of the Unitrack) you can make it look really good. I just never got around to that.
The only bad thing about ripping up a foam layout is all the foam mess you get, and trying to figure out what to do with the pieces. One of the tables I have is a simple 4 x 8 design from the WGH magazine I got years ago, and I'm going to go to my local hobby shop and tell them to keep their eyes open for someone that could use it. Maybe for a child's first layout, or just someone local interested in diving into model railroading.
NYC1:
Nice layout! It looked good. In fact, you've got a couple of scenes there that could have easily gone into Trackside Photos. Put your best engine in the foreground with a couple of cars (make sure the first few are your better ones; the rest won't be very visible), arrange some sort of scene and a sky backdrop, take a good photo from a low angle with good lighting and you'd be surprised at just how good it all looked. (You could also pile a little loose ballast on the front side of the Unitrack, just for the photo.)
Have fun building the next one! It always is.
Well, here's the 1st step:
I use unitrack as well, I simply love it. Very reliable, easy to set up and take apart. I have never had a single derailment.
I think I will use unitrack for running trains on the carpet once I get a permanent layout, and use atlas code 100 on the table. But you are right, the problem with flex track is that its never as straight as Kato, curves can be unreliable if not set exactly right and atlas switches are pretty bad, whereas Kato's are amazing.
Plus with Kato unitrack, you don't have to do any measuring of pesky lines.
What I miss about atlas flex 100, is the putting down the fine ballast, 50/50 gray/cinders mix. It gives it that realistic dark, gritty appearance of ballast you can't really find in any pre ballasted plastic roadbeds.
However, I must say that Kato at least tries to do a good job of imitating ballast, unlike Bachmman EZ track.
The problem I have with using unitrack though is that it doesn't blend well with scenery, sort of sticks out a bit, but I guess I would rather have that as a beginner than have constant derailments due to my own poor track laying of the flex.
NYCentral1 Well, here's the 1st step:
Very nice, I see you brush painted the table black? Thats what I am thinking of doing.
rjake4454 Very nice, I see you brush painted the table black? Thats what I am thinking of doing.
Yeah, I didn't have a fascia, I just painted the side of the tables and the sides of the foam black. It wasn't perfect, but it looked ok.
I think you have the right idea, Dave Vollmer's layout has also inspired me to focus on detailing one section as much as possible, to create a realistic scenic view.
I am still deciding whether I shall simply focus my attention on one section of the table, or devote an entirely separate smaller table to realistic scenery, while keeping the standard table for simple operations on plywood, however unrealistic they may be. I also want the best of both worlds, steam, and electric, I don't know how to incorporate these two themes into one, but I wonder how one mixes gg1's with duplex engines? Thats why one of my tables might have to be dedicated to electrified territory near philly, the other to the western parts of PA.
Anyway, you're first layout already looked very good, like it was done by a pro. I hope your second table meets your expectations, good luck.
~G4
19 Years old, modeling the Cowlitz, Chehalis, and Cascade Railroad of Western Washington in 1927 in 6X6 feet.
That's the question most of us have to deal with. Quality vs. quantity and what is the right balance. There is no right answer. We have to decide that for ourselves. I went the other route. I've been working on a monster layout for over 7 years because I know what I want to do I just couldn't do in a small layout. That means accepting the "good enough" standard because I know if I tried make everything top drawer, I'd never get close to completing it. Even with the good enough approach, progress has been much slower than I had anticipated and it does get frustrating at times. I think I have reached the point where I can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. I'm close to getting the railroad completed to my satsifaction. I don't equate completed with finished. When I reach that point, I intend to go back and redo parts of the layout that I didn't do so well the first time around but I'll be able to do that at my leisure while having the large railroad that I have always wanted.
In your case, I wonder if you have considered building a series of highly detailed dioramas and when you get enough of them, stringing them together in a mid sized layout?
Be sure to recycle as much as you can. My current layout has some trees that once served as background trees when I was still in HO! I salvage EVERYTHING, every little detail...
I'm flattered and humbled that my tiny layout has inspired you. I will say, though, that smaller does not always mean interesting. You can detail a small layout to the extreme, but when it comes time to operate it like a real railroad, you may be disappointed. You'll notice I recently began a yard extension to try to alleviate the operational boredom.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
I didn't think this thread would show up on the first page again, but I actually started on my second layout about 3 weeks ago. I took some cues from your layout Dave (such as the overall style) and MRs Black River Junction and the Carolina Central trackplan.
It's 8' x 5' with a 2' x 4' extension for an industry, etc. This time I used Atlas track (better than what I used before) and really haven't had too hard of a time laying it and so far ballasting it. I reused most of my structures and several other things. I'll post some photos to WPF of my progress sometime soon. Thanks for the help and opinions everyone!