How does one come up with a layout idea?

[Greg H.]

I imagine the original publisher or author chose the name to ride the coattails of Kalmbach's better-known book.

Paul's right, this is not really a practical buildable track plan, it's more like a schematic. Some of the grades will be quite problematic.

Moreover, it's from a copyrighted work (even though it is out of print), so you should probably remove the image from your post.

With that said, the breaks in the track are denoting where one track passes beneath another.

The problem in this case may not be any failing in your imagination, rather the limitations of the original plan.

I am planning to remove it, just right now it's serving a educational purpose, which is alowed under copyright law.

I think I said that I was planning to eliminate most of the turnouts making it one some what complex loop - if I didn't say that, that's what I intended - my bad if I didn't.

Here is what I was thinking ( pardon the mess - I don't do paint very well ):

You see how I was saying that it sugested winding through or around mountians?

I don't know if the modified plan is any better - it's not like I planning the curves to be exacly as printed - if I can ever master XTrackCAD, I plan on easments.

[Greg H.]

I will admit that my dream layout, will eventualy combine the Tehachapi Loop with the canyon streach of RR along side I-70 east of Glenwood Springs, plus a few other places

That is quite a night and day combination.

I never said that it made sense, but, I think you can see why I said that I don't have the space to do it.

I'm fairly flexable as to the era - 1930 to modern, but, sooner or later I am going to put a Big Boy or Challanger on the layout so generious curves are a good thing.

If that is really true why be so flexible.  Lock yourself into the Supersteam / Transition era right now.  Then you won't waste money on stuff that will eventually be anacronstic to your ultimate layout.  Of course, I don't understand how this equipment choice matches with your scenery choice.  D&RGW Challengers went through Glenwood Canyon, but a Big Boy never got close to either of those two scenery choices.  If you really want to model Big Boys plan on modeling the UP or a UP freelance and start researching Sherman Hill.  I think you will find it just as interesting as the Tehapachi Loop.

If the Tehapachi Loop is most important think and you want big steam consider the SP cab forward articulateds 4-6-6-2s & 4-8-8-2s.   Very interesting and impressive locomotives.

Tehapachi Loop is not that important - I have only seen the area once when I was a kid - OTOH, I see the section of RR along side 1-70 east of Glenwood Springs every couple of years when I drive out to visit relitives - it's not so much of the RR, but the way they shoehorned the hwy in, next to the river oppisite the tracks - the east / west lanes are over / undereach other and they don't nessasarly parrallel each other - one may go through a tunnel while the other goes around the rock - and at one spot there is a rest spot under both lanes of the hwy.

Dad was fasenated with the SP cab forward designs - never did much for me.

I'm positive that I'm going to freelance and as I've said before, I'm partial to diesels, except in a few cases of heavy iron stream - like Big Boy and Challenger - perhaps a generic mountian terrain which would represent what either one might have been found in.

[GraniteRailroader]

Moreover, it's from a copyrighted work (even though it is out of print), so you should probably remove the image from your post.

He's citing the image of the track plan as a reference, which is completely allowable. Furthermore, he took a photograph of something and showed us that photograph. Just because something was in that photograph doesn't mean that it's violating a copyright.

Now, if he were to represent that track plan as his own, and market it in some way or fashion, then he would start running into problems.

It's no different then when we all look at and critique plans that come from MR, or any other hobby publication...Or when we say "hey, what about this?" and cite someone else's work as a reference.

 

[marknewton]

Ok, I admit it, I am a layout copier.

Aren't we all?

No, I don't think we are. I've always looked to the prototype I was modelling for ideas and inspiration. I had too, as I had no model railway magazines to copy from initially. Later, when I did have magazines, I was never impressed by the layout designs featured, as to my eyes they weren't realistic. So I stuck to what worked for me, and copied the real thing.

All the best,

Mark.

[cuyama]

I don't know if the modified plan is any better - it's not like I planning the curves to be exacly as printed - if I can ever master XTrackCAD, I plan on easments.

Depends on what you want. A lot of folks have found similar plans where the train goes back and forth through the scene many times to be a bit tedious. It can also be a little harder to come up with realistic looking scenery sometimes because there are so many bridges and tunnels.

What you've sketched should be easier to accomplish than the original plan, although some of the grades could still be pretty challenging.

For a "railfanning" type layout as you are imagining, dividing the scenes so you can't see everything at once is usually a good idea. Personally, I think adding some secluded staging allows for consists to be varied for more interest. And although you're not interested in "operations" now, allowing space for some industries may be handy for the future.

[ericboone]

For me, it was actually pretty easy.  I've wanted to model the section of track I grew up next to for many years.  Since I am modeling a prototype and am trying to be as faithful to the prototype as I reasonably can, I simply used track charts, station diagrams, and Sanborn maps to guide me.

The shape of the room and my desire for long mainline runs dictated the shape of the layout as around the wall with a long penisula down the middle or possibly two shorter penisulas.  All I had to do is take the real track plan and twist it around in the space I have until I could make it fit while trying to minimize the comprimises.

I strongly recommend getting large graph paper, accurately sketching your layout area, and then getting photocopies made.  Sketch away on those photocopies to your heart's content.  I do recommend using circle templates and/or a compass as it is very easy to cheat on the curves if you're free hand drawing.  Watch the angles on the turnouts as well.

When using this method, I generally started with areas of the real track plan that are more than just mainline.  For example, one section is a busy branchline junction with a wye.  I really wanted the branchline to lead to staging and not just dead end into the wall, so that junction was limited to areas on a penisula where there was room for the wye rather than along the wall.

Once I had a good concept sketch I liked, I started using the CAD software to fully detail my plan.  I'm an engineer by trade, so I used a student / personal edition of the CAD software I use at work.  For most, one of the packages geared towards model railroaders is probably a better idea. 

My layout (which I have just now started to build) track plan can be seen here.  It's four pages, so don't forget to see all the pages.

[steinjr]

 I just don't know how to turn a bunch of lines into a layout - call it lack of artistic tallent or the inability to visualize

 How do you do it?

 It seems, from your followup postings - that your dream layout basically would be mainly train watching layout where you can lean back and enjoy the sight of long(ish) trains pulled by large diesels or large steam engines winding through narrow and dramatic mountain valleys, where the narrow valley is shared between the RR (two parallell lines crisscrossing) and a road. Would that be a reasonably accurate description of your vision for the layout ?

 As SpaceMouse writes on his web page - you start with a vision. The idea of what you like to end up with.

 Then you look at givens - how much space do you have available (not needlessly imposing unneccessarily narrow limits on yourself like assuming a rectangular 4x8' plate as the layout basis if you really can do creative tings like creating a donutshaped layout around the walls, tunnell through a wall and put some of the layout in the neighbouring room etc).

  Then you start the tradeoff process. You draw one track plan. Then a new one. Then yet another one. Show your plan to others. Ask for advice. Try to incorporate advice. Repeat 40-50-60 times until you have a plan to seems a workable comprimize that gives you the things that are really important to you.

 If you get your joy from watching a train wind down a canyon/narrow valley - why not just starting with dividing your table in two with a vertical divider/backdrop down the length of the table ?

  On the front half of the table you have your scenicked (sp?) canyon, on back half (behind the backdrop) you have staging tracks representing "points east" and "points west" of the portion you are watching.

 Trains come from the staging yard, come around the mountain edge at the narrow end of the table, go down the sceniced canyon, disappear out the other end. Then the next train - in the same direction or in the opposite direction comes through the canyon.

  You can run the same train around and around in a circle if you like. You can stop your train in the staging yard and wait to make it appear that the round takes longer time. You can have several trains following each other round and round (in both directions). You can automate the order the trains go in.

  If necessary you can make your staging yards on long boards that you support by collapsible sawhorses so they can be free standing next to the table and feed in new trains.

 You can do a lot of things, if you have a clear vision of what you want to end up with. But you first need to try to decide on your vision. If you like railfanning - think of one spot (or a few spots) where you would be standing to watch the trains pass by.

 But I would suggest thinking of your layout as being a stage consisting of two parts: one or more scenes (the part you are watching) and the wings/backroom (the mechanism that generates what you are watching).

 Start with a vision of what you would like to do - e.g watching passenger trains pass through the canyon, see long doublestack container trains passing through.

 Seems to me that you still haven't quite found your vision. Or have you ?

 My vision for the layout I am currently building was : "I want to run a local freight train switching cars in an urban setting with 3-4 story buildings in the US midwest in the early 1960s - with small diesel switchers and mainly 40 foot boxcars".  

 My vision for a bigger layout that I have made plans for, but not started was : "I want to simulate working on a bridge line/terminal railroad in the Twin Cities (MTRY - Minnesota Transfer Railway) where a lot of the traffic is interchanges/transfers between various other RRs (Northern Pacific, Great Northern, Chicago & Northwestern, Rock Island), and some of the traffic is pickup/delivery from local industries, and where the yard is the centerpiece of the action".

 Same basic vision in both cases : I want urban, I want freigh trains with plenty of switching, I want early diesel road switchers (preferably Alco's), continuous run is optional, watching trains run past is not so important for me as throwing turnouts and setting out and picking up cars.

 How would you describe your vision ?

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[rayw46]

This question is kind of like the old Herman cartoon where he's sitting at the kitchen table, looks up from his newspaper and says to his wife, "Help me think of something to invent."

Ray

[nbrodar]

Dave Barrow wrote an excellent article in the June 1995 MR about layout planning.  The article included a lot of information about choosing your "theme" and the basic mechanics of design.  Of course, his planning style is based on linear domino theory.

He following in August 1995 with a construction article, giving ideas on construction materials, and room environment.

In October 1995, Dave concluded with his thoughts on operation, including car cards, switch lists, and tab on car.  Additionally, he provided information about work instructions, communications, train scheduling, layout labeling, and fast time.

Nick

[SpaceMouse]

Before you go too far with this plan, it might pay to ask yourself why you don't see any layouts that look like this in any of the photos in mags or posted on this site.

IF all you want to do is watch trains run, then as Byron suggested, create scenes (not loops) for the trains to run through.

Charlie Comstock's Bear Creek and South Jackson

[rs2mike]

Yeah good question.  I have no idea how to take line on a paper to an actual track plan?  How do you guys do it.  Especially how do you do elevation changes.  I am so confused

You take a peice of solid wire... size does not matter. Put one end on the track at a bridge. Then bend the wire back to the start of that grade. Usually there is 4 inches involved in climbing one track over another.

Mark the wire where the grade starts.

Take the wire to the measurements bar below or near the plan usually in HO scale one square = 1 real life foot (12 inches) The distance from your mark to the end of the wire is the distance of the grade in actual feet.

Thanks I will copy that down so I don't forget by the time we move and start the benchwork.

[BRAKIE]

Ok, I admit it, I am a layout copier.

I copy other peoples ideas, mixing and matching as needed, because I just don't understand how to come up with my own ideas. 

I have read " Realistic Railroad Operations ", and I have gone through " 101 Model Rail Road Layouts ", but, I just don't know how to turn a bunch of lines into a layout - call it lack of artistic tallent or the inability to visualize, track running through mountians, over rivers, past lakes and/or buildings.

How do you do it?

Greg,Good question with has many "correct" answers as there are modelers.After all a layout is a personal thing based on a modelers givens and druthers.

For me my plans come from observation of the prototype and my 9 1/2 years working as a brakeman.You see I base my layout track designs on the way I seen railroads do things.I avoid things like a switch back that involves moving a car from another industry..After all a crossing diamond would be used instand.

I avoid mountains(or any such space eaters) on my small ISLs, the few point to point branch lines or the few small loop layouts that I have built over the years.Instead I suggest rolling hills on the back drop or  rolling "hills" along the edge of the layout.Another trick is to drop the scenery below track level..

[Dave-the-Train]

I haven't got a clue!  I've been aroound models and real RR so long that ideas just build on random elements...

BUT...

I would reckon that all my ideas would fit within a pretty small cluster of concepts.

This is for the following reasons:-

1. SCALE  I've chosen H0 - which is because it achieves a number of requirements in its own right.
2. ERA  I've chosen era - 1980s - originally to fit a group of locos that I started out with.  There are then various benefits to the decade that I like.
3. LOCATION  I stumbled on a location - Chicago... ish - because a relative got a frost bitten nose there back about 1903... well?  How would you choose a location in the UK if you'd never been here?
4. RR COMPANY  That added up to CNW for someone with as little knowledge of the subject as I had at that time... PLUS CNW run on the correct side
5. TYPE OF LAYOUT  The tradition of MRR I have grown up in runs point-to-point between staging yards or has a large hidden staging yard on one side of a circuit and, usually, a station on the other side.
6. TYPE OF LAYOUT   We have almost no 8x4 tradition in this country.  We tend to go round the walls or along one or two walls.
7. STYLE  Whether they are long or short trains I like to see trains rolling.
8. MOVEMENT   My experience tells me both that the real RR cars do nothing much but stand around at stations/yards and that constant switching of a model asks for trouble and is boring.
9. THEATRE   I like my model scenes to tell a story... or several stories f there is space for several scenes that compliment each other.
10. OPERATION  I like to try to operate my models with something like a representation of what the real thing does.

This doesn't answer your question as such but shows yet another way of dividing up some of the elements that go into "coming up with layout ideas...

[Gandy Dancer]

Ok, I admit it, I am a layout copier.

Aren't we all?

No, I don't think we are. I've always looked to the prototype I was modelling for ideas and inspiration.

Isn't that copying their layout?

[Greg H.]

Hmmm...

What I am thinking about, is I remember going on a train to visit my grandparents, and spending alot of time watching scenery go by, and to an extent I am trying to recreate that feel. 

Perhaps if I list some of the layouts that catch my eye, you might be able to see what it is that I like, that I'm missing.

Silver City Central  ( one of the Kalmbach plan books - chapter 16 ) 3'6"x8   It has a crossing and a couple of extra spurs that I realy don't care for, but, it wind's back and forth across the layout, before coming back to the starting point.   The minium curve radius is 11" and Max grade is 5.5%.   I figure that by enlarging the layout to 5x8, I can increase the curve radius and reduce the maximum grade.   A good layout for turning it in to a jumbo size module, by extending most of the spurs that are at the corners.

Cactus Valley ( MR Dec 1998  Pg 79 )  4x8   At first glance just the thing, simple loop, with just a couple of spurs.  OTOH, the more I look at it, the more that something about it, leaves me scratching my head, and I'm not sure why.

The Montana Western Railway  ( MR April 1993 Pg 112 )   6x11   When I first saw this one it knocked my socks off.  Way more sidings and spurs than I would ever think of useing, but for some reasion it appealed to me.   For some reasion I thought it was in HO scale, and I was originaly going to scale it down to N scale, which if It had worked, would have been right about 4x8 - then I figured out it was already at N scale, when the track placement started not adding up.   Like the Silver City Central layout, it to would make a decent jumbo module, with slight alteration due to placement of a spurs in a couple of the corners.

What I'm think of was a layout that could run on it's own loop, totaly independant, representing different part of the country, then at a later date, I can build another loop type layout that represents a different part of the country and so on. 

A very long term idea that I am still playing with is much later on I could take over the entire front room for a few days, and hook 3 or 4 of them together, and have a train loop through each of them a couple of times in turn, before moving on to the next one, and back again when it got to the end.  

If I get to the point where I am doing delivery/pickup ops, then if each of them has 2-3 siding/spurs, then I could pick up some at module 1 and deliver it to module 3, then move on to module 4 to pick up a delivery for module 2.

Making holes in walls or building shelf layouts on to them are not options due to moving within the next year ot two.

I hope this help you help me.

[steinjr]

Hmmm...

What I am thinking about, is I remember going on a train to visit my grandparents, and spending alot of time watching scenery go by, and to an extent I am trying to recreate that feel. 

 So your vision of the effect you want to accomplish is not of standing (or sitting) trackside and watching a train pass by the spot where you are - viewed from the side ?

 Is your vision that you are moving through the landscape ? Ie that you mentally are watching the landscape change from the engineer's position in the cab of the lead engine ?

 Or is it that you are watching a distant train move through the landscape from a lofty perch - perhaps a mountaintop lookout spot or from a helicopter hovering over the landscape ?

Perhaps if I list some of the layouts that catch my eye, you might be able to see what it is that I like, that I'm missing.

Silver City Central  ( one of the Kalmbach plan books - chapter 16 ) 3'6"x8   It has a crossing and a couple of extra spurs that I realy don't care for, but, it wind's back and forth across the layout, before coming back to the starting point.   The minium curve radius is 11" and Max grade is 5.5%.   I figure that by enlarging the layout to 5x8, I can increase the curve radius and reduce the maximum grade.   A good layout for turning it in to a jumbo size module, by extending most of the spurs that are at the corners.

Cactus Valley ( MR Dec 1998  Pg 79 )  4x8   At first glance just the thing, simple loop, with just a couple of spurs.  OTOH, the more I look at it, the more that something about it, leaves me scratching my head, and I'm not sure why.

The Montana Western Railway  ( MR April 1993 Pg 112 )   6x11   When I first saw this one it knocked my socks off.  Way more sidings and spurs than I would ever think of useing, but for some reasion it appealed to me.   For some reasion I thought it was in HO scale, and I was originaly going to scale it down to N scale, which if It had worked, would have been right about 4x8 - then I figured out it was already at N scale, when the track placement started not adding up.   Like the Silver City Central layout, it to would make a decent jumbo module, with slight alteration due to placement of a spurs in a couple of the corners.

What I'm think of was a layout that could run on it's own loop, totaly independant, representing different part of the country, then at a later date, I can build another loop type layout that represents a different part of the country and so on. 

A very long term idea that I am still playing with is much later on I could take over the entire front room for a few days, and hook 3 or 4 of them together, and have a train loop through each of them a couple of times in turn, before moving on to the next one, and back again when it got to the end.  

If I get to the point where I am doing delivery/pickup ops, then if each of them has 2-3 siding/spurs, then I could pick up some at module 1 and deliver it to module 3, then move on to module 4 to pick up a delivery for module 2.

Making holes in walls or building shelf layouts on to them are not options due to moving within the next year ot two.

I hope this help you help me.

 Mmm - the important thing is that explaining it helps you figure out what you want to achieve. Explaining the problem to others often makes it easier to find the solution for yourself.

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[Greg H.]

 So your vision of the effect you want to accomplish is not of standing (or sitting) trackside and watching a train pass by the spot where you are - viewed from the side ?

 Is your vision that you are moving through the landscape ? Ie that you mentally are watching the landscape change from the engineer's position in the cab of the lead engine ? 

 

Maybe not from the perspective of the engineer, but, definetly from " on the train ".

When I see a train, especialy a passenger train, I end up rembering what little time I have had as a passenger, almost all of it more than 30 yrs ago as a young kid.

What little I can remember was the excitment of seeing countryside go by, of seeing the Rocky Mountians poke their heads up over the plains and knowing that we were almost to Denver or Cheyenne, which was the halfway point were we would get off and get an ice cream cone.   Later, came the desert & mountians of eastern Utah, but, always was the excitement of seeing something different that from what I was used to.  

This was a time where the restrooms on the train dumped right on the tracks when outside of town, and the first time I realized it, I must of spent 10 min looking down through the toilet, to see the tracks wiz by  , as an adult I probably wouldn't have given it a second glance, but, as a six yr old, I thought that was the most amazing, out of the world thing, I ever saw .

Not a bloody care in the world, until the trip was over.

 

That's what I see, and how I might translate that to a layout has me totaly stumped.

[marknewton]

Ok, I admit it, I am a layout copier.

Aren't we all?

No, I don't think we are. I've always looked to the prototype I was modelling for ideas and inspiration.

Isn't that copying their layout?

Only if I actually copy it!

I suppose the distinction I'm trying to make is that when I have designed layouts, I didn't look to other people's model railroads for ideas or inspiration, but to real railroads. I have thirty-three years service on the railway I work for, so the way real railways work and look is pretty deeply ingrained in me.

Cheers,

Mark.

[steinjr]

 So your vision of the effect you want to accomplish is not of standing (or sitting) trackside and watching a train pass by the spot where you are - viewed from the side ?

 Is your vision that you are moving through the landscape ? Ie that you mentally are watching the landscape change from the engineer's position in the cab of the lead engine ? 

Maybe not from the perspective of the engineer, but, definetly from " on the train ".

When I see a train, especialy a passenger train, I end up rembering what little time I have had as a passenger, almost all of it more than 30 yrs ago as a young kid.

What little I can remember was the excitment of seeing countryside go by, of seeing the Rocky Mountians poke their heads up over the plains and knowing that we were almost to Denver or Cheyenne, which was the halfway point were we would get off and get an ice cream cone.   Later, came the desert & mountians of eastern Utah, but, always was the excitement of seeing something different that from what I was used to.  

This was a time where the restrooms on the train dumped right on the tracks when outside of town, and the first time I realized it, I must of spent 10 min looking down through the toilet, to see the tracks wiz by  , as an adult I probably wouldn't have given it a second glance, but, as a six yr old, I thought that was the most amazing, out of the world thing, I ever saw .

Not a bloody care in the world, until the trip was over.

 I know the feeling you are describing

 

That's what I see, and how I might translate that to a layout has me totaly stumped.

  Mmmm - just tossing out half baked ideas here - have you considered creating your layout in train simulator software instead of on a physical layout ?

 You obviously can create a far bigger virtual world on a computer than you can on a table top layout, and it is far easier to put yourself on the moving train viewing the landscape flow past (rather than standing in the landscape and seeing the train move past).

 I am not saying that your dream layout cannot be built - I am just trying to think outside the box.

 Another option would be to create several small "dioramas" that the train would pass through, linked together, but with walls/scenic dividers between the scenes (and behind the scenes, to block the view of scenes on the other side of the table)- so you get an effect of seeing one scene, and then moving yourself along around the layout to see another scene.

 Each diorama (called an "layout design element" - LDE for short) can be from a different place along the journey. The train would spend a relatively short period of time in each scene (even moving slowly).  Perhaps with the train moving into a tunnel from one scene - and immediately coming out of the tunnel on the other side of a thin vertical separator. 

 I am sure there also are other options - I am just trying to bandy around a few ideas for you to consider. Anyone else have any good advice here ?

 Smile,
 Stein

 

[Anonymous]

There was a game called Trainz 2004 that had a 2-8-0 steamer from the Rio Grande and a smallish yard with it's own roundtable.

Making up a train to go up the branch to the sawmill with a batch of freight orders in hand was a big break for me.

[dinwitty]

Ok, I admit it, I am a layout copier.

I copy other peoples ideas, mixing and matching as needed, because I just don't understand how to come up with my own ideas. 

I have read " Realistic Railroad Operations ", and I have gone through " 101 Model Rail Road Layouts ", but, I just don't know how to turn a bunch of lines into a layout - call it lack of artistic tallent or the inability to visualize, track running through mountians, over rivers, past lakes and/or buildings.

How do you do it?

 

experiment, testing, mistakes, experience, mental visualization, whatever I do, when I get to the actual building, its going to change some again to fit anyways so the plan isnt perfect, ever.

 

[Greg H.]

One of the reasions the wife doesn't fuss to much about the cost of the hobby, is that it's one that I can do with the kids - even if to an limited extent, spending even more time on the computer would not make her smile.

As it is I can buy $20 of train stuff each month, and she isn't going to complain ( at least wise not to much ), neither is my wallet.

OTOH , I see multaple different Trainz programs ranging from $40-$80, that I know nothing about, and even the reviews don't tell me a whole heck of a lot about them. ( where is a shrug emotioncon when you need one? )  I don't even know which one does what. 

[Dave-the-Train]

Hmmm...

What I am thinking about, is I remember going on a train to visit my grandparents, and spending alot of time watching scenery go by, and to an extent I am trying to recreate that feel. 

Whoa!

I've spent chunks of today thinking about how ineffectual my last post was... but the elements I listed are some of the basic parameters that establish the ground rules on which any idea cn be developed.

N scale is a different scene from the one in which I work... it has its own "rules" or definitions with which I am not familiar... ask the N scale people...

BUT... what you have written here is a whole different ballgame...

I can't put you on the footplate f a Black 5 going over Knucklas viaduct or on an E8 pulling out of Chicago. 

To be honest I don't think that the models we make can do that... i don't think that virtual RR can either.  A multi million $ simulator might begin to... if it can include smells as well as vibration... and...and...

What our models can sometimes do is achieve the theatre of being on the platform as the train we are about to ride comes in...sometimes...

Personallay I think that H0 or even S or 0 would be better scles for this than N... N (to me) is more about viewing a train from some high vantage point... seeing the train painted in the scenery...

Getting the feel - if that is what you want - is about ambience, anticipation, activity, detail... even dust... you know that moment in Jurasic Park when the water in the glass starts to move because of the dinosaurs steps...

That is a terrific thing to try to recreate.

I don't have a clue how one would do it.

What I work on is not the N scale "big picture" but an H0 attempt to feel the tremble of a string of loaded hoppers rolling down a grade through curves and the belch as the locos shift to putting out power for the next climb.  I also like the occasional growl of an SW10 and the crunch of knuckles in switching moves.  There are smells of dust and hot oil that I don't need to replicate but that can be stirred in the recall by an effective image...

I think that you have a challenge... first part is to identify what it is!

I like the involvement of the kids!

If you can help them to appreciate the drama of trains moving... along with the beauty of a sunset or the... whatever of whatever... then you will have given them a great gift.

So many people seem to plough through their lives without even waking up.

Last weekend i was working back at Holywell Junction... I described a corner of the place as "the Narnia Streetlight".  the guy I was talking to had clearly been there at night in the snow and knew exactly where and what I meant instantly.  That is like a secret magical bond.  It is like feeling the sound of a Harley... or so many things... but you have to be alive and awake to experience them.

This can be a great hobby.

[Greg H.]

I don't know about that.

When I see a model train passing through some nice scenery, it triggers memories,  about that feeling - that's probably why I don't worry about switching operations.

Imagining that I'm on the train going for a trip, and looking at the sceanery as go by - is it any different that pretending that I'm an engeneer, taking a load of coal from the mine to a power plant?   I doubt it. 

[Dave-the-Train]

Hmmm ?

Okay... you've just taught me something about myself and how I see the hobby.

Evidently I see it "externally".  I gues that as an ex signalman (tower man) this is natural.

While thinking about the whole issue of the OP I was recalling an occasion when I ran 3 ATSF GP35s and 20+ (Accurail) ATSF covered hoppers on a very simple loop layout.  I was miles away in my head, totally focussed on making the train crawl across the grade crossing in the middle of town.  Everyone thought it was hilarious because i didn't even hear my cell phone.

BUT the specific point now is that I realise that I was not thinking of myself as the Engineer...

Hmm...

Whether this keys into how we get inspiration for a layout design I'm not sure... but maybe it does...

What do people think?

[Greg H.]

I think it might, as it's easier for people to model what they know and understand ( or believe/think they do ) so they are better equiped to come up with more original ideas in that paticular area, and the knowlage and confidence to do it.

When I'm thinking of a layout, I'm not thinking of it's function ( if there is any ) but, what it looks like and might seen from the train as well as what I'm going to see in person.   

[tgindy]

The planning for my Conemaugh Road & Traction is N Scale within a 9'x9' space, and; is an almost around-the-walls on two levels for more trackage real estate.

• We share common ground:  There's only so much you can do in so much space.

One additional resource that has provided balance is from the folks at Railroad Model Craftsman (http://www.rrmodelcraftsman.com/):  "Track Design" by Hal Carstens...

http://index.mrmag.com/tm.exe?opt=I&MAG=BOOK&MO=3&YR=1989&output=5

"Track Design" is a compilation from RMC's "Layout Doctor" series from roughly 1965-1975 with layouts that squeeze quite a bit of operations in limited spaces.  Here's the description at the Carsten's Book Depot page...

"This is an excellent introduction to Track Design. Point to Point Layouts, Continuous Running, Out and Back Layouts, Terminal Railroads, Short Line Railroads, Corridor Railroads, Multi track Mainlines, Combining Various Designs, Layouts for Odd Shapes, and Layouts on a 4 x 8."

[GraniteRailroader]

Have you thought about perhaps modelling scenes to be scene from what you would see looking out of the cab, versus what "we" see?

You could model 3 or 4 different scenes with a basic double-loop with fixgure 8 with a few creative scene blocks / dividers, and use a generic (cheap?) locomotive with a camera car and control the train while you watch through a TV.

Perhaps build up a little window frame for around the TV and get a seat out of an old passenger car or similar, and boom, you'll be right back to riding in the train. 

[Greg H.]

Believe me, when I say I have already given that some serious thought, and that it may be a possability down the road ( when a lot more funds become avalable ).

I just have a problem putting things on paper ( where do I put a tunnel ) which line should go over another - that sort of thing.

[SpaceMouse]

Believe me, when I say I have already given that some serious thought, and that it may be a possability down the road ( when a lot more funds become avalable ).

I just have a problem putting things on paper ( where do I put a tunnel ) which line should go over another - that sort of thing.

It seems like the major obstacle is getting started with the plan at this point. You can download XtrkCAD free and start putting in the elements you want. when they don't fit you try something else. Post the plans here and get feedback.

But you have to do it (or pay to have it done.)

BTW: I got an older versions of TrainZ for $7 off eBay.