Well, I don't know. I feel I learn something from pretty much every layout or track plan I see.
Case in point - have a quick look at tracks for the Kelly Appliance factory. Not too deep a scene, and yet they get the tracks to curve off and go into the building instead of running parallel to the yard - by applying the trick that the industry track can extend a little under the view block and scenery on the other side. Simple, and I had seen it before, but a useful reminder of a trick for a double sided layout with a view block.
They are illustrating partial buildings along a backdrop. Some people have not considered that.They will be illustrating scratch building and kit-bashing buildings - some people haven't done that before.
They illustrate using an overpass as a scenic separator between the Williams Bay station and the Bay Junction yard. Some people have not considered that.
They illustrate an interchange yard, and probably introduce a few people to the concept of interchange - making operations more interesting.
And you don't actually need a 30 feet wall to create a layout based on the core of this layout. You could make a nice little switching layout based on Bay Junction (the junction, not the whole layout) in H0 scale in say 14-16 feet or so - which in N scale would be about 7-8 feet of length.
Here is e.g.a quick sketch for a 14 x 2 foot H0 scale switching layout inspired by the Bay Junction plan - (roughly backdated to the 1950s, to make cars 40-footers mostly) - you would either have to fiddle trains between switching sessions, or add staging - fixed or cassette, but it would allow quite a bit of switching fun:
The trick is that you can take inspiration from any track plan, without building an exact replica of the plan. Make it your own.
Grin, Stein
I think David mentioned in the first of the video blogs that one reason they chose this as their project layout was that they wanted to have a significant new scene on the layout to show all the visitors on layout tours during the NMRA 75th in Milwaukee last summer. Since it took the staff most of the spring to bring Bay Junction (or whatever it's called) to a near finished state, I think it's only fair to cut them slack in choosing to present their efforts as their annual project layout.
The main purposes of project layouts, as I understand it, are to demonstrate new techniques and to encourage both new and veteran modelers to get of their duff and build SOMETHING (anything!). Choosing something different from previous years - in this case a layout remodel rather than starting from scratch - is only fair. Maybe this project will convince some of us who have existing layouts (of any size) to make some progress on that next town/yard/scene, and if it has that effect, then it has accomplished its purpose.
Eventually, it's up to the individual to find their own inspiration in the project layout. If a modeler chooses not to find some inspiration in the project because it doesn't fit their idea of what a project layout "should be", it will be their layout that doesn't get worked on, and they're the ones who will be missing out on the fun.
You can probably guess by now that I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of the project, expecting that at least something new on my layout will result from it.
Tom
Wow, what a multitude of opinions!
As I stated earlier, I don´t think that it is a good choice for a project layout. Large layouts are pretty well covered during the year and those of us, who already have a large layout and want to expand it, already know how to build the benchwork, lay track and add the scenery.
Has MR not understood the writing on the wall, I am inclined to ask. In times, when money is getting tighter for us, and space is getting even tighter, running a feature on building a monstrous extension on an already club-sized layout may not be the right thing to do. Who of us has the extra cash to the tune of $ 5,000 for tackling such a project, who of us (still) owns a home of a a size that could house such a large layout?
MR leaves the field of interesting and rewarding small layouts pretty much uncovered, also in their regular monthly features. Small layouts don´t have to be the set track type, round the rosie layouts, as one of the posters so eloquently stated. There is much more to small layouts and I would like to see MR going into this field much more. The Beer Line was certainly a step in the right direction, although I would not call it a small layout anymore. But its modular design and different ways of configuring it, just like dominoes, made it an excellent source of inspiration for own layout design. Add to that the feature on how to operate the Beer line, and this project layout was excelling all others I have seen. Too bad that MR decided to go back to the old way of "big is beautiful", instead of showing us how to enjoy MRRing with little budget and small space.
I mostly agree with the OP. The first article is interesting, and I will follow the future editions, but in reality, as has been said before, few of us have the space or resources to manage such a project. I think that MRR could take a few leads from these forums to help them find articles that will be of interest to a larger base of readers. For example, we all have space limitations. Perhaps a few articles on selective compression might fill a need. There was a very well done recent post which really showed what could be done in a small space:
http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/t/183323.aspx
The model is very tight, and perhaps not to everyone's standards, but the creativity deserves full applause, and the ideas therein I'm sure will inspire a lot of modelling.
Perhaps if we make a few suggestions on this thread, and some of us show support, we could influence MRR to publish articles closer to our needs, not that they have been doing a bad job in the past.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I really like this year. Last years project I had no interest in since I am in HO and I focus in the northeast and not the southwest. This year's project will have some interesting parts with the kit bashing of some cool industries and I am always a fan of interchange operations.
Chris
Check out my railroad at: Buffalo and Southwestern
Photos at:Flicker account
YouTube:StellarMRR YouTube account
I like it. Here is a project that "breaks" into an existing layout right down to the frame. How many folks have been on the fence about making changes to a layout but maybe were not sure how to go about it or maybe just needed a kick in the pants to get going - tear into that part of the layout that didn't come out right the first time. Or maybe the layout has grown stagnant and needs some changes. Rather than tearing the whole layout down take part of it out and rework it.
Not all MRR projects should be starting from the ground up. They have done several layouts the last couple of years - the beer line and the N scale. Both terrific in there respective scales and how to's. And I do not understandthe objection as to the size the layout is. I do not have a large area to work with but I sure have learned quite a bit over the years studying the layout plan and how the owner overcame an obstacle, track work, scenery, etc. There's a lesson to be learned every time a layout is published - no matter what size it is.
In the end it's the modeler's layout and his/her choice as to how to go about it. There are a million ways to do things and no one has the "absolute right way" to do it. Time, money and interest all figure into the mix. I think they've covered very well the basics on how to get started with the last two projects. And who doesn't want to see what's new on the MRR Layout?
Look forward to seeing the rest of the projects.
Enjoy
Bill from very cold New Jersey
I sort of stand in the middle on this debate.
It's a refreshing "out of the ordinary" project layout that doesn't focus on the adverage loop of track with more, but it's also a large layout in it's own right, and not that many people have the space to build it.
However, I'm sure there will be something everyone can pick up and learn. Who knows? The more that I look at the drawings, I see more possibility of someone builfing it as a doubble-decker (or tripple-decker) layout.
Hi Irv,
I respectfully disagree with you. I understand that we all have different expectations, but please understand that the "expansion project" is probably larger then most layouts. Sure I like to see what they are doing too and I think that articles such as "How to build a canyon scene" in the Oct issue Step by Step do that very well. Did you notice what layout was the focus of Step by step in the Jan 2011 issue? I think Dana even wrote that they were going to be tight on time in the article, and that is with a team of modelers. In my opinion, this would have been better as the center fold for one issue, not four.
As far as possibilitys...................they are endless. They get paid to do what most pay to do. Don't you think they could spend an afternoon with the team and come up with something?
We get 12 pretty large detailed layouts a year and don't forget GMR too. It just seems reasonable to do something that us armchair modelers could get into doing.
Jon
I can't say that I was particularly enthused by this year's project layout, either. It's way too big and linear for probably 95% of the readership and too specific in its intent. Most previous project layouts allowed for a broader scope of scenery and operations. This new project is just a shelf layout grown all out of proportion in my book and likely to garner little interest among average readers. I would have much rather seen the page space devoted to what David Popp was doing with his home layout's latest extension than this.
As a big fan of the MR&T, however, I might have found the project layout more acceptible as part of a multi-issue piece updating readers regarding the entire layout, rather than a stand alone feature.
CNJ831
I like it. I have felt that the last few projects were a little lame and not of much interest to me. However, this little layout kind of talks to me. Granted I will not be building it, as my layout is pretty much done and will not change much now, but I still liked it. Kinda nice to get away from the little desert/out in the boonies projects done recently.
So, that said, I enjoyed the first article and look forward to more, especially the grain elevator article that I believe they said was forthcoming.
JonMN I finally had time to open the Jan issue and read. I am a little dissappointed with this years project. The last two projects were great, something an average person like myself would consider building. This years project just kinda seems like they wanted to focus on the club layout rather then inspire us regular folks into starting a layout. Also, I don't feel that writing a few hundred words and adding a sketch on how you could build it as a stand alone project is good enough, or suggesting Nscale if you don't have a 30ft long wall cuts it either. I will still continue to read and enjoy MRR but IMHO think the staff could have came up with a better project. Jon
I finally had time to open the Jan issue and read. I am a little dissappointed with this years project. The last two projects were great, something an average person like myself would consider building. This years project just kinda seems like they wanted to focus on the club layout rather then inspire us regular folks into starting a layout. Also, I don't feel that writing a few hundred words and adding a sketch on how you could build it as a stand alone project is good enough, or suggesting Nscale if you don't have a 30ft long wall cuts it either.
I will still continue to read and enjoy MRR but IMHO think the staff could have came up with a better project.
I don't feel that way. I like the fact that they finally decided to tackle something that really is a layout expansion project. Sure it is using the existing layout but many of those who have an existng layout are often in search of something to either enhance or expand an existing layout, so what is so wrong with this? I don't see anything.
Frankly expecting somethingeach time they go through this process isn'tr reasonable any more. Just how many new and different possiilities are there? Only afe and until a new idea comes up, I am very content to see what they are doing even if it really isn't new.
Irv
I liked it a lot. Everything doesn't have to be a little beginners ring around the rosey every year. There will be a lot to learn from this for people really building layouts.
Unfortunately, I can only agree to the disappointment voiced so far. This year´s project just fills space in the mag, there is nothing in it for me, not even the slightest inspiration.
Not a good choice this year, I am afraid.
I agree that's a poor choice for a project-unless one has a Godzilla size basement layout..Even in N that would be a space eater even as a interchange yard switching layout .
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
I'm sorry to say I feel the same way. Hopefully some of the tips and techniques will be inspiring, but the layout plan certainly is not. More than anything it is mostly un-achievable for most all readers.
I also watched the first 4 videos that document the build and also felt let down compared to videos/projects past. 4 minute videos can't possibly contain enough to keep me interested and they spend the first 30 seconds playing the intro, the next 30sec to a minute saying hello and that they don't have a name and they will take us to the workshop. Quick tip, several seconds of credits and then it's over.
I certainly found more inspiration in the beer line concept and even last years N scale project seemed better to me.