dknelsonI think there has been some rethinking about how much to follow Armstrong's preference for cramming in a lot of track and a lot of operation in many of his plans often at the expense of scenic realism. ...I would also say that the entire notion of staging yards which is so important to modern track planning was something Armstrong himself only partly seemed to have sympathy for.
Having visited and operated a couple of John Armstrong designs, and followed construction of others in the magazines, there are common issues that show up when they'e actually translated into layouts. Staging and visible yards tend to be inadequate for the desired operation. Aisles are frequently too narrow for operators to pass comfortably.
The problems seem related to the same root cause - wanting to get the most railroad into the room. Enlarging staging or classification/division point/other yards might reduce what can be done with the rest of the layout space. Bigger aisles would do the same. John's writing seemed to indicate he appreciated that such compromises could become a dowside of the finished product.
Rob Spangler
Well let's give the OP a little credit for intellectual curiosity, and not just trolling. Armstrong is an icon (and those who differ with icons are iconoclasts) and deservedly so for many reasons. He spent a lot of time THINKING about so many elements of layout design and was flexible enough to do so while still meeting the "givens and 'druthers" of paying customers for his plans. His only rival in the 1950s and 60s was Bill Schopp the "Layout Doctor" in Railroad Model Craftsman, and Schopp's track plans are rarely as thoughtful or interesting as Armstrong's. Of course there are other names. Ed Vondrak comes to mind. Linn Westcott of course. But Armstrong had qualities as a writer and analyst of his own track plans that indeed did make him the Dean.
I mean what more can you say about a guy who was creating track plans for walk-around operation before walk around operation was even practical! He created the need and then expected the technical types to start inventing how to do it and they did.
But that is not the same as saying that he is the last word. I think there has been some rethinking about how much to follow Armstrong's preference for cramming in a lot of track and a lot of operation in many of his plans often at the expense of scenic realism. And even many of his paying customers who write about how wonderful it was to work with him admit that they did not build the layout exactly as his plan dictated. I would also say that the entire notion of staging yards which is so important to modern track planning was something Armstrong himself only partly seemed to have sympathy for.
One could even say that DCC has made available some track planning ideas and opportunities that Armstrong could not take advantage of - he was still basically designing assuming DC block control.
I cannot recall if it is in Track Planning for Realistic Operation (which should NEVER be allowed to go out of print) and his other interesting book, Creative Layout Design (which has been allowed to go out of print but is still seen at swap meets) but he makes the point that ideally guys would not design layouts with the main goal of holding their excessively large and ever-growing collection of rolling stock somewhere in a yard. He says they should design to a workable amount of rolling stock given the trains they want to run, and stop building kits that add to the collection. But he then says something like "this calls for so much strength of will that it is out of the question." He understood.
Dave Nelson
Random_Idea_Poster_6263 RR_Mel I'm not trolling, wether you believe me or not, I am just asking a question about this well known Model Railroader and his work.
RR_Mel I'm not trolling, wether you believe me or not, I am just asking a question about this well known Model Railroader and his work.
Definition: An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" is a person who posts messages to bait people to answer. Trolls often delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion.Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
Random_Idea_Poster_6263n the October 2018 issue, I saw a facinating layout called the HO scale Clinchfield RR in which the author whos layout is in australia, asked for Johns help in considering improving it. The one on the top is the original plan and the one on the bottom is Johns revised plan as the layout appears today built. This is a link to the trackplan by clicking on the picture.
By the way, you have it backwards – and it’s the November 2018 issue. Armstrong designed the layout first, added some modifications at the client's request, and then the client made additional modifications in construction.
Subscribers may view the track plans from that article here:https://mrr.trains.com/how-to/track-plan-database/2018/09/track-plan-ho-scale-clinchfield-rr
Layout Design GalleryLayout Design Special Interest Group
SeeYou190 Yes he was/is the godfather of layout design. Everyone that I respect when it comes to track planning constantly references John Armstrong's ideas. He literally wrote the book on the subject. -Kevin
Yes he was/is the godfather of layout design.
Everyone that I respect when it comes to track planning constantly references John Armstrong's ideas.
He literally wrote the book on the subject.
-Kevin
RR_MelI'm not trolling, wether you believe me or not, I am just asking a question about this well known Model Railroader and his work. cuyama Are you just trolling, bruh? Byron Yep! You got that right Byron!!!!Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
cuyama Are you just trolling, bruh? Byron
Are you just trolling, bruh?
Byron
Yep! You got that right Byron!!!!Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
I don´t want to be rude, but what a silly question! John Armstrong´s book Track Planning For Realistic Operation is certainly the "bible" for every model railroader thriving to build a realistic layout. It was published 41 years ago and is now in its third edition. Buy the book and read it!
Edit: Byron, you are spot on!
Happy times!
Ulrich (aka The Tin Man)
"You´re never too old for a happy childhood!"
Random_Idea_Poster_6263However, was he really the dean of layout design and track planning? I am not trying to be rude, being being that i didnt grew up seeing his work before his death I am skeptical.
Are you just trolling, bruh? Or are you saying that anything that happened before you were paying attention doesn't have value?
Do some research and come back to us. Have you read Track Planning for Realistic Operation? What’s your analysis of it?
Armstrong’s articles starting in the mid-Fifties changed the way the hobby conceived of layout design. He introduced or popularized walk-around design, multi-deck layouts, and much more. He was active in design for 40+ years. While some of his track plans haven’t stood the test of time, the principles are still foundational today.
Living the dream.
I understand that John Armstrong was well known in the hobby of model railroading, and said magazine named after the hobby, was known for his infuance on the hobby with his expeertise on track planning layout design.
He was also known for his freelanced model railray in O scale, being the Canamdaigua Southern Railroad with a Anericans aboriginals spearhead as its logo/symbol. I remember in one of my first issues of MRR I saw an artiucle dediatee to his memory and his layout, athough I was disapointed there was no trackplan included. This was when I started reading MRR as a young kid in the early 2000s, dropped reading it for a while and became later interested in 2018.
However, was he really the dean of layout design and track planning? I am not trying to be rude, being being that i didnt grew up seeing his work before his death I am skeptical.In the October 2018 issue, I saw a facinating layout called the HO scale Clinchfield RR in which the author whos layout is in australia, asked for Johns help in considering improving it. The one on the top is the original plan and the one on the bottom is Johns revised plan as the layout appears today built. This is a link to the trackplan by clicking on the picture.I like the one on the left better as it feels bigger and that the trains run longer distances on it, but after thinking about it I understand why the Author went with the improvised version. I now see John also helped design and improve others trackplans before building, but was he really such a dean?