what type of layout do you prefer

[wickman]

What would be the differences in differnet types of benchwork and plan other than the obvious and island layout is an island type where as a shelf layout is a shelf. Can you get better operations on one type of layout compared to another or can you lay more track on each different type more scenery ? Why would someone go with one type compared to another ? :D Can you have a busier layout with movement of the trains going from industry to industry? Why would you choose the layout type that you have ? :D Now this is just a general discussion for different fews one view not being any better or worse than anothers
Lynn

[nbrodar]

I build linear shelf type layouts. Although, I prefer slightly deeper benchwork then most (30" rather then 24"). Normally, I can get more railroad into a room, by starting around the walls, and if there is space add some penisulas into the middle of the room. Shelf layouts also make it easier to incorporatate large radius curves and turnouts.

I find it easier to build and scenic the shelf types, because I can reach all the way to the back. Operationally, I don't think one has it over the other. Having operated on both, either one can be as intense or laidback as you want.

Nick

[tomikawaTT]

Several things drive the kind of layout to be planned and built. In (my opinion) order:

1. Space. Everyone would love to have a big (such as gymnasium-size) area in which to build. Reality usually steamrollers that idea in a hurry.

2. Money. Since model railroading is neither inexpensive nor essential, budget constraints tend to shrink both space and what can be built within that space.

3. Preferred prototype/type of operation. Some people like the Northeast during the transition era (loose car railroading, lots of rail-served industry, short transfer runs, interchange between a dozen railroads.) Others prefer the look and feel of the present-day desert Southwest (miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles, with Amtrak and intermodal trains passing through at speeds measured in Mach numbers.) Still others model earlier-era short lines or present-day spinoffs (light traffic, laid-back operations.) Last, but hardly least, there's the happy yardmaster, who considers the rest of the railroad as the place where trains come from for termination or through-train servicing, and go to after being worked over or built up. This is a matter of personal preference, and, once established, is not subject to rational discussion.

4. The availability of operators. A lone wolf would have problems simulating Northeastern Corridor operations without the aid of a well-linked computer and some very sophisticated software to handle 90-95% of the train movements. One-train-a-day shortline operations would bore a large group to tears. This is a function of the size of the local model railroad community and the sociability of the individual.

Actual layout design is driven by all of the above, plus the physical limitations of the operator(s). One basic, now well established, is that it is all but impossible to lay track or do detail work beyond the point where the modeler can reach safely and conveniently. This distance varies with the height and arm length of the individual, and gradually shrinks as the height from the floor increases. A good layout design will place all critical points within easy arm's reach of the aisleway or island edge.

As for traffic density, the busiest possible layout would be a rapid transit system in a major metropolitan area - nose to tail EMU trains stopping at closely-spaced stations. It would also be boring, since the only visual difference between trains would be the graffiti on the cars and switching would be nonexistant.

My own personal preference is to model a division point on a line with frequent train movements and diverse passenger service. Most trains change locomotives (from steam to electric or vice versa) and most freights do at least some switching. Local freight runs originate and terminate. So do the EMU trains of the local commuter district. There is a coal-hauling short line for interchange, and a narrow gauge logging road for interest. Not much local industry, but that's not a high priority of mine in any event. (I've described the layout I'm now building and expect to keep working on for the forseeable future.)

[wickman]

Well guys I do have a layout on the go here's the plan I've been working with

By the way I can walk all the way around this but it is kinda narrow 18" or so. And heres the link to my progress
http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=54510

I made the mistake of not including a staging area as well as I'm wandering if this layout is going to become boring and turn into a dust collector down the road. As you can see from the link to my progress I have come a long way. But as I look at it in the train room the only thing I can see having to replace $$$ wise is the cork roadbed ...well and the 3 x 50lb bags of plaster of paris . On the layout I have plans for campbells ayer's chairs industry, campbells barrel factory, fsm 170 super sawmill, and some dpm kits including harlee and sons kit and several others I also have the mine as you can see. Problem is I have my doubts that the moving around of trains from indusrty to industry will keep me from becomeing bored. Don't get me wrong I love doing scenery and love the idea of scratch building and all the other fun stuff that I've been involved with but what do you do when you get it all done (except for the fine detail stuff of course ) to continue running the trains. So as far as I've gotten I'm wandering what is a decent type of layout that will keep me busy all the way down the road. The problem started when I realized I needed a staging yrd and was going to be very dificult to acquire as well as is the rail design I have setup going to be busy enuff? I've thought of many ways of gaining access to the under table area for staging as well as I'm looked and looked at my rail design.
Have you fine modelers ever had your doubts about the layout you were working on ?[:)]

[Anonymous]

My preference is an around the walls shelf layout no deeper than 30". I can walk but spend a lot of time in a wheelchair so having the layout around the perimeter if the room allows me better access to do scenery work.

My other tongue in cheek answer is OP's other peoples, I love going to a friends house and participating in a run session.

[Tracklayer]

I went with a 3 1/2 X 6 1/2 N scale table layout because of space. Though it's not real big, it's big enough for me. I also made it so that I can change out the automobiles and a few buildings around and go from one time period to another.

TL

[Anonymous]

I'm with nbrodar and modlerbob... I've built many types, but settled on around-the-walls shelf type layouts, a little on the deep side (typically 30"), with peninsulas as space allows.

As I've said elsewhere, I also don't like multi-deck layouts. For me, it intrudes on the 'illusion' too much. But that's just me. Multi-deck layouts seem to have become not just common, but almost the norm for medium-and-larger layouts in the last 5 years - to the point it's difficult to find a layout or a design for medium+ spaces that isn't multi-deck.

[CMSTPP]

The Shelf layout is probably the way to go. This way you don't have to duck under the layout everytime you want to run trains. What I have planned on doing is having a layout that runs the length of the wall so that when you do enter the basement you come down and you're surrounded by a large mountainous scene of the Milwaukee roads Rocky mountain division. Then probably in areas you can make it come away from the wall and have it wind around some bigger mountain or even river scenes.
But I would recommend the shelf layout. If you wanted to build a layout for train shows then the bench work or Island type layouts would be best.

James

[Anonymous]

I have a "U" island layout, and it's alright, but if I had the chance to do it over, and somehow I think I will sometime, I'd go with an around the wall shelf, with 5 foot squares at the ends so I could get big radii on the turnarounds.

Greg

[metalfrog]

i have a square island with an open space in the middle.the benchwork is a couple of 4by8's and a2by12 all sandwiched together to form the above mentioned square.if i had the money i would defintely have a around the walls type of layout(shelf.)because of my health i can't tear the present layout down or pay to have it torn down.yes wickman i have my doubts about my present layout.i really don't like what im building but until october of this year im stuck with what i've got.im going to start gathering info on modules,similiar to what the n scalers use.perhaps that is the way to go.terry.......

[Anonymous]

This is a tough one.

I prefer the look of the track plan of an around-the-walls layout, with no "u-turns". However, for convenience, I prefer a layout with "u-turns", so I don't have to "enter" the layout.

Another possibility is the backdrop-divided Island layout. This has a lot of practical attributes.

[csmith9474]

The kind I don't have to build myself (although I think that will change very soon).

[wickman]

So I'm still fishing here but at the same time starting a new design.

And so far shelf layout seems the most practical I know myself I'm already tired of doing the sidestep to go way around the other side of my layout( only about 20" walkaround room)
Is it possible to have one single continuous as well as switching for industries on a loop to loop shelf layout having 4 foot square ends for the loops and say 32- 36" shelfs in between the 2 loops and still have great scenery ? Kinda like having the best of both worlds this way kids don't become bored ( some day grand kids ) and adults still get to play operations games with Car Card . I think question is more has it been done with the size of space I'm using?
:D

[steamage]

I have a medium size room that also used as my home office, I choose to build my layout as a shelf type, switching layout around the walls. It averages from about 12 to 18 inches the widest part. My layout sits at 54 inches from the floor leaving plenty of room for furniture along the walls. I like walking along with my train while switching, the layout seems bigger, as I only view the area my train is working. I'm a right-of-way modeler.

[wickman]

Hi again
Can those of use that have or built around the room layouts give me your opinion on is it better to have deeper bench work or wider isles. I realize in my situation that if I want deeper bench work so deeper than 26" ( wide ) I will have to sacrifice the isle width and I would make this scarifice for more scenery\track area. And what have those of use that did around the room use for bench work depth including for end loops as well as for isle width?
[:)]
Lynn

[GAPPLEG]

I used 24 inch wide shelves for one reason, it's the cut of a sheet of plywood right down the middle. No messing around, expedience was my priority. It makes for an easy reach across my benchwork at 42 inch above the floor. That just made my center table bigger by a couple of inches.

[JimValle]

Like you, I was determined to build a layout that wouldn't bore me down the road. I hit upon single track point-to-point operation with a double tracked mountain grade in between and a short connector for continuous running. Once everything is up and running I amuse myself by slinging the trains over the road, making meets and doing pick-ups and set-outs with local freights. Now that the track plan is complete I concentrate on upgrading structures and scenery trying to come closer to a "fine art" modeling standard. I figure that will keep me busy for the rest of my days, that and perfecting my rolling stock and locomotives. The best way to keep from getting bored is to have a layout that is never completely finished.

[MStLfan]

Due to the shape of the spare room (208 cm x 375 cm, asymmetrical entrance on one short side with a big window opposite looking over the busy Rotterdam-Dordrecht mainline here in the southern part of Rotterdam, the Netherlands) that I am going to use, my layout will be on a shelf on one long side. This side will have a width of circa 25 cm / 10 inches. It will be mainly scenery (Iowa farmland). The other side will be wider (50 cm / 20 inches) and feature a yard and town.
I have not decided if it will be once or twice around. In the latter case there will be a fiddle yard under the narrow side with cassette storage. An alternative is a bigger staging yard under the town / yard.
The aisle will be about 120 cm / 4 feet wide in places with small lobes projecting into it for industry.
Normally I will operate by myself but there should be room for 1 or 2 more people.
Everything will be high enough so that a desk etc. can be located under the benchwork. By the way I model mainly in N-scale.
greetings from Rotterdam
Marc Immeker

[MisterBeasley]

If it were up to me, I'd do an around-the-wall layout with a lift-out bridge at the doorway. I like continuous running as a "background" for switching operations. That way, I can have a slow freight chugging around that I have to watch out for when switching locals, or I can run a fast passenger train the other way and arrange meets when necessary.

However, it's not up to me. The family room belongs to the rest of the family, too, so I've got a 5x12 island. I've managed to pack in a lot of track, partly by putting a subway loop down as a first layer and adding the ground level on top of that. In contrast to a previous opinion, I get a lot of "action" from my mass transit system by combining the traditional subway (Lifelike R-17 train) with Light Rail (Bowser PCC) and allowing the PCC to climb the ramp out of the tunnel for brief runs on the surface.

With a bit of careful throttle control and a little imagination, I can run 2 trains in the subway, 2 on the surface and then do some switching operations, all by myself with one DCC controller. Mostly, this means head-to-tail operations on each loop, because I can't manage much more by myself, but I occasionally will run that trolley upstairs in a contrary direction to see how smoothly I can interleave the trains.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by MisterBeasley

If it were up to me, I'd do an around-the-wall layout with a lift-out bridge at the doorway. I like continuous running as a "background" for switching operations. That way, I can have a slow freight chugging around that I have to watch out for when switching locals, or I can run a fast passenger train the other way and arrange meets when necessary.

Pretty much describes my setup exactly, and that's precisely the reasoning. I set some trains in motion on a 'continuous running' basis (prototypical operations folks can gasp in shock now), and then dodge locals and switching ops around them.

[markffisch]

It is amazing how the room you are given drives the design. Negotiations with Facilities Mangement determined that trains could go in the furnace room. The basic layout will be a dog bone shape with a peninsula in the center of the room. The aisles need to be large so that the furnace can be serviced. I also am constrained by the height of the oil tank in setting the height of the layout. I am planning on two levels on the peninsula so that I can have some staging underneath. Like some of the others posted, I want to be able to do continuous running and also do switching depending on what I feel like that day. I may have helpers but they will probably be little ones.

I will have one yard in the peninsula and probably another on one of the wings. This will allow for some point to point operations. I expect the staging could be used this way as well, although I plan on using it primarily to change the order of the trains so that the same ones are not following each other around the room. I am also going to put a reversing loop underneath so the passenger trains can appear to be returning after a time.

Construction should begin shortly.

[trainwomen]

I have taken a whole room approach to my layout and have used a combination of around the wall and additional levels all included in the one scenic package. I have also incorporated two circular peninsulars which then give me an S- shaped well in the center. Layout height starts at 48" and rises to 60". Scenery rises to 84" in places.
I also have an 11 track staging yard underneath. For me operation is not the main attraction - I just love running trains and watching them climbing slowly with a long consist through a newly scenicked area. I also have switching areas which provide suitable challenges when I feel like it. The layout room is not large (12x18) but I have managed to fit in good length main and branch lines.I enjoy scratchbuilding and scenery and often make changes (a hammer and wrecking bar are my best friends). As for the preferred type of layout - I guess it doesn't matter as long as you are having fun. I had a small shelf layout previously and had a great time with it. I would post a photo of the current layout but I still haven't worked out how to add them to a reply.
Regards from Downunder.