Anniversary

Model Railroader Layouts and layout building
1

Yesterday my lovely wife agreed that I should get my old hobby going again. Anniversary gift. Wow! Her’s is a cruise for us May 11th to Alaska. Fair trade

New 12 x 20 building in the works. Started sketching 1st idea. Want to model Katy from Taylor to La Grange as on map here.

Initial bench layout. I’m thinking I can use that island for the tail between Granger and Smithfield.

Ideas and comments welcome!

Thanks Tom

2

Would do an E shape with a turn around at each end and a peninsula in the middle. Considering the 12’ distance that would give you two feet for each leg and 2 feet for the peninsula and still have over 30" walkways. Also you can keep it simple or get really fancy. Alot though would depend on what you want to run. My layout before this one had turnarounds that were less radius than my regular mainline and were partially hidden.

3

Hi there. I assume you are modelling HO scale. Do you have a preference for a point-to-point layout? If not, you might consider a lift-out, or re-arrange the benchwork to accomodate larger curves. I would go with option B, at the cost of removing the peninsula.

Simon

4

Thanks rrebell. I’ll sketch that idea out. The turn arounds are appealing. Will be running freight. . . maybe a short passenger. I’m HO and using FP-3/7, 1200/1500 switcher or FM HH16-44, possibly a Mikado.

Thanks again. Tom

5

Thanks Simon. Yes. HO it is. I’ve no preference for point-to-point or continuous running. I do enjoy switching. I like to have businesses in one town with freight delivering raw materials the business in another town on the route needs to MFG a finished product to then be hauled away.

Have not configured track yet and will consider having radious of 20-24 inches.

Had a successful drop-in once before and not adverse to considering. It or turns on each each will be needed.

Again, thanks for your ideas. Tom

6

i would suggest double-deck (if possible) and loop. You will still have penty of places for switching. I peronally prefer loop as you will have a chance to sit and watch. Point-to-point is good to take photos but you will then have to to work on rearrange your locos… For the long term, that part could be boring…

Just a small cent.

Jerry

7

If you are open to point to point I would consider a helix in one of the left side corners. That would give you twice as much layout in the same space. As it is now it does not appear you have enough width to even put in 18" radius curves to turn trains. You could also have a temporary bridge section on the right side when you just want to run trains

8

What is your anniversary gift to her?

9

From the OP’s original message:

-Kevin

10

Ah, I just skim these quick. Thanks for the cliff notes.

11

Unless you’ve had a duck-under (I did on 1st layout), you won’t truly appreciate its annoyance at having to avoid hitting yourself. Even in late 30s-early 40s I hated it. Avoid!

12

Thanks kasskaboose. I don’t plan on a duck under. I’m just over the 70. The only duck under I’ve seen remotely okay is one where one sits on chair with wheels and coasts under. Based on your height your milage will vary :-). I agree, best no duck under.

13

Thanks kasskaboose. I don’t plan on a duck under. I’m just over the 70. No duck under.

14

Thanks for the inputs ndpprr. Yes. I do not room to have a turn around.

So far I’ve designed the yard in Smithfield (will post later). I’m interested in the helix. I’ve never had one but this will be my first space in which I can do what I want :-).

Thanks again.

15

Thank you Jerry. Your inputs here have given me further thought. As I mentioned I’ve a fairly significant yard in Smithville (the upper space. On the right side I was planning a fiddle/staging yard. Now I may consider the drop in bridge when running loops. Trains in that case would appear from staging (some facing east and some facing west) and return into a track with consist different than they left with.

Love it!!

Thanks Tom