I am new to model railroading. Been learning about it for the past year and will go to my first model railroading meeting tonight. I am getting into it because when I was young I loved model railroads and my boy(5) now loves trains of all sorts. We run down the block so we can see the trains anytime we hear a train come into town. I know absolutely nothing but what I have read in a couple of books and read on here.
I am working on the woodland scenics Layout Kit to learn a little about scenery and how things work (the woodland scenics way).
I will probably start building my beginner layout this summer. I like the concept of the better beginner layout found here:
I have a few questions about layout and thoughts before proceeding. Anyway, I like steam engines and having trains on different levels of track. Is this big enough to have a train climb to a higher level or would I need to run the levels around the entire layout? I think I would like a tunnel. Maybe a little town and some industries. Have a trestle bridge as the focus in the center of the far wall. I was wondering if I built the layout in two foot sections instead of one foot could I get a better layout? Are my wants too big for this size layout? Would I be biteing off two much for a beginner to take on? Is there enough room in the middle for operation after building it in two foot sections. Would it be a big hastle to have the duck under 2 feet instead of one? Would I be building for the rest of my life and not be able to run trains? Would it be best just to try building the HOG railroad first and then try to go to something more ambitious?
How much do you think it would cost to build the HOG? How much just to build the benchwork?
What are your thoughts or ideas on a layout plan? I will try to post some pictures of a layout that I saw on ebay awhile back that I liked to show
Interesting plan–I do like the idea of a donut-shaped layout more than the boring ol’ 4x8, and this layout would take up about the same amount of space as a 4x8 with access spaces would.
A good rule of thumb for a fully detailed layout is around $100 per square foot. Off the cuff I’d say $50 per square foot is bare minimum for lumber, wiring and track.
It looks like there is already potential for operation with a 1’ deep setup–there are three different switching districts and at least one yard. Adding an extra foot of depth wouldn’t add a whole lot of switching possibilities, other than a couple more yard spurs. An advantage of a donut or shelf layout over a flat table is that the middle part of the table is mostly wasted space. You’d get more operating potential by adding a leg off of one corner (making an arrangment that looked like a “P”) for a staging yard.
You could make some changes in elevation if you wanted to, but you wouldn’t get much higher or lower in that amount of space–generally, it’s easier to drop the layout than to raise the track.
A trestle and bridge would look fine along the left-hand side of the plan over “Lake Blackshear” and you could certainly put a mountain and tunnel in between Pitts and Vidalia. One thing to remember about mountains is that seldom does one mountain sit by itself–it would look a little weird unless you made the surrounding terrain mountainous. If there’s just one hill in the way, railroads would typically rather go around it than through it. But if you want to model mountainous terrain anyhow (and it would be a natural combination with a trestle bridge) it would work just fine, and the mountain would also help hide the far end of the interchange track in the plan.
The “Heart of Georgia” plan (perhaps turned into the “Heart of Colorado” or wherever you are) definitely has potential for industries and towns–there are quite a few spurs for industries already, as well as interchange track and the small ya
[#welcome] miji. Here is one additional link that I would recommend spending a little time looking at if you have not already.
http://www.nmra.org/. Half way down the page is a link to starting a layout and what all should be considered. This will help answer a lot of the basic questions. The NMRA web site has a lot of good information.
Here are the pictures that I liked from ebay. The model was made by Jim Harmon.
I loved that layout and wish I had the money to buy it. It was also a lot larger than I could handle. If you would like to see the other pictures I have of it then let me know.
I liked the curved bride in the stoney creek layout in March MR as well. Anyplace you can get an already made stone bridge like that?
Thanks for the replies already and the welcomes. Thanks for the NMRA beginner page. I loved the disclaimer ! : )
I would widen the benchwork to 2 ft on three sides leaving the 4th side (Lake Blackshear) for the duckunder. Run the track down the center of the 2 ft wide so you can add some scenery/structures to both sides of the track. Since this is your first layout I would stick to the plan. Once you get the trains running and some scenery you can add a branch line off of one of the spurs with a grade on it and a yard/roundhouse off another spur.
Once you have some experience with this layout, you’ll have a better idea of what you want in a layout. At that point you can modify this one or tear down and start a new one.
I reciently had an around the walls layout but it had to come down to make room for my new baby. The doughnut shaped layout while the exact same square footage as a 4x8 does take more room in the room. For this reason a 4x8 works best for me. I have to share my train room with my son now so being compact works best for me. Also you may want to consider the amount of space you have at your disposal.
As for the WS scenery stuff the kits are designed to be used on a 4x8 sheet that was not cut into sections. The WS system works good but I found that I liked building right on top of a extruded foam board better. I still use the plaster cloth and their foam sheets for my scenery just not the foam risers. (my new layout does not have any inclines but I would defidently use them again they are easy to use and they take the guess work out of a grade). the scenery toppings like the ground foam and ballast I also recommend. Good luck on whatever route you choose.
Not to start another 4x8 vs. shelf layout flame, but a donut can be a lot lower profile than a 4x8! Keep in mind that you need to have access to three sides of a 4x8, which means that you really need a space of 8x10 feet for a 4x8. Cut into four one-foot wide boards, an 8x10 donut takes up the same space, but the interior space need not be wasted–especially if you make a lift-up gate in one corner for entering and exiting the loop. Placed at a height of, say, 50-52" high, it will be more than high enough to be out of Junior’s reach until it is old enough to join in the fun, with plenty of storage underneath the layout. A shelf doesn’t dominate a small room like a 4x8 does either.
While it takes the same space, it also blocks the space. The 4X8 leaves aisles free to access the closet, window, crib, etc. You may not mind the duckunder, but I bet that Mom does.
Enjoy
Paul
That’s why a drop-down section is nice…okay, a little more work, but it saves many headaches–literally, if you put the duckunder too low and miss it a few times.
Maybe I just think in terms of my shelf layout–for a while I had a 3x6 layout in my garage space (about 8x18 feet) and the layout was just a huge space eater. I took up the track and cut the table into three one-foot strips and it sits nicely against the wall instead of dominating the room.
I’d have to agree with Paul. If the room is totally and exclusively devoted to your trains and you are single, a 360-degree around-the-walls shelf layout is OK. But if anyone (especially a wife) needs to use or regularly access the entry door, a closet, or get to the windows, a 360 degree around-the-walls design fails and the Mrs. is likely to tell you to take it down or else, in rather short order…drop-down sections or not.
On the other hand, if the HOG is done freestanding within a room, with space on all four sides for access to doors, closets, and windows, its scenicked width it far too narrow to depict any sort of realism and it’s likely to lack any substantial backdrop as well. That may be OK for a guy who to totally absorbed in operations (but that’s a very small proportion of hobbyists) but not good enough for the average model railroader, in my opinion.
My experience and advice it simply this. Whatever you do for your first project, do something that you are not afraid to play around with. My first layout was a 4’ X 4’ N scale layout. I had little enought invested in it that I could build, rebuild, tear out, start again, switch around, etc. I read everything I could on modeling when I started, and it was invaluable, but there is no experience like real trial and error. Dig in and have fun, remember what works and what doesn’t, then use that experience when you move on to a larger project in the future (I’m working on that second and much larger project now, after 6 years of fun with my 4x4). just my [2c].
A one-foot deep layout can certainly depict realistic scenes–a backdrop of 1/8" masonite painted a sky color, with backdrops paintings or building flats, is easily screwed into the back of a shelf section. This section can be set on top of an existing shelf or other piece of furniture and easily removed. Or you can just paint the walls sky blue (excellent choice for a baby room) and add some flats. Make a trip to Ikea or Target for some 40-50" high bookshelves or cabinets and you don’t even have to build any sort of permanent wall-hanging hardware–just set it on the bookshelf.
I’m just going on my wife’s opinion here–she definitely prefers the idea of a 1-foot deep shelf layout around a room, that doesn’t dominate the space. Closets are nice but if you have a perimeter of shelves and cabinets under the layout all the way around the room, closets become pretty redundant.
As far as backdrop goes–the 4x8 in the midle of the room doesn’t have much backdrop potential, unless you add a scenic divider down the middle–and then the horizontal space gobbled up by the 4x8 jumps up into vertical space, and demands that the layout be in the center of the room. This converts a 8x12 bedroom into a two foot wide corridor, where a shelf layout in the same room leaves 6x10 feet of open space, plus a potential 40 square feet of cabinet storage.
I think people get stuck on the idea that an around-the-walls layout has to be a room-dominating thing with tiny corridors in it, but it certainly doesn’t have to be. And while there are different sorts of challenges to creating a neat scene in 12 inches of shelf depth, there are just as many solutions–and they’re generally easier ones than the task of having to disguise the fact that a 4x8 just goes around and around. How many variations on the “one big mountain with a tunnel in the corner” can we think of?
Lets get back on track here (pardon the pun). I don’t want to debate whether this is a better layout. I like it and have questions about modifying it. I will probably use some form of this layout with modifications because I like scenery (Even though I am a beginner I want to try it). I do not plan on building the HOG exactly like it is.
So, what I am hearing is that an extra foot around will not give me much opportunity for another level? But it will give me some scenery options and town options?
I am also thinking about maybe combining scenes from 4 different 4 x 8 layouts to create the look that I want. Each module having its own scene. I don’t know. I am just thinking out loud. What I like about model railroads is scenery and operation.
So a scaled down version of the model I posted is out of the question? Or something along those lines. Smaller mountain etc…
I think the key to any beginner layout, whether island or shelf style, is that it be simple to build, small enough to maintain, yet interesting in design and operational possibilities. Thank you, miji, for bringing the HOG to our attention. I, for one, was not aware of it before.
If you want to bring in other scenes, one option would be to use the Vandalia Short Line as one side of your layout. http://www.nmra.org/beginner/vandalia.html You’ll need to modify the ends slightly to curve onto the rest of the layout, but this would let you experiment with grades off the main line. It’s a variation of the Gum Stump & Snowshoe http://www.algonet.se/~justus/zigzag/model/zzmod6.htm
Enjoy
Paul
I like scenery too, the difference is largely in how you present the scenery in the space that you have. If you have a 1’ wide shelf, you can very easily simulate a train winding up a rocky mountainside, crossing a trestle, going in and out of tunnels, passing through forests, or traveling along a lonesome prairie–as long as the section is single or double track. A heavy industrial location or a yard is going to feature less in the way of impressive scenery, but then things like yards are not normally put on winding mountainsides.
Part of why the “HOG” plan is called a “Better Beginner” is because it IS pretty simple. The potential is certainly there to make four different scenes, and making the layout as four separate modules (making them one at a time, in easy increments) would be a great way to familiarize yourself with the skills of model railroading in a relatively economical way, with quick return on your time investment–a 4x8 doesn’t take long to build, but a 1x8 takes even less time, and is a lot easier to move around!
An extra foot depends on how much room real estate you want to take up, and how much you want to model. I’m fond of dense urban track and city modeling. The exception (on my own layout) to the 12" from the wall guideline is a 2x2 foot “peninsula” on part of the layout, which features a pair of larger industries.
If you like really like large industries, against-the-wall flats are probably the best way to model them. A real heavy industry would take up quite a few square feet–even a moderate-sized real-world warehouse would take up most of a 4x8 layout. But three or four feet of high building wall against the back wall of a shelf layout, especially if it is a couple of stories tall, looks gigantic–it dwarfs the train, and especially if there are some convenient view blocks like trees or other structures, the eye can’t take it in all at once–and it costs a heck of a lot less than building a “full-depth” industry of comparable size.
Wow ! This has been a most informative thread. I am getting back into model railroading, again, and after much looking around was getting very frustrated with layout ideas. I am restricted to just how much room I can can take up in the basement for a layout. Must have room for juniors drum set and the budding rock musicians to practice as well as a place to relax and get away from it all. The HOG seems to be the best answer to my problem. I too had questions about the one foot width but like others have expressed on this thread, I came to the conclusion of possibly widening three of the four legs if not all four legs.
One though I had about the HOG, was to place staging yards so that a train entering from one staging yard could traverse the railroad and then exit to the other staging yard.
I have introduced the HOG to a friend of mine at work and as here, it has created some discussion between us. It is a different layout but isn’t that the idea?
If your into steampower, grades and trestles perhaps you could change the HOG into a logging railroad, keep the benchwork the same just modify the track plan.
here’s a link to one of many logging RR’s. http://members.home.nl/l.bettonviel/
