So in the 2009 102 Realistic Track Plans, I have found that the Fox River RR #27 pg 33 fits perfectly into the era I wish to model as well as the space I cleaned out. I have an 8’2’’ x 11’6’’ area along the back wall of my family room that is completely wide open and ready for service. I am very excited about this, and I hope to start the benchwork on the new layout this week. I model the Norfolk Southern/Conrail merger. this has a double track main, 2 1/2" incline so i can set this in the Pa mountain area. It shows a intermodal yard…tho im not so sure thats what ill make it as. It also has a oil refinery which ill change over to maybe ethanol…not sure yet. Check out this lay out if your into N scale and the modern era or like big radius curves. 15’’ radius minimum! Im ecstatic! Well, I will keep you posted with pics as it comes along. It will be slow unless i can get back to work with my sheriff’s office or any sheriffs office at that! God Bless Lay-offs! 
MR Subscribers can see the plan here:
http://mrr.trains.com/how-to/track-plan-database/2007/08/fox-river-rr
It’s from the June, 2005 MR. Of course, a lot depends on your concept for a layout. This may or may not fit your interests in the long term.
This plan has fewer issues than many published plans, but still a couple of concerns. In that much space in N scale, many folks interested in operation would choose to have some staging for more realism in trains leaving from and arriving on the visible layout. Otherwise, where are your trains going? Or coming from? But not everyone is interested in operations, of course.
The switchbacked connection to the intermodal area effectively takes away a good bit of the small yard, which could certainly be rearranged a bit for more effective operation. And the intermodal area is pretty small for realistic intermodal modeling, so that might be a good change to another industry, with the track connected differently.
Many folks would want more than the single pair of crossovers shown for more fexibility, but this can be argued either way.
The one feed mill on the “horizontal” leg seems to be imagined to be served from one of the main lines. This would be extremely unusual in real life and very inconvenient on the model. In fact, a long siding here could serve multiple industries and would add some operating interest, IMHO – again, only if that’s an interest.
The concept of the original seems to be focused on scenery and structure modeling and watching a couple of trains run with a little switching thrown in. If that matches your idea of a layout that will be fun in the longer term, then it’s a good fit. In that space, other concepts would also be very viable. Have you had layouts before or been around other layouts? Were these the kinds of things that interested you?
When you say 2 1/2" incline, I
Ah yes, I do agree with you. Im not looking much for a lot of operation just yet…kinda new with all the DCC stuff. Ive been reading up on it. Trying to learn it. Its more of an entertainment value. Im hoping to build onto it more as space becomes available and turn it into an operating layout. As for PA, I know its tough to model that section of pa with tough grades but its worth a try and yes i did mean clearance, not grade. Hopefully i can make it nice and eventually turn it into a part of a large operating layout!
Mr Quiet or better mr Storm
you seem to be in a hurry; i am afraid you already laid your tracks or you were in the mr-shop and ordered all the stuff to start building. Understanding the feeling, i would have been in the shop already a 100 times, i am still feeling you should do a little bit of thinking first.
Problem is, you’r talking about more space already and about changing your layout for more operation. Try to find out how to extend your plan in the future before you start building. It can save you a lot of trouble.
Having the same two trains running around and around can be boring in the long run. Longtime ago a mr-project layout was build (BN, double tracks somewhere along the Mississippi), with a short piece of single track over a bridge; just to keep the operators awake. With a junction into staging just beyond the bridge you could also have an other train making it’s appearence. My thinking, your decisions
Have lots of fun and excitement
Paul
Paul,
Ah, youre right to an extent…I did draw up a plan for an extended branch line for more service but i didnt think of the junction…Thats a good one to add. Im still on the drawing board. Im mainly using Kato Unitrack that ive had since 02. It runs great and for a guy like me who has to use what i can get for the price it saves me on ballast and roadbed…i have about 24 feet of flextrack as well. hopefullly in time i have the complete layout im lookin for. For now I am happy with the one i have chose and it fits my needs and wants! Thanks for the ideas and kind words.
Jeff
I like the layout for its simplicity. I wouldn’t worry about the operations aspect just yet, especially if you’re just getting your feet wet. Get the main circuit up and running, and maybe include the main line turnouts shown in the plan. That will give you some flexibility.
Use this project to teach yourself some basic skills like track laying and basic scenery and wiring. I would recommend taking one more advanced step, and use Atlas Code 55 track. If you’re going to on a learning curve, you might as well learn on something that looks good! (Think of it as going for your driver’s test in a Bentley).
Also, I notice the plan has a large timber trestle on the lower loop. If you’re doing NS/Conrail, I’d deep six that and maybe replace it with a stone arch bridge (the Atlas stone viaduct is a good place to start, and is fun to kit bash into different configurations).
I’m heavy into ops, but it took me years to get here. Take your time, have fun building and running, and use the lessons learned to move on to the next layout!
Lee