I am trying to decide wether to have a loop on my layout or not and any input is appriciated!
The Rock Island, gone but never forgoten[bow][bow][bow]
Sometimes I just like having a trian run on it’s own, continuously .
[#ditto] I totally agree with emeraldisle.
I think we need the spell checker more than the loop.[:D] My layout actually consists of 2 reverse loops connected by a very short section of single track. The smaller of the 2 is a hidden that will be used for storage, the larger is actually the layout itself, and the single track is a helix that connects the two. I could run through if I wasn’t storing trains on all of the yard tracks.
i too love the idea of being able to set the throttle and watch the trains run. my current railroad consists of a double figure-8, allowing for the trains to constanly be passing by. i think its also fun because it make you feel like you have to give rights to through trains when messing around the yard.
It’s handy for railfanning on your own layout. I am double tracking my main track around the layout room so I can easily run two trains at once on the main, plus a third on the branch.
Enjoy
Paul
Having at least one line set-up for continuous running is a must in my opinion,two or more being even better,with a little switching possibility.I believe “switching” layouts are great for group operations but since I’ll be railroading alone,I went for continuous running so that I could have train(s) running while I work on the scenery.And when I feel lazy,I could just set it “on”,sit back and enjoy it.
My layout is based on continuous running. Basically loops.
I’m for continuous loop and speel check. Some times you just gotta let the horses out and let them run.
Spurs, Branch lines and wyes are also a neccesity
I like having one running while I work on something else. And it’s fun to just sit and watch with the kids as well.
A continuous run is nice. Not always needed, but nice.
I have one, a 2 lap oval, on my layout.
Gordon
My yet to be built, in design stage waiting for construction funds wil be a double loop layout with several farm type industries to give some switching duties. One part of the layout will have part of the two loops running parallel to each other, then split apart to give the illusion of of two seperate railroads. My reason for all this is basically the same as those already listed. Old McDonald is waiting patiently for the shipment of his new John Deere B tractor to come in to get his spring plowing done. His mules are getting old and kerosene is only six cents a gallon.
Having or not having a CONTINUOUS loop is certainly a personal choice. However, as stated, they do allow for running a train unattended. They are also nice for breaking in equipment. If you are into proto-typical operation, I can see where you might feel their not right. I suspect that most modelers would chose to have a loop.
I posted a similar topic last year and was advised almost unaminously to build in continuous running. I can say now that it was good advice. When you show off your layout to visitors, especially non-modellers, there is a much better response/appreciation for what you are doing if there is a train orbiting the layout. Also there will be days when you just want to railfan and relax.
Charles
Hillsburgh Ontario
I guess it’s up to me to defend the point that continuous running is not needed.
The first reason I see no need for it is that trains running in circles is quite simply put, boring. I would much rather run a train from Point A to Point B, simulating the hauling of some model goods or people. When a train goes in circles, it does just that: goes in circles. When a train runs between two yards or a yard and industry, it waits for other trains at signals, obeys train orders, etc; and the “crew” will have to throw switches, couple/uncouple cars, so on. It is much more fun and exciting to actually run trains rather than watch them race around.
Secondly, if one models a prototype, then one should not have his trains run in circles, unless the prototype is a zoo train. There are a few instances where real tracks do go in a circle (the Ashley Drew & Northern comes to mind), but the trains do not run in in continous circles (I use the term “circle” here to describe any track arrangement whereby a train will end up where it started, e.g. loop, mainline with reversing loops, etc.). I actually find it humorous when a modeller will claim to be a prototype modeller, and put all those little details into a model, and organize cities to look exactly like their real life counterpart, but then run trains in circles, destroying the effect. Simply put, real trains act as shuttles, moving goods between two points in a straight line.
On the point of breaking in new trains: Any new manufacture items really do not need breaking in. Modern motors and geartrains are of high quality right out of the box, as are any mechanical parts on rolling stock. If there is anything wrong that could be fixed by breaking in, then it could be fixed better by alleviating the problem on the workbench. Even if one still likes to break in trains, then he could still run it between two ends of a point-to-point layout, and switch directions at each end: the direction switching would actually break it in faster
[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by lemscate
I guess it’s up to me to defend the point that continuous running is not needed.
The first reason I see no need for it is that trains running in circles is quite simply put, boring. I would much rather run a train from Point A to Point B, simulating the hauling of some model goods or people. When a train goes in circles, it does just that: goes in circles. When a train runs between two yards or a yard and industry, it waits for other trains at signals, obeys train orders, etc; and the “crew” will have to throw switches, couple/uncouple cars, so on. It is much more fun and exciting to actually run trains rather than watch them race around.
Secondly, if one models a prototype, then one should not have his trains run in circles, unless the prototype is a zoo train. There are a few instances where real tracks do go in a circle (the Ashley Drew & Northern comes to mind), but the trains do not run in in continous circles (I use the term “circle” here to describe any track arrangement whereby a train will end up where it started, e.g. loop, mainline with reversing loops, etc.). I actually find it humorous when a modeller will claim to be a prototype modeller, and put all those little details into a model, and organize cities to look exactly like their real life counterpart, but then run trains in circles, destroying the effect. Simply put, real trains act as shuttles, moving goods between two points in a straight line.
On the point of breaking in new trains: Any new manufacture items really do not need breaking in. Modern motors and geartrains are of high quality right out of the box, as are any mechanical parts on rolling stock. If there is anything wrong that could be fixed by breaking in, then it could be fixed better by alleviating the problem on the workbench. Even if one still likes to break in trains, then he could still run it between two ends of a point-to-point layout, and switch directions at each
Lemscate, I can see and understand your views on point to point prototypical operations and find no fault there. However some of us don’t have the space for such operations in our homes for such a layout. I’m designing my layout with both continuos running and switching operations available to me in the limited amount of space available. If you find it humorous that my trains will run in circles, then an awful lot of us ought to give you some good laughs. I’m building my layout to suit my wants just as you should build yours. We are talking “home” layouts here not a club layout open to the public. I belong to a club also and I’ve seen some negatives come out of a large club layout. A family recently visited us with their young son. That young boy got a train set for Xmas and of coarse he had visions of his train operating like our club trains. His parents quickley sqwashed that idea for the obvious reasons. Myself and another member took them back to our storage area and showed them a 4x8 layout we built for Xmas display at various places of buisiness. It had your basic circle of track and some scenery and buildings on it. We placed a small train on it’s track and fired it up. Guess what, we now have a new family member to our club all do to that little nonprotypical circle of track. Just goes to show you that sometimes all the high tech stuff can work against you . Trainboy asked for an opinion and a lot of us answered with our reasons. You did the same, but maybe not intentional, I kind of got the feeling of being put down because my trains run in circles. If you think my layout is a screen saver, thats all well and good, but don’t put me down for it. One more thing, We have a real train near my home that runs in a real circle. It’ called the Tweetsy RR. It goes in circles but still a lot of fun. I submit this with the hopes you and others will not take this as a personal flame as it isn’t. Heck if we all thought alike we would all be driving Chevy pick-ups, eat moon pies and drink R-C cola and have Bubba for
Actually lemscate, the “point” of model railroading is to enjoy it any way one likes…[:0]…nothing else matters in the slightest.
You like it your way, that is good, and I am happy for you. But if your way is “good” it is because it is your chosen alternative, a personal choice, not because other alternatives are “bad”.
You are talking “down” to the majority of layout builders. You cover all of the personal prejudices that you have, that lead you to consider continuous running to be some sort of toylike abberation of the hobby. That is rather presumptuous of you, and I find that the tone of your overly long lecture, (disguised as a post,) is rather elitist.[B)]
With my own layouts, I’ve had continuous, point-to-point, out-and-back, and combinations of all three…as I have now. All designs are good, if they meet the needs and aspirations of their builders.
Another factor to keep in mind: Virtually every well known, “famous” model railroad ever featured in the model media, has had at least ONE continuous running element in its’ design…the layouts built by the true giants of the hobby.
regards;
Mike[:D]
It all depends on what you want out of your modeling. The main reason I model trains is for relaxation and releaving stress. I like the detail and the large amount of different aspects involved in the hobby. I’m not a bolt or rivet counter but do care if things at least look like they belong in the right time period. The best thing about model railroading is that you can take it in what ever direction you want and to whatever degree or level you feel like. If you want to be a prottypical realist fanatic it’s ok. If you want 6 continuous loops and just like to watch them go round and round then that’s fine. There are snobs out there but just ignore them and do what you want. I have 2 loops so that trains may pass each other in opposite directions, 5 spurs and 1 passing track. All that gives me the varity I like.
RMax
I like lemscate’s idea and do not think that I will include a continuse run because it takes alot of space. Thank you for your input though, you helped make an important decision for my layout!