Crazy idea: Layout Concentrate

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

Hi all,

I’ve been away from this forum for a while quietly working on my own projects plus a career as a photographer, but modeling has always been lurking at the back of my mind. I’m currently tearing down my last failed project and have been scheming about my next layout.

I have an odd idea that has been fascinating me for a while now, and I want to get some other opinions on it before I either check myself in or go build this thing.

It all started with micro layouts. These tiny layouts, of varying size, are common in Europe and many exist on this side of the Atlantic but don’t get their fair share of attention. A few characteristics:

  • There is only one scene.
  • They operate in some way, even if simple. Trains move. On larger layouts, switching is possible (see Timesaver).
  • Each scene is viewed from one, maybe two vantage points, freeing the builder to employ theatre-style perception tricks (flats, forced perspective, visual composition, mirrors) with an audacity that would be impossible on a traditional layout.

I really liked this simplicity. That’s when I got the idea.

What if one were to design a layout where instead of a long open scenes blending seamlessly together, it were composed of short dioramas separated by full backdrops? Take a layout and remove all the empty space between scenes (or LDEs if you like) and squish those scenes together, separated by a thin backdrop. You can even compress the scenes since buildings can be built as flats on the side backdrops, not just the back backdrop, allowing you to shorten long buildings. If you need more car space, simply make the adjacent scene shallower and run a tail track behind its backdrop.

I call this Layout Concentrate. It would let you squeeze more layout into a given space without compromising each scene. Would it be too concentrated and busy, or could you use lighting to focus the viewer on the scene they&

2

Multi-shadowbox, essentially. Yeah, it could work pretty well. You could even do different seasons; eg. fall in one, winter in another.

Stu

3

Nothing unusual. {If I understand what you are saying}

I have seen several “modular layouts” at train shows that are essentially what you describe, save for the fact that common tracks run through each modular/scene/“concentrate” {usually 3 “mainline tracks”} for mainline running of the club’s trains.

Each module IS It’s own diorama, with it’s own "scene’ to it, often complete with a backdrop completely different from it’s neighbor.

The theme is often completely different than it’s neighbor also, often “concentrated” or “compressed” or “squeezed” into the 4’ length.

Sometimes it is AMAZING what they can compact into a 2x4’ module.

[8-|]

4

Clarifications:

  • Stu had it right with the shadowbox idea. That was exactly what I was thinking.
  • Galaxy also provided a perfect analogy, the module. Key difference being that (in my case at least) the modules are a linear representation of the same railroad line, just compressed. I’m an operator so it has to make sense.
5

This idea has been around for a long time, although it’s often hard to make it work effectively.

That’s one of the things that is hard to make work. When you have to switch one town by having the engine in the next town over (and supposedly many miles away), some folks find it hard to willing suspend their disbelief, especially when one must keep peering around the divider while switching.

It seems to work little better for model-railfanning style layouts where the trains just pass through.

6

If one takes on the role of the conductor on the ground, the engine could be forgotten – out of sight, out of mind, but just a radio command (throttle movement) away.

I will admit that I’m worried about multiple-train operation and crews staying on the section of line they have authority to use.

7

That´s what I had planned for a show layout, which was to start out as a micro layout with the potential to grow - as space and funds would allow for.

8

Gidday Tyler, No it’s not a crazy idea, I have seen a modular layout at a show which was basically an amalgam of what everyone has already described, unfortunately I have no photos, but Ulrichs’ illustration is very apt. I thought it was great as it allowed for different scenes which, with their own lighting, and with the view blocks combined with the matt black bridges, didn’t clash. You could for instance have a Californian orange grove, next to a Maine lobster port, next to a Pittsburgh steel mill, and for me, I was drawn into each individual scene, as a rail fan.(The modeling was very good). To be fair though other viewers were not so impressed, too disjointed was a common complaint.

Unless the trains were short enough to be self contained with in the boundaries of each module, I too, would have difficulties operating in the scenario that Cuyama describes.

Have fun [:D]

Cheers, the Bear.

9

Ulrich’s illustration looks like what I’m proposing. Just because you can put an orange grove next to a lobster port doesn’t mean you SHOULD. My scenes would be sequential, just without having to put empty mainline run to separate the scenes.

Lying in bed last night I took this idea a little further. I was worried about the scenes being so short and close together that the mainline run would seem too short (in physical space) and packed together. Comments about the locomotive being three towns away worried me, because they’re absolutely true. And if you’re running at track speed you cover distance at a ridiculously fast pace.

This new idea is a twice-around…on the same track. Phase A has every other module illuminated and the others dark, possibly even curtained off with drapes on a clothesline. The train starts in Module 1, runs through Module 2 which is dark/hidden, and into Module 3 which is illuminated. This continues to the halfway point: 4 is hidden, 5 is visible, 6 is hidden, and let’s say 7 is the halfway point, which is illuminated.

The train stops briefly for a station stop, crew change, interlocking to clear, bridge to lower, etc., and the operator flips a switch to Phase B. Modules 1, 3, and 5 all go dark and 2, 4, and 6 light up. If curtains are used to further hide dark modules, the drapes on clotheslines can be cycled one module to hide the now-dark modules and reveal the now-lit ones.

The train continues, through now-illuminated modules 2, 4, and 6, while passing through 1, 3, and 5 in the dark.

1 and 6 are the termini of the line, so the train only passes through 7 (the halfway point, always illuminated) once on its journey.

If one is really ambitious (and/or the modules are really small), a thrice-around would be possible with two lighting change points and having three phases. Every third module would be illuminated. Heck, why not four or five times around?

Obviously, any plan of this type only allows one t

10

This is essentially all the modular layouts one sees at big train shows. Each person’s module is a scene unto itself but it is hooked to the others so a train can run through them. On several of my children’s Youth In Model Railroading modules we added “side drops” to help the viewer separate their scene from the neighbor’s.

Before they started getting older and losing interest we had considered totally boxing one in even with a ceiling to do a night scene using a black light.

11

This idea would be perfectly suited to a traction layout, where a single interurban car or streetcar is your “train” and thus you avoid the distraction of the far ends of your train being in such “distant locales.” Some interurban and even urban systems had freight service too, sometimes only at night, behind a boxcab or steeplecab, and often just a freight car or two, so you could have local switching on such a layout without running trains of a length that would tend to highlight the distance deception you are attempting to get away with.

For a non-electric “steam” (even if there is no steam) railroad, a doodlebug for passengers and a GE70 tonner with a max load of a few cars would get you to the same place – the train would plausibly be in just one of these shadowbox locales at a time when doing real work.

Dave Nelson

12

I don’t have this fully thought out yet, but it seems to me that if you made your trackwork vary from the back to front of the layout, you might be able to get away with hiding portions where a train could be seen right on the other side of the scene divider. Of course, it would have to be a relatively short train. Or could you possibly have two tracks so that maybe one could be hidden on every other scene to prevent one train extending into the adjacent scene? That would be similar to your idea of lighting every other one, but doing it by hiding some of the trackwork instead. If that makes sense.

But really, if you do a good job of hiding where the track goes through a divider, so that it looks logical and not just a hole in the wall, would it really matter if a train extended into another scene? If you’re looking down an urban street and see a railroad crossing, you’re only going to be seeing a portion of the train in between the buildings. How is that any different from having your train extend into another scene if you’re not looking at the second scene too?

Jim

13

Your idea is pretty neat…maybe complicated, but that will extend operating sessions on a small layout. It reminds me of Free Mo, town modules linked by several scenic modules (and no two layouts are ever the same,usually). I like Free Mo because it allows the modeler to build a LDE of any size/shape with minimal compression. Free Mo was made for operations, not just running trains on a big oval; I think it looks more realistic than oval modular layouts because you don’t have to squeeze everything into a given length. If your prototype (or freelance) town needs to be 14’ 9" then thats how long you build it…no need to worry about specific lengths so the oval is the same length on both sides (Free Mo is a point to point layout). Modules can be as narrow as 8" and 12" long (although as long as the track is straight and perpendicular to the end plates, they will work (maybe your series of shadowboxes will be perfect on the end of a Free Mo layout, off the main line and provide lots of switching). The only downside is you’ll have to wait for a Free Mo setup to run your long trains. To get around this, I’ve built a 2’ x 12’ 2-1/2" switching module set so I can operate at home (I just need to plug a couple cassettes onto the ends for tail tracks). I’m designing passing siding modules (one 2 track, and one 3 track) that I will use in the future, instead of the cassettes; those modules will also be used for staging and fiddling at home…and since those will also be Free Mo compatible, I can take them to future setups, which will make the Free Mo layout even longer and more flexible.

14

Gidday Tyler, it would appear that you and I have different levels of disbelief, the point being that being is that mine has absolutely no bearing on your givens and druthers. You have to satisfy yourself.

Have Fun and I look forward to the photos, [swg]

Cheers, the Bear.

15

They operate in some way, even if simple. Trains move. On larger layouts, switching is possible (see Timesaver).

It would be best to kill the Timesaver [xx(] and bury it in the annuals of history as a switching contest layout design by John Allen for a NMRA convention.

It would be better to follow the more contemporary ISL designs.

BTW…Shadow box layout ideas isn’t new…First I heard of such layouts was in the 80’s.

16

I think the shadowbox idea with a wall separating each module has potential. Who cares what the next one Is because you wouldn’t see it until you intended to work it. If your train is too long for your module you would need a block occupancy signal to let you know it is clear. Each module c ould have its own time that could vary by several hours if wanted. You could even have operators work modules and be at different times.

17

I tried the shadow box (or if you prefer the layout concentrate) on the previous incarnation of my home layout.

I made two serious errors:

  1. The shadow boxes were not properly proportioned so that the cleaning and maintenance could be performed easily on the track.

  2. I used every trick in the book to hide tracks running through holes in the walls, tunnels, overhead bridges, arching canopies of trees, and narrow cuts. Some worked better than others.

On the plus side, the shadow box approach allowed individual boxes to be removed and brought to train shows.

Have a nice weekend,

kevin

18

I won’t assume you’ve seen this:

www.carendt.com

MS

Well, maybe I should…

19

I am planning on just having a small switching layout, it will have four industries that need different type of cars. I plan on having a staging yard next to it so I don’t have to worry about having the train in another state when I am switching.

20

I had hoped for a spray can or a magic liquid that could be applied with a roller. That’s about the only way I’ll get my layout finished.