Another question for all you guys. We are in the process of building a shop that will be deemed railroad only! WOOHOO! Finally getting a layout with some size.
That being said, what would you guys want or do for your dream layout? One of my friends said multiple yards so you have somewhere to fun freight. Genius!
Any other inputs? We are looking at about 1200sq ft so we have room to do some cool things. Just looking for input on what all you guys would do different if you had a change. What would you add or get rid of?
What era will you be modeling? That would be an important factor in producing a wish list. My layout is dual-era, so I can justify both diesel and steam.
I do like things that can span those periods. I stretch reality a bit, but I am not bad at keeping things between the thirties and early sixties.
I would plan for a main line or two with catenary. I don’t have any now, but I would love to have some wire to run my GG-1 under. Modern electrics like the Acela would also benefit from the scenery of catenary. For me, this would just be a staging to staging thing, but on a larger layout a decent sized passenger terminal might be possible.
I have a carfloat with the apron, set in a waterfront scene. I have another carfloat kit, as yet unbuilt, but one of these days I will have this whole operation out in front so I can spend more time switching it and using the carfloats (removable) as cassettes to introduce more traffic.
Did I mention staging? Yes I did, but now I will do it again. Plan for staging, including access. Don’t, like I did, try to do staging as an afterthought. It needs to be an integral part of the traffic flow of the layout.
Water elements are something else that needs advance planning. Rivers and streams give you opportunities to build bridges. Real railroads have to deal with the realities of traffic constraints getting over bridges, and additional switching and signalling to manage the constrictions will enhance operations.
Possibility of continuous running when non MR friends are over.
Staging, both ends better.
Passing tracks need to be long enough to hold the longest train you will run.
Each passing track allows one train to run each direction, as long as each side of passing section is empty to begin. Therefore a passing track in each town to be switched.
30" aisles are not wide enough for multiple people. 42" would be good.
Thank you guys for the input. I guess it would have helped if I would have given all the info! LOL!
So era we are looking at is the end of SP. So 80’s through 90’s. I do have some modern stuff as well though so we can sort of go from 80’s till current as weird as that sounds. Hard for me to pick one era as I have a love for BN, BNSF, SF…but dad and I’s original love is for SP.
We are in Oregon and I lived in San Diego for a little bit so we will be modelling some of both of these. I have a plan to do the San Diego Union station as well as a beach scene where the tracks go right down close to the ocean near San Clemente, complete with surfers and a cut away ocean view using epoxy.
Also lots of trees, lots of forest. Hopefully some of the Shasta area with the river and lake maybe. Trying to model some of the local economy although it’s changed so much it’s hard to know what we will do. We just are picking the best parts out of both areas.
All diesel. Only steam that will be on the layout will be my brass Daylight if I don’t chuck it out the window. Trying to get the DCC in it to be trouble free but that’s a whole nother post! LOL!
It will be all one level. We have one large yard about about 25’ long with 8-10 tracks and another smaller yard at the other end that’s only 9’ish feet and so far only about 6 tracks. But enough for us to stage things at different areas. Two stations for passengers and about 10 sidings for various businesses and industries. We plan to do the downtown San Diego roughly and transition to the ocean scene and then into scrub then to forest with big cedar and pines.
It’s about 1000’ of track and all one continuous loop. I have double track but I’m not a fan of everything being double track. It’s too easy. I like having to watch signals and things and with dad being the only other one on the track some single track makes it a bit more challenging when you have to watc
Think about stuff that’s easy and relatively inexpensive now, but much harder later. Consider how your layout must be blocked and divided for signalling. Build a power distribution system for your trains, and a separate one for structures, street lights and so on.
Plan and be faithful to a color code for wiring. Plan ahead for future maintenance and additions.
Plan your roads. They should be designed in, not thrown together later. Crossing Gates and signals add a lot.
I’d use one of those Overland Models brass truss bridges, perhaps multiple spans of it.
I’d need some dramatic western scenery, perhaps Abo Canyon, New Mexico, and/or Devil’s Canyon, on the SP&S…or perhaps the often modeled Feather River Canyon/Keddie Wye…Maybe the fill section across the Great Salt Lake…perhaps other sections of the old Los Angeles and Salt Lake division of UP.
I’d like to see ocean waves and a beach scene modeled in HO…perhaps along the Surf Line?
I’d need some big time steam power that I doubt I’ll ever actually have. I’d start with W&R/Samhongsa WP 251 and 257 class 2-8-8-2’s, Rio Grande L-107, L-131 and L-132’s, and add in PSC WP 4-6-6-4’s, and some NP Z-5’s and Z-6’s, whichever make you prefer.
If I had the time and money for a bigger layout area, my only change would be to increase the mileage between towns to at least 5 or 6 HO scale miles. There are eight towns on the layout, so the additional track would require somewhere between 2100 and just over 2500 linear feet in total and it wouldn’t be running around the room multiple times, either.
Otherwise, it’s pretty-much exactly as I wanted it. [swg]
You are lucky to have that generous a space to work with. If I were you, I’d be trying to accomplish the following:
Large radii curves with easements.
Long spurs and sidings for your major industries. They should be able to accommodate all of the cars being delivered to the industry without having to leave any cars on the main, and there should be room enough within the spurs to allow for switching without having to foul the mainline. Note that this only applies to major industries where you might be handling unit trains or large numbers of cars. Having other smaller spurs for one or two car drop offs is fine.
In line with #2, if you are going to have multiple operators, design your sidings as switching puzzles so that an individual operator can spend an hour or two sorting cars without having to use the mainline. Fouling the mainline complicates operations. Some people want to avoid that, whereas others find it to be an interesting addition to the challenge of operating. I’m of the former belief.
Keep things within reach! This advice is as old as the hills but it is nonetheless valid. Having to climb on top of the layout to rerail a train is just plain bad.
Get 3rd PlanIt! it will make designing and building your layout much easier! If you want some examples of how useful it has been for me, please ask.
What are the actual dimensions of the 1200 sq ft space? That is a big space, but I agree with Sheldon that it is not as big as you might think it is.
Not bragging, but I have a 1950 sq ft basement with roughly 1/3 of it devoted to the layout. Pretty big but I still work with some constraints, mainly the absence of staging areas.
Mister Beasley mentioned staging 5 times in his reply, while you didn’t mention staging once. Whatever else you do, be sure to add staging and plenty of it.
See my reply int he turnout thread. 48" radius will eat that space in no time. And #12 turnouts even faster - not to mention they are WAY overkill with 48" radius curves.
1200 sq ft SOUNDS like a lot - it’s not that much. If my garage was alongside my house instead of under it, my basement would be over 1200 sq ft - basically the same as my house. I’m doing double deck to get what I want in my available space.
Unless you are doing N scale. 1200 sq ft is quite large for N scale, but then 48" minimum radius is REALLY overkill.
I would start making some sketches - use a compass to draw circles so you don;t cheat on the radius, and get dimensional information for the turnouts - you can get the dimensions on the Fast Tracks templates since you are interested in using their turnouts. You will see how fast that 1200 sq ft space gets eaten up with 48" radius curves and #12 turnouts. That’s EIGHT FEET center to center on a loop of track, so you need at least 9 feet width for a turnback. If you have a CAD program, draw the outline of the space, then draw some circles at your radius and drag them around and see how it all fits (or doesn’t).
When I built my layout, I kept track of time and progress. Basically, I started from nothing, used purchased turnouts and flex track, and I did scenery in sections. I found that it took me about a month to do a square foot.
This included structure kits and rolling stock kits, but also wiring for structure lighting, crossing signals and so on.
That’s an all-inclusive month, work, food, sleeping, coaching sports, playing sports and so on. I didn’t miss out on life, but that time was well used.
Think about your time and what you expect to accomplish. The original 60 square feet of my layout took 5 years.
Twelve hundred sq ft is no aircraft hanger for sure, but to some less fortunate, it’s a pretty generous space. As often, it’s relative to ones status and standard of living.
For example, 1200 sq ft could be a 30x40’ room, a 24x50’ or 20x60’. I’d be very happy with that “sounds like a lot” space and not being a spring chicken, would find it challenging to build a layout filling that space. As it is, my paultry ~ 550 sq ft is going to be plenty of work. Granted, it’s a little cramped but like many, we make-do. I often dream about how I would like just a couple more feet in each direction, but I don’t. As much as I’d like a 24x50’ space, it’s a lot of work for these bones to build benchwork and the rest for a space of that size.
I agree regarding the proposed curve radius and turnouts. While 48" minimum radius and #12 turnouts sound great, they will eat 1200 sq ft for lunch. Those would fit but the length of mainline etc. would suffer vs. using 36" minumum curves and #8 mainline turnouts.
If you can cut your minimums to 36" and #8, you should be able to fit much more operation in the space. Keep in mind that you can probably fit broader curves in many places, but for turn-backs or some areas, the 36" radius will allow more sections of longer running and decent aisle widths.
In my rather small basement space, I had to make some compromises to get some longer running and minimum radius is 32" for a couple of spots to make it fit. That said, I’ve been able to design in some larger radii in places.
Speaking of aircraft hangars, I have long lusted to build an HO scale layout that would simulate the six large downtown passenger stations in Chicago in the 1950s. My best calculation is that a 100’ x 100’ outbuilding would suffice. Let’s see now, that would be 10,000 sq. ft. I’ll betcha that 48" radius curves would fit in that space quite nicely. [swg]
Yep, I will second that. The bigger the space, the wider the aisles and the deeper the scenery. That sure beats cramming a whole bunch of track into that "surplus’ space.
By the way, I agree, Sheldon, that 36" radius curves should be sufficient on a larger HO layout.
Yes. Bingo. You’ve been doing carpentry for a living for many years; I’m an amateur and have very little experience of this sort. Night and day difference. So really it should go without saying that it comes easy to you and comment is not needed or beneficial. One thing I’ve notice over the years is that often, people who are really really good at something or have many years of experience, can have a difficult time understanding or empathising with those who struggle or don’t have a natural aptitude and/or benefit of all that experience. Comments sometimes are made by the experienced or gifted that come across as condescending, perhaps without awareness, but they are heard and can have still a negative effect others. (for those who have ears to hear anyway)
As I noted earlier, not all have the means to afford generous layout spaces. When my wife and I were house hunting a few years ago, we had to keep looking further and further afield to find an affordable home with a space for a layout and other features we wanted. What we found was the best we could do. I could be envious of the big layouts others may be able to build but as the apostle Paul commented, he learned to be content with little and in plenty. For me, for whatever reason
